MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024338638 · doi:10.14740/wjon1278

Breast Cancer Incidence and Behavior in Younger Patients: A Study From the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Database

2020· article· en· W3024338638 on OpenAlex
Zuha Nasim, Christine Girtain, Varsha Gupta, Ishan Patel, Mohammad Anwar Hossain

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End ResultsIncidence (geometry)Logistic regressionEpidemiologyCancerCancer registryGuidelineDemographyGynecologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Breast cancer screening for women less than 40 years old is practically non-existent. Since screening can detect cancer at an early stage, not having a surveillance guideline for breast cancer in younger women can result in detection of the cancer at advanced stages. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence and behavior of breast cancer in younger women. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry data from 2004 to 2014 were accessed for the study. All women diagnosed with breast cancer and with complete information were included in the study. The data were further divided into two groups based on the age of the patient at the time of diagnosis. The younger group consisted of women < 40 years old (group 1) and the older group consisted of women >= 40 years old (group 2). Both groups were compared on demography and characteristics of the cancer. The continuous variables were tested using Student's t -tests and categorical variables were compared using Chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. Multivariate analysis was done to find the association of high-grade cancer using a logistic regression model. All P-values are two-sided and values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Of 599,782 patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria, 28,243 (4.71%) diagnosed with breast cancer were younger women aged < 40 years old. A higher proportion of these younger women presented with larger tumor sizes (between 5.1 and 10.0 cm) (11.61% vs. 5.70%, P < 0.001), poorly differentiated cancer cells (55.88% vs. 32.85%, P < 0.001) and triple negative receptors (6.83% vs. 3.81%, P < 0.001) than older women respectively. Younger age was significantly associated with high-grade tumor at presentation when controlling for race and marital status. There was roughly 3% increased risk of a high-grade tumor with each decrease of 1 year (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.96 - 0.99, P = 0.001). Conclusion: This study found that the proportion of breast cancer cases in younger women was just below 5%; however, when the cancer was diagnosed, these women presented in advanced stages and more aggressive cancer types. World J Oncol. 2020;11(3):88-97 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1278

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.295 · 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