Abstract 802: Utilization of emotional support services among breast cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Breast cancer patients frequently experience significant psychological distress, with prevalence rates of anxiety and depression reaching as high as 50% in certain studies. This distress is linked to worse treatment adherence and outcomes. Additionally, a recent review demonstrated that psychological interventions in these patients have been found to improve quality of life, decrease distress, and may extend disease-free survival while reducing recurrence and mortality. Despite the benefits, mental health services remain underutilized in this population. This study examined the use of emotional support resources by breast cancer patients using data from a single-institution patient-reported outcomes registry. Method: Data were collected from our institutional electronic medical records of breast cancer patients treated within the past year. Participants included those reporting moderate to severe symptoms (≥4) on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Score (ESAS) for depression or anxiety. Utilization of emotional support resources, such as referrals to psychosocial interventions (Psychiatrists, Social Workers), was analyzed. Demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics were compared between resource users and non-users using chi-square and z-tests. Results: Among 340 participants with moderate or higher distress, 118 (35.1%) accessed psychosocial resources, such as counseling or support groups. Younger patients showed a trend toward higher utilization (p=0.068), and white participants were slightly more likely to use resources (p=0.229), though neither finding reached statistical significance. Travel time significantly impacted resource use, with shorter commutes (<30 mins) leading to greater engagement (43.5% vs. 21.7% for 30-60 mins and 12.5% for >60 mins, p<0.001). Furthermore, patients with higher ESAS scores, reflecting greater symptom burden, were significantly more likely to engage with support resources (p<0.001). Other characteristics, including gender (p=0.51) and disease stage (p=0.432) were not associated with differences in resource use. Conclusions: This study highlights factors influencing the utilization of psychosocial support resources among breast cancer patients with moderate or greater distress. While age and race showed nonsignificant trends, travel time and symptom burden were significant predictors of engagement. Some patients may have declined additional referrals due to pre-existing support systems, indicating the need to assess these factors in future studies. Expanding access and addressing barriers through healthcare and advocacy partnerships remains essential. Further research could explore the use of psychosocial resources by patients with mild distress (ESAS scores 1-3). Citation Format: Ahmed Allibhai, Asiyah Allibhai, Zishan Allibhai. Utilization of emotional support services among breast cancer patients [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 802.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".