MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P4-10-14: Pilot data from the development of the Senior Women's Breast Cancer Clinic at Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre

2018· article· en· W2792910895 on OpenAlexaff
IB Menjak, M. Trudeau, Ram Sharan Mehta, Fiona McCullock, Bryan Bristow, Fred A. Wright, Ketra Rice, Lynette M Gibson, Mark Pasetka, EF Szumacher

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerPharmacyCancerFamily medicineMedical recordReferralGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Women over 70 are a growing demographic of breast cancer patients with specific needs requiring individualized care plans. We developed the interdisciplinary Senior Women's Breast Cancer Clinic (SWBCC) to improve access to a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and allied health services such as social work, occupational therapy, and pharmacy assistance. After initiation of the SWBCC, we conducted a pilot study using the VES-13 (vulnerable elders survey-13) tool to screen all patients over 70 with the goal of focusing referrals for patients who may benefit most from a CGA. The VES-13 was developed for community-dwelling elders and is validated in oncology patients. The objective of this study is to examine the outcomes of VES-13 screening, determine the medical issues identified by the CGA, and describe the development of this clinic. Methods: A retrospective review of the clinic from May 2015 - May 2017 was performed using the electronic medical records and paper screening forms. We separately describe the impact of the VES-13 to manage CGA referrals. A score of 3 or greater is a positive screen, and indicates the patient is at risk for death or decline. Non-parametric descriptive statistics were used for statistical analyses. Results: A total of 25 patients have been seen in the SWBCC for CGA to date. Median age was 83, (range 67-97). A median of two (range 1-4) new medical issues were identified from the CGA for each patient. The most common new diagnoses or issues identified were cognitive impairment (15/25), falls (6/25), neuropathy (4/25), and pain (4/25). The geriatric day program and falls prevention program were common referrals. After the introduction of VES-13 screening, a total of 54 patients were screened. Median age in that group was 78.5 years (range 70-95). The median VES-13 score was 1 (range 0-10). Of the 21 patients screened positive on VES-13, 7 went on to have a CGA. Of the remaining screen-positive patients, 3/21 patients declined SWBCC referral, and the others were not referred at the discretion of the physician. None of the patients with negative VES-13 were referred for CGA. The SWBCC structure was developed to utilize breast cancer-specific resources, whereby geriatricians provide consultation within the oncology space, and the allied health providers were affiliated with the breast centre. Oncology and geriatric administrative staff organized bookings to better coordinate schedules between the two disciplines. The geriatricians supervised trainees for the CGA, and follow-ups took place at SWBCC or in the geriatric outpatient clinic. Clinic coordinators affixed the VES-13 tool to all new patient charts for those aged ≥70. Nursing resources were dedicated to assist patients with VES-13 if needed, and document scores in the electronic medical record. Conclusions: A dedicated clinic for seniors with breast cancer providing geriatric assessment can identify important undiagnosed medical issues that warrant intervention or monitoring during breast cancer treatment. The VES-13 screening tool provides useful information to help manage resources for geriatrics referral. A prospective trial examining the role of CGA in decision-making for adjuvant chemotherapy is underway in this clinic. Citation Format: Menjak IB, Trudeau ME, Mehta R, McCullock F, Bristow B, Wright F, Rice K, Gibson L, Pasetka M, Szumacher EF. Pilot data from the development of the Senior Women's Breast Cancer Clinic at Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-10-14.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.187
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→