Changes in acute and late toxicity and patient-reported health-related quality of life following radiotherapy in women with breast cancer: A 1-year longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the frequency of acute and late toxicities, as well as changes in the quality of life (QOL) for breast cancer patients following radiotherapy (RT). Materials and Methods: A total of 108 breast cancer women were recruited for this prospective study. Data were collected at various intervals; prior to, and 1, 3, 6 months, and 1 year after radiation therapy. The primary outcomes were toxicity radiation therapy oncology group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) criteria. Our secondary outcome was QOL, measured using EORTC QLQ-C30 and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. We employed Friedman’s two-way analysis to evaluate the changes in QOL over the course of 1 year. Results: The early toxicities that are most commonly experienced include pharyngeal, skin, and mucous membrane toxicity. Late toxicities frequently involve skin and submucosal toxicity. To measure patient functionality, all functional subscale scores except for the patient’s emotional state increased over time compared to pre-RT. Symptoms of the patients, which were included in the QOL symptom scale, decreased during the follow-up period, except for fatigue; however, changes in pain, insomnia, and loss of appetite did not significantly change. We identified the analogous symptom profiles in Edmonton. Although patients’ overall health scores declined in the 1 st and 3 rd months after radiotherapy (RT), they rebounded at 6 and 12 months. Conclusion: For breast cancer patients, RT did not adversely affect functional capacity or exacerbate symptoms, but persistent fatigue did increase during the observation period. Health-care professionals ought to devise strategies to assist patients with skin toxicity and fatigue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".