Fear of cancer recurrence in breast cancer survivors carrying a BRCA1 or 2 genetic mutation : a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) affects virtually all patients who have been treated for cancer, to varying degrees. Breast cancer survivors who carry a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation are at high risk of cancer recurrence. No study has yet assessed FCR specifically in this population. OBJECTIVES: This cross-sectional study, conducted in women who were treated for breast cancer and carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation, aimed to: (1) assess the mean level of FCR and estimate the proportion of patients with clinical levels of FCR; (2) examine the relationships between FCR and selected psychological variables (e.g., avoidance, intolerance to uncertainty) and quality of life; (3) explore whether FCR levels vary as a function of the past preventive treatment received; and (4) to assess the associations between FCR and the presence of decisional conflict or regret regarding the various preventive options. METHOD: Participants were recruited through an e-mail sent to an oncogenetic network mailing list (Réseau ROSE). Participants were asked to complete a battery of questionnaires online assessing FCR and other psychological and quality of life variables. RESULTS: A total of 89 women completed the survey. Most participants had undergone a preventive mastectomy (62.9%) and a preventive salpingo-oophorectomy (75.3%) at the time of the study. The mean Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory-severity score was 16.8, which exceeds the clinical cut-off score of 13, and 70.8% of the participants showed a clinical level of FCR. FCR was significantly associated with higher levels of anxiety and depression, and higher avoidance and intolerance of uncertainty, but not with quality of life. No significant difference was observed on the total FCR score between women who had received preventive surgery (mastectomy and/or salpingo-oophorectomy) and those considering it, and those not considering it. The association was significant between higher FRC scores and greater decisional conflicts and regrets about choosing to undergo preventive surgery. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that FCR is a significant problem for breast cancer survivors carrying a BRCA1/2 genetic mutation, even after undergoing a prophylactic surgery. This highlights the importance of providing these women with specific psychological intervention focusing on FCR.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".