MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378347588 · doi:10.3390/curroncol30050359

COVID-19 and Breast Cancer: Analysis of Surgical Management of a Large Referral Center during the 2020–2021 Pandemic Period

2023· article· en· W4378347588 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fulvio Borella, Luca Bertero, Fabrizia Di Giovanni, Gianluca Witel, Giulia Orlando, Alessia Andrea Ricci, Alessandra Pittaro, Isabella Castellano, Paola Cassoni

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerPandemicCase fatality rateReferralGeneral surgeryMastectomyRetrospective cohort studyCancerSentinel lymph nodeSentinel nodeDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SurgeryEpidemiologyInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Family medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide since December 2019 and was officially declared a pandemic in March 2020. Due to the rapid transmission and the high fatality rate, drastic emergency restrictions were issued, with a negative impact on routine clinical activities. In particular, in Italy, many authors have reported a reduction in the number of breast cancer diagnoses and critical problems in the management of patients who accessed the breast units during the dramatic first months of the pandemic. Our study aims to analyze the global impact of COVID-19 in the two years of the pandemic (2020–2021) on the surgical management of breast cancer by comparing them with the previous two years. Methods: In our retrospective study, we analyzed all cases of breast cancer diagnosed and surgically treated at the breast unit of “Città della Salute e della Scienza” in Turin, Italy, making a comparison between the 2018–2019 pre-pandemic period and the 2020–2021 pandemic period. Results: We included in our analysis 1331 breast cancer cases surgically treated from January 2018 to December 2021. A total of 726 patients were treated in the pre-pandemic years and 605 in the pandemic period (−121 cases, 9%). No significant differences were observed regarding diagnosis (screening vs. no screening) and timing between radiological diagnosis and surgery for both in situ and invasive tumors. There were no variations in the breast surgical approach (mastectomy vs. conservative surgery), while a reduction in axillary dissection compared to the sentinel lymph node in the pandemic period was observed (p-value < 0.001). Regarding the biological characteristics of breast cancers, we observed a greater number of grades 2–3 (p-value = 0.007), pT stage 3–4 breast cancer surgically treated without previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p-value = 0.03), and a reduction in luminal B tumors (p-value = 0.007). Conclusions: Overall, we report a limited reduction in surgical activity for breast cancer treatment considering the entire pandemic period (2020–2021). These results suggest a prompt resumption of surgical activity similar to the pre-pandemic period.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts→French-language works237,207→