Relationships Between Weight Change and Physical and Psychological Distress in Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Weight gain and unfavorable changes in body composition are common in a growing population of breast cancer survivors, but the etiology of these changes is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate relationships between weight change and symptoms of physical and psychological distress in the first 12 months of completing treatment in women who had completed treatment for breast cancer. METHODS: Physical distress and psychological distress were assessed using the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, the Distress Thermometer, and the Fatigue Symptom Inventory. RESULTS: Weight change in 28 women since the completion of treatment (mean, 6.4 ± 4.4 months) ranged from -6.0 kg to +5.2 kg (mean, -0.4 ± 3.2), with 6 women gaining and 7 women losing an average of 3.5 ± 1.0 and 5.1 ± 0.8 kg, respectively. Rotterdam mean scores for physical (17.5 ± 9.0) and psychological distress (27.1 ± 16.9) were similar to previous findings for patients with early-stage breast cancer in active treatment and appear to be markedly higher than distress levels previously reported in cancer-free adults. Distress levels, based on the Distress Thermometer, were moderate to severe in 35% of women. Fatigue was common and associated with interference in daily living for some women. Fatigue duration was negatively correlated with weight change (P = -0.46, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms of physical and psychological distress persist for some women in the first year after completing treatment and may associate with weight change. IMPLICATIONS: These findings underscore a need for ongoing assessment and supportive care across the breast cancer trajectory and may guide dietary counseling aimed at promoting healthy body weight and overall health in early survivorship.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".