MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outcomes of very young women and adolescent (VYWAA) with breast cancer (BC) in rural and urban Saskatchewan: A population-based cohort study.

2024· article· en· W4399324685 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erika Arnold, Devin Laubscher, Huzaifa Saeed, Osama Ahmed, Ayesha Bashir, Haji Chalchal, Raymond G. Deobald, Ali El‐Gayed, Gary Groot, Kamal Haider, KATE JOHNSON, Duc Le, Shazia Mahmood, Madhumita Manna, Pamela Meiers, Prosanta Mondal, Amer Sami, Philip Wright, Shahid Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Cancer AgencyUniversity of SaskatchewanMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCohortDemographyPopulationRural populationCancerGerontologyGynecologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1571 Background: BC is uncommon in VYWAA (≤ 35 years) and accounts for about 1.8% of all BC. As BC screening is typically recommended for women aged 50-74 years there is a risk of delayed diagnosis of BC in VYWAA especially those with rural residence. The current study aims to assess outcomes of a cohort of VYWAA with BC in relation to their place of residence in the province of Saskatchewan over a period of 20 years. Methods: In this population-based retrospective cohort study all women ≤ 35 years with histologically documented epithelial BC during 2000-2019 were evaluated. Survival of the entire cohort and its subgroups was estimated using the Kaplan−Meier method, and the survival distribution of different groups was compared by the log rank test. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was performed. Various clinical and demographic variables were examined for their prognostic importance of overall survival (OS) for all stages and disease-free survival (DFS) for early-stage BC. Results: 248 eligible women with a median age of 32 years were identified, 24% were <30 years of age. Of all patients, 51% had node positive disease, 7% had DCIS, 15% stage I, 42% stage II, 22% stage III and 11% had stage IV disease at initial presentation. Among them 42% had hormone receptor +, 28% had HER2 + and 23% had triple negative BC (TNBC).16% developed BC within 1-year of pregnancy. 53% were rural resident and 47% were urban resident. Significant differences were noted between the two groups regarding smoking history (42 vs. 25%), HER2+BC (35% vs. 20%) and mean platelet count (285 vs. 258). Median follow up for all women was 91 months with a total follow up period of 294 months. Median DFS of VYWAA with stage I to III disease has not reached. 10-year estimated DFS of all women was 66%. 10-year DFS for stage I and II was 73% and 75%, respectively, vs. 43% for stage III (p<0.001). Median OS of entire cohort with stage 0-IV BC has not reached. 10-year OS of all VYWAA was 69%. 10 years OS of urban women was 79% compared to 65% for rural resident (p=0.041). 10-year OS of women age >30 years was 74% compared to 62% for age 26-30 years and 55% for age <26 (p=0.35).10 years OS of VYWAA with non-TNBC was 73% compared to 63% for with TNBC (p=0.028). On multivariate analysis for women with early-stage disease, stage III BC, HR, 3.0 (1.80-4.92) and grade III BC were significantly correlated with inferior DFS. On a multivariate analysis for OS of all VYWAA with stage 0 to IV disease, rural residence, HR, 1.75 (1.08-2.81); TNBC, HR, 2.25 (1.34-3.80), and stage IV disease, HR, 8.1 (4.72-13.94) were correlated with inferior OS. Conclusions: Very young women and adolescent with BC have a high incidence of node-positive disease and HER2+ and TNBC subtypes. TNBC and grade III disease were associated with inferior DFS in stage I-III disease whereas stage IV BC, TNBC and rural residence were correlated with inferior survival in women with stage 0-IV disease.

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 score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207