Comparing elderly and non-elderly adult cancer survivors: Differences in modifiable behaviours of smoking and alcohol cessation and physical activity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
9551 Background: In developing a cancer survivorship program at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (Canada), cancer survivors were surveyed on modifiable behaviours: smoking/alcohol intake and physical activity. We evaluated whether special considerations should be given to elderly cancer survivors (age 65 years or higher), where few data currently exists. Methods: 616 adult cancer survivors of all disease sites were asked about their smoking, alcohol, and physical activity habits, and their attitudes and knowledge about effects of these habits on cancer outcomes. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models evaluated the effect of age on these factors. Results: 23% were elderly; 53% female; 15% breast, 20% gastrointestinal/gynecologic, 24% hematologic, 19% thoracic/head and neck, and 13% genitourinary cancers. Median follow up was 24 months. Elderly survivors were more likely to be ever smokers (OR=1.69, 95% CI [1.12-2.53]) and ex-smokers than current (OR=4.11 [2.02-8.33]), but less likely to know how smoking could affect cancer treatment (OR=1.72 [1.09-2.69]) or outcome (OR=1.66 [1.07-2.60]). Elderly patients were less likely to binge drink (OR=2.07 [1.34-3.19]), but more likely to perceive alcohol as improving quality of life (OR=1.98 [1.11-3.56]) and overall survival (OR=2.32 [1.22-4.41]) in their own situation. Elderly survivors were less likely to receive information about alcohol use (OR=2.89 [1.29-6.49]). Meeting exercise guidelines at diagnosis (OR=1.76 [1.16-2.67]) and improving/maintaining them after treatment (OR=2.02 [1.12-2.93]) was substantially lower in elderly survivors, but perceived benefits/harms of exercise did not differ with age. Conclusions: Elderly patients know less about the impact of smoking on their overall health, despite having higher rates of cumulative exposure. A lower proportion received information on alcohol use. Elderly patients are less able to achieve the same exercise goals as younger patients. Survivorship programs may need to tailor counselling on modifiable behaviours by age group. CN, LE, SMHA, and GL contributed equally.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".