Abstract PD6-01: Prevalence and predictors of self-reported memory ability in a large sample of breast cancer survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: A substantial subset of women previously treated for breast cancer report deficits in cognitive abilities such as memory. Cancer-related cognitive dysfunction (CRCD) has been linked to a variety of factors including chemotherapy. However, the reported prevalence of symptoms is variable and investigations of CRCD correlates in large samples are limited. This study aimed to 1) investigate whether the prevalence of patient-reported memory problems differs as a function of having received chemotherapy and time-since-treatment; and 2) identify additional factors associated with patient-reported memory in a large sample of breast cancer survivors. Method: In this cross-sectional cohort study, self-administered questionnaires including those assessing memory (Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire) and lifestyle behaviors were mailed to 1500 disease-free breast cancer survivors from three time-since-treatment cohorts (early: 6-18 months, middle: 2-4 years, or late: 5-12 years post-treatment). Demographic and clinical information was collected and confirmed from chart review. The prevalence of clinically significant memory dysfunction was estimated using published normative cut-off scores. We tested whether chemotherapy and time-since-treatment affected memory (analysis of variance), or increased the risk of significant memory dysfunction (odds ratio chi-squared test). Using a forward stepwise regression model, we explored whether patient characteristics (age, education, comorbidities, concussion history, adverse life events), type of treatment (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormonal therapy), or lifestyle behaviors (adherence to a Mediterranean diet, physical activity, sleep efficiency, stress management practices) were associated with patient-reported memory. Results: 773 questionnaire packages were returned (mean age=60.4±11.7). 436 (56%) survivors had received chemotherapy (Ch+), and 337 (44%) had not (Ch-). 314 (41%) were early survivors, 244 (32%) were middle, and 215 (28%) were late. Ch+ reported poorer memory than Ch- (F(1, 764)=12.752, p<0.001), with no effect of time-since-treatment or interaction. Prevalence of significant memory dysfunction was higher in Ch+ (28%) than in Ch- (15%) (OR=2.130, 95% CI 1.479-3.066). Younger age and history of concussion were significantly associated with worse patient-reported memory (p=0.002, p<0.001). Unlike chemotherapy (p=0.018), neither radiation nor hormonal treatment was a significant predictor of memory symptoms. Increased physical activity (p=0.002) and higher sleep efficiency (p<0.001) were associated with better memory. Survivors reporting greater memory symptoms also reported greater use of stress management techniques (p=0.026). Conclusion: This large study indicates that chemotherapy doubles the risk of memory symptoms up to at least 10 years post-treatment. Results also point to sleep hygiene and physical activity as potentially meaningful targets for self-management training to reduce CRCD in breast cancer survivors. Citation Format: Bernstein LJ, D'Amico DN, Richard NM, McCready DR, Howell D, Jones JM, Edelstein K. Prevalence and predictors of self-reported memory ability in a large sample of breast cancer survivors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD6-01.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".