MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sexual health and therapy adherence of hormone-sensitive breast cancer survivors on maintenance endocrine therapy: The SHE-CAN project in Toronto, Canada.

2024· article· en· W4399122113 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alliya Remtulla Tharani, Carol Townsley, Janet L. Smith, Noor Salman, Sahaar Rattansi, Karina Signarowski, Shankavi Nandakumar, Taissa Czerwoniak, Alexandra Lawryshyn, N. Singh, Alexandria Abbruzzino, Emilie Richard, Emily S. Hu, Adriyan Hrycyshyn, Jaqueline Elliott, Maya Pankiw, Tiana Wertelecky, Geoffrey Alan Watson, Christine Elser, Christine Brezden‐Masley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHormone therapyBreast cancerEndocrine systemReproductive healthSex therapyHormonal therapyOncologyCancerMaintenance therapyGynecologyHormoneFamily medicineInternal medicineSexual dysfunctionChemotherapyPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

536 Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) is the standard of care for hormone sensitive (HR) breast cancer. While these drugs are highly efficacious and patients remain on them for extended periods of time, there are many side effects. It is estimated that 20-30% of women on ET stop early due to these side effects, most commonly due to gynecological symptoms of menopause (GSM). The purpose of this study is to better understand the vaginal health, sexual health, quality of life, sexual dysfunction, and adherence to therapy for HR breast cancer patients treated with anti-estrogen therapy. Methods: From August 2021 to January 2024, women from Mount Sinai Hospital’s outpatient oncology clinic and Women’s College Hospital After Cancer Treatment Transition (ACTT) clinic, who presented with HR breast cancer and who were being treated with anti-estrogen agents for a minimum of three months, were invited to participate in the study. Participants were asked to complete a survey examining their treatment experience and adherence, occurrence and frequency of GSM, patient-provider communication, along with two validated measurement tools (Female Sexual Function Index [FSFI} and Menopause-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire [MENQOL]). Medical history was also reviewed from the participant’s medical chart. Analysis was conducted using Excel. Results: A total of 417 participants completed the questionnaire. The median age was 60 years [IQR:52-69] with 401 participants (96.2%) being treated in the adjuvant setting versus 16 patients (3.8%) in the metastatic setting. At the time of diagnosis, 156 participants (37.4%) were pre-menopausal, 52 participants (12.5%) were peri-menopausal, and 185 participants (44.4%) were post-menopausal. When surveyed, 134 participants (32.1%) were on tamoxifen and 272 participants (65.2%) were on an aromatase inhibitor. Within six months prior to survey completion, 214 participants (51.3%) stopped taking their medication for a period of time. Within the past year, participants reported experiencing the following symptoms “all of the time”: vaginal dryness (24.9%), hot flashes (24.7%), and decreased sex drive (34.5%). Only 144 participants (34.5%) reported that a healthcare provider had asked them about experiencing GSM. The mean FSFI score was 21.9 ± 7.7 among 168 sexually active participants. Of these 168 participants, 116 (69.0%) had a final score of 26.5 or less, the cut-point used to demonstrate female sexual dysfunction. Symptoms captured in the MENQOL’s sexual domain (3.7 ± 2.3) and physical domain (3.7 ± 1.4) were found to be most bothersome. Conclusions: In our study, patients with breast cancer on ET report significant sexual dysfunction. Management of GSM and improved communication between patients and healthcare providers is required and should be prioritized to improve sexual dysfunction and treatment adherence.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.468
Teacher spread0.350 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207