Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite a remarkable increase in the depth of our understanding and management of breast cancer in the past 50 years, the disease is still a major public health problem worldwide and poses significant challenges. The palpability of breast tumors has facilitated diagnosis and documentation since ancient times. The earliest descriptions of breast cancer date back to around 3500 BCE. For centuries to follow, theories by Hippocrates (460 BCE) and Galen (200 CE), attributing the cause of breast cancer to an "excess of black bile" and treatment options including the use of opium and castor oil, prevailed. Surgical resection was introduced in the 18th century. The advent of modern medicine led to the development of novel treatment options that include hormonal, targeted and chemo-therapies. There are still several therapeutic challenges including the treatment of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), and overcoming drug resistance. SCOPE OF REVIEW: The increased incidence and awareness of breast cancer has led to significant changes in diagnosis and treatment in recent decades. But, mankind has come a long way. Herein, I have traced how our understanding of breast cancer has evolved from the early description of the disease around 460 BCE as "black bile-containing crab-like tumors" to the conventional as a heterogeneous disease with high degree of diversity between and within tumors, as well as among breast cancer patients. How is breast cancer treated today and how do risk factors, breast cancer subtype and drug resistance contribute to the therapeutic challenges at the turn of the 21st century? MAJOR CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer remains a serious public health issue worldwide. However, appreciable growth in our understanding of breast cancer in the past century has led to remarkable progress in the early detection, treatment and prevention of the disease. The clinical focus is shifting more towards tailored therapy as more targets are characterized and novel highly innovative approaches are developed. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE: Tracing the history of breast cancer, highlights how increased awareness of the disease, and progress in research and development have enhance our understanding of the disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".