MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409702136 · doi:10.3390/cancers17091409

Preoperative and Postoperative Change in Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in Breast Cancer Surgery Patients Across Surgical Modalities: A Prospective Study

2025· article· en· W4409702136 on OpenAlexafffund
Claire Liu, Maria Saleeb, Guiping Liu, Trafford Crump, Rebecca Warburton, Jin‐Si Pao, Carol Dingee, Amy Bazzarelli, Jason M. Sutherland, Elaine McKevitt

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineAnxietyBreast cancerPsychosocialMastectomyProspective cohort studyDepression (economics)Quality of life (healthcare)Breast reconstructionModalitiesPhysical therapyPatient satisfactionSurgeryInternal medicineCancerPsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study compared the change in pre- and postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS), total mastectomy no reconstruction (TMNR), and total mastectomy immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR). Patient factors associated with postoperative anxiety and depression were also identified. Methods: This prospective cohort study enrolled breast cancer patients between September 2017 and August 2020. HRQoL changes from preoperative to six months postoperative were compared using patient-reported outcome tools assessing anxiety, depression, pain, perceived health, breast satisfaction, psychosocial, physical, and sexual well-being and analyzed with ANOVA and linear regression. Results: A total of 471 patients completed preoperative and postoperative surveys (BCS: 313, TMNR: 60, MIBR: 98). Postoperative anxiety decreased across all modalities, with MIBR showing the greatest reduction (p = 0.03), though still exhibiting the highest postoperative anxiety (p = 0.05). Depression and perceived health scores showed no significant difference in change across modalities (p = 0.15, p = 0.48). MIBR patients showed the greatest increase in pain (p = 0.05) and the highest postoperative pain scores (p = 0.04). All three modalities showed a clinically significant decline in physical and sexual well-being. TMNR and MIBR had additional reductions in breast satisfaction, with TMNR also showing a decline in psychosocial well-being. Absolute postoperative scores for breast satisfaction, psychosocial, physical, and sexual well-being remained highest in BCS compared to TMNR and MIBR (p < 0.01, for each domain). In multivariable regression analysis, postoperative depression and anxiety scores did not differ between surgical modalities, but younger age was significantly associated with higher postoperative depression, pain and anxiety (p < 0.01), and adjuvant chemotherapy with higher postoperative depression (p < 0.01). Conclusions: BCS may have better overall HRQoL outcomes, specifically in breast satisfaction, psychosocial, physical, and sexual well-being, compared to TMNR and MIBR. Additionally, younger age, rather than surgical modality, was found to be associated with higher postoperative depression, pain, and anxiety scores.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207