MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Predictors of patient-reported toxicities from endocrine therapy: Importance of illness perceptions, treatment beliefs, and fear of recurrence.

2013· article· en· W2600576686 on OpenAlexaff
Xinni Song, Susan Dent, Shailendra Verma, Mark Clemons, Nadine Graham, Marc Bedard, Lise Paquet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectInternal medicinePsychological interventionBreast cancerUnivariate analysisDiseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Multivariate analysisCancerPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

542 Background: Numerous studies have documented the toxicities of endocrine therapy (ET) for early breast cancer (EBC) and their deleterious impact on quality of life and adherence. However, little is known about the factors that underlie patient's susceptibility to report toxicities. The identification of risk factors for toxicities from ET is important as it would allow early targeting of symptom management interventions for women more vulnerable to adverse effects of ET. This prospective study aims to examine the impact of pre-treatment perceptions of EBC, ET beliefs and fear of breast cancer (BC) recurrence (FBCR) on toxicities reported after 6 months of ET. Methods: Women diagnosed with EBC completed a survey prior to initiating endocrine therapy, then at 3, 6 and 12 months. Standardized self-report instruments were used to assess EBC perceptions, ET beliefs, FBCR and toxicities. Clinical and treatment variables were also evaluated. Univariate analyses and mulitivariate regression were conducted to identify factors associated (p<0.1) with side effects at 6 months. Results: Since 9/2010, 173 patients have consented and 84 (mean age = 60 y) have completed the questionnaires at baseline and after 6 months of ET. Controlling for age, none of the clinical or treatment variables (stage of disease, type of surgery, receipt of chemotherapy and radiation therapy) were significant univariate predictors of toxicities. In multiple regression, stronger perceptions that BC has serious consequences on their lives (β=0.218, p<0.05), greater concerns about the adverse effects of ET (β=0.215, p<0.05) and higher levels of FBCR (β=0.316, p<0.01) at baseline were associated with higher levels of reported toxicities. Conclusions: Baseline psychological factors predicted level of patient-reported toxicities to a larger extent than clinical/treatment factors. How patients perceived their illness, their beliefs about ET side effects and their fear of cancer recurrence are strongly associated with side effects experienced after 6 months of ET. These results could facilitate the identification of a subgroup of patients for early interventions to improve symptom management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBRCA gene mutations in cancer→French-language works237,207→