MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409632085 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2025-3602

Abstract 3602: The association between longitudinal lipid trajectories and all-cause mortality in breast cancer survivors: A population-based study

2025· article· en· W4409632085 on OpenAlexaff
Shana Jean Kim, Vanessa De Rubeis, Brendan T. Smith, Husam Abdel‐Qadir, Jennifer D. Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalPublic Health OntarioMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineCancerPopulationOncologyInternal medicineGerontologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Given breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in women, it is important to identify breast cancer patients at high risk of mortality. Lipid levels before and after diagnosis may be key indicators for overall health and prognostic outcomes for breast cancer patients. This study aimed to identify distinct lipid trajectories in those diagnosed with breast cancer and examined their association with all-cause mortality. Methods: This population-based retrospective cohort study included females diagnosed with incident breast cancer who survived at least five years after diagnosis (i.e., breast cancer survivors). Total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and triglycerides (mmol/L) were used to develop trajectory patterns for each lipid through group-based trajectory modelling. Cox proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of all-cause mortality by lipid trajectories. Results: The study included 32, 537 female breast cancer survivors. Approximately 30% of the study population lipid levels within recommended ranges before and after a breast cancer diagnosis (moderate-stable trajectory). Nearly 10% of the population had very low lipids before and after a breast cancer diagnosis (very low-stable trajectory); this pattern was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality for total cholesterol (HR 1.38, 95%CI 1.16, 1.66), LDL (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.04, 1.49), and HDL (HR 1.20, 95%CI 1.02, 1.40), compared to the moderate-stable trajectory. Approximately 5-6% had very high total cholesterol or LDL that rapidly declined after a breast cancer diagnosis (very high-declining trajectory); this pattern was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to a moderate-stable trajectory (HR 1.59, 95%CI 1.23, 2.05; HR 1.40, 95%CI 1.09, 1.81, respectively). The association between lipid trajectories and all-cause mortality did not significantly differ by lipid-lowering agent use, suggesting pharmacologic management did not impact the findings. However, those not on a lipid-lowering agent had a mortality risk of higher magnitude than those on pharmacologic intervention. Conclusions: Breast cancer patients with very low lipids before and after diagnosis, and patients with very high lipids that rapidly decline to low levels after diagnosis were identified as subgroups at high risk of mortality. These findings highlight the importance of considering longitudinal, repeat lipid measures to improve long-term outcomes in this population. Citation Format: Shana Jean Kim, Vanessa De Rubeis, Brendan T. Smith, Husam Abdel-Qadir, Jennifer D. Brooks. The association between longitudinal lipid trajectories and all-cause mortality in breast cancer survivors: A population-based study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 3602.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.345 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207