Risk Factors for Treatment Toxicity and High Side Effect Burden Among Breast Cancer Survivors: A Retrospective Chart Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: This study describes the sequelae, side effects, and toxicities experienced by Canadian breast cancer survivors at a breast cancer survivorship clinic at a tertiary academic cancer centre and identifies potential risk factors which may be associated with increased side effect burden. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of adult patients treated at the Sunnybrook Breast Cancer Survivorship Clinic from 6 July 2022, to 30 September 2023 (n = 435). Results: Most patients (72.6%) reported at least one side effect impacting their quality of life, and a smaller majority (55.4%) reported two or more side effects. The most common symptoms experienced were anxiety (29.4%), chronic pain (23.9%), hot flashes (21.4%), and fear of recurrence (19.8%). Older age was strongly correlated with a lower likelihood of experiencing greater side effect burden (p < 0.01). Patients who underwent chemotherapy were significantly more likely to experience higher side effect burden than patients who did not. Current smokers were more likely than nonsmokers or past smokers to have a higher burden, for both physical (p < 0.01) and psychological side effects (p < 0.01). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that younger age was strongly associated with greater side effect burden, higher likelihood of psychological and physical symptoms, and greater likelihood of requiring close follow-up. Conclusions: The results highlight the need for survivorship resources tailored to survivors under the age of 55 and the importance of referring smokers to smoking cessation programs. Additional research is required to explore the significant reluctance among patients regarding discharge. Future studies should examine the acute needs of younger breast cancer survivors and investigate the impact of smoking and treatment modalities on the side effect burden.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".