MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P2-12-07: Vaginal and sexual health of hormone-receptor positive breast cancer survivors on oral endocrine therapy: A cross-sectional study

2020· article· en· W3013854659 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amy Skitch, Alexandra Moskalewicz, Samantha Scime, Rosane Nisenbaum, Ronita Lee, Rashida Haq, Christine Dzerko, Christine Brezden‐Masley

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTamoxifenBreast cancerLetrozoleCancerGynecologyQuality of life (healthcare)ExemestanePopulationOutpatient clinicReproductive healthAnastrozoleInternal medicineOncologyObstetricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Tamoxifen and Aromatase Inhibitors (AI) are highly effective forms of oral endocrine therapy (ET) used to prevent recurrences in women with hormone-receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer, often with a treatment duration of five or more years. However, the host of side effects women may experience, some related to vaginal health and sexual functioning, greatly impact quality of life (QoL). Those who experience side effects from oral ET are more likely to become non-adherent to their treatment protocol, adversely affecting survival outcomes. Despite this, general communication between cancer patients and their oncologists about sexual health is limited. Few studies have focused specifically on vaginal and sexual health when investigating ET side effects and patient-provider communication in women with HR+ breast cancer. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of vaginal and sexual-related side-effects in women with HR+ breast cancer on oral ET. Secondary objectives were to examine patient-provider communication around sexual health, female sexual dysfunction (FSD), and QoL in this patient population. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study between July 2017 and June 2018 in the outpatient oncology clinic at St. Michael’s Hospital (SMH), a tertiary-care center in Toronto, Canada. English-speaking women with HR+ breast cancer who had a treatment history with Tamoxifen or an AI (Anastrozole, Letrozole or Exemestane) for ≥ 6 consecutive months were eligible to participate. We developed a questionnaire to obtain self-reported information about vaginal and sexual-related side effects, sexual history, and patient-provider communication around sexual health. Two validated questionnaires were also used. Total scores for the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) could range from 1.2 to 36.0, with ≤ 26.55 indicating possible female sexual dysfunction (FSD). Domain scores within the 1-week recall version of the Menopause-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MENQOL) range from one to eight, with higher scores indicating worse QoL. Additional demographic and clinical variables were collected from electronic medical records. Results: The mean age of the 151 respondents was 56.2 (±10.3), 51.0% of which were receiving Tamoxifen and 49.0% an AI. Ninety-six (63.6%) reported having a current sexual partner, and 71 (47.0%) reported being sexually active. Hot flashes/insomnia (41.7%), decreased libido (32.5%), and vaginal dryness (27.8%) were the three most commonly reported side effects that women experienced “all the time” in the past year. Only 44 (29.1%) women reported ever having been asked about their vaginal and/or sexual health by their oncologist, but 123 (81.5%) reported that they would be comfortable discussing this topic with them. Almost half of participants (68/151, 45.0%) indicated that their current vaginal or sexual-related side effects are not severe enough to want treatment. Thirty-four (22.5%) indicated wanting to know what their options are to best address side effects, 28 (18.5%) would be open to potential treatment for side effects, and 21 (13.9%) would be interested in seeing a physician specialist. Of the 87 women who fully completed the FSFI, 67 (77%) were classified as likely experiencing FSD. The mean score in the MENQOL’s sexual QoL domain was 3.89 ± 2.38 (n = 119), which indicated greater rates of vaginal dryness, avoidance of intimacy, and decreased sexual desire in this group. Conclusion: Our results support the notion that side effect management and patient-provider communication should be prioritized to optimize the vaginal and sexual health of women with HR+ breast cancer receiving oral ET. Women may be unaware of potential treatment options that can help manage side effects accompanying this therapy, and possibly accept these as a new standard of life. Citation Format: Amy Skitch, Alexandra Moskalewicz, Samantha Scime, Rosane Nisenbaum, Ronita Lee, Rashida Haq, Christine Dzerko, Christine Brezden-Masley. Vaginal and sexual health of hormone-receptor positive breast cancer survivors on oral endocrine therapy: A cross-sectional study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-12-07.

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)0.001
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→