0827 Prevalence And Factors Associated With Pre-treatment Insomnia Symptoms In Women With Early Stage Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Up to 70% of post-treatment breast cancer (BCa) survivors report having insomnia symptoms, but less is known about the prevalence of insomnia in women with BCa prior to treatment initiation. The present study aims to identify the prevalence and factors associated with pre-treatment insomnia symptoms in women with early stage BCa. This study is part of a larger ongoing prospective observational cohort study of women with non-metastatic breast cancer. Participants completed the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Hot Flash Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF). Insomnia symptoms were defined as a score on the ISI of greater than 7. Using participant’s pre-treatment data, a hierarchical regression model was used to examine associations between clinical variables and insomnia severity, after statistically adjusting for age. Zero-order and partial correlations were used to examine the importance of individual predictors. Among 86 women with breast cancer, 36% reported symptoms of insomnia before beginning cancer treatment. After adjusting for age, the model was significant F(4, 78)=4.88, p<.001, accounting for 20% of the unique variance in insomnia severity. Zero-order correlations indicated significant bivariate associations between insomnia severity and symptoms of depression (r=.30), anxiety (r=.34), and fatigue (r=.43), but not perceived impairment due to hot flashes (r=.16). After partitioning out variability from other independent variables, only fatigue remained significantly associated with insomnia severity, accounting for 5.3% unique variance. Although symptoms of depression and anxiety are associated with insomnia severity, fatigue appears to be the most important factor associated with pre-treatment insomnia symptoms. Given the bi-directional relationship of insomnia and fatigue, interventions targeting one is likely to benefit the other. Dr. Garland is supported by a New Investigator Award and seed funding from the Beatrice Hunter Cancer Research Institute (BHCRI).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".