MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Breast cancer in women aged 80 years and older: Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns according to biologic subtype.

2020· article· en· W3030038734 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie M. Wong, Jean-François Boileau, Thierry Muanza, Richard G. Margolese, Johanne Monette, Boris Bahoric, Mark Basik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineStage (stratigraphy)OncologyEpidemiologyLogistic regressionCancerDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e12594 Background: Older age is associated with poorer breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) outcomes, despite a higher prevalence of biologically favorable disease. We sought to evaluate differences in the clinical characteristics and management of older women according to biologic subtype of breast cancer. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) treatment database was queried to identify all women aged 80 years or older with a first diagnosis of invasive breast cancer between 2010 and 2016. Patients were subgrouped according to biologic subtype and clinical and treatment-related variables were compared. Multivariable logistic regression was then performed to determine factors independently associated with receipt of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adjuvant radiation. Results: Overall, 27,375 women with a median age of 84 (range, 80-108 years) met inclusion criteria. The majority of older women were diagnosed with HR+HER2- breast cancer (78.9%), followed by HER2+ (11.0%) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (10.0%). In women with stage I-III disease, non-operative management was employed in 13.4% of HR+HER2- patients, compared to 16.7% of HER2+ patients and 11.0% of TNBC (p < 0.001). In those undergoing surgery, BCS was most common in HR+HER2- patients (80.9%), compared to HER2+ (68.9%) and TNBC (67.8%; p < 0.001). Axillary surgery was performed in 74.0% of early stage patients with HR+HER2- disease, compared to patients with HER2+ (77.8%) and TNBC (79.3%; p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses controlling for stage and clinical variables, women aged 80 years or older with HER2+ breast cancer and TNBC had a lower likelihood of BCS (ORHER2+ 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.80; ORTNBC 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.81), and an increased likelihood of adjuvant radiation (ORHER2+ 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.27; ORTNBC 1.40, 95% CI 1.25-1.57). Conclusions: One fifth of women with breast cancer over age 80 are diagnosed with HER2+ and triple-negative subtypes, which are associated with more aggressive local therapy. Further studies are warranted to determine if higher rates of adjuvant radiation optimize local control in older HER2+ and TNBC patients at increased risk for early locoregional recurrences.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→