Intervention adherence, engagement and tool utilization in the breast cancer weight loss (BWEL) trial by race and ethnicity (Alliance A011401).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1586 Background: Black and Hispanic breast cancer (BC) survivors have a higher prevalence of obesity and experience less success with weight loss interventions (WLI) than White BC survivors. The BWEL trial (Alliance A011401; NCT02750826) is a phase III randomized trial evaluating the impact of a 2-year telephone-based WLI on invasive disease-free survival in participants (pts) with stage II-III HER2-negative BC and a BMI ≥ 27 kg/m 2 . At 12-months, the WLI induced significant weight loss across demographic factors, including race and ethnicity. However, Black and Hispanic pts lost less weight and completed fewer calls than White pts. Here, we evaluate intervention adherence, engagement and tool utilization in BWEL pts by race and ethnicity. Methods: BWEL randomized pts to a WLI plus health education (HE) or HE alone. WLI pts received semi-structured telephone-based health coaching, delivered in English or Spanish, and received an activity monitor and wireless scale. Pts self-reported race and ethnicity. Mean values for call duration, call density (time to complete the initial 12-week intensive intervention phase), intervention attrition, and frequency of Fitbit use and weight tracking over 12-months were compared by race and ethnicity, comparing least squares means with Tukey-Kramer adjustment for multiple comparisons with adjusted p-values. Results: Of 3181 pts randomized to the study between 08/2016 and 02/2021, 1591 pts were allocated to the WLI arm. 80.5% of pts were White, 12.8% Black, and 7.1% Hispanic. Average BMI was 34.5 (±5.7) kg/m2. Compared to White pts, Black pts had fewer days of Fitbit usage (113.6 vs. 159.8, p<0.0001) and weight tracking (77.9 vs. 135.6 days, p< 0.0001). Hispanic pts had fewer days of Fitbit usage (108.8 vs. 154.9, p= 0.001) and weight tracking (87 vs. 129.5 days, p=0.0002) compared to non-Hispanic pts. There were no differences in attrition rate, average call duration, or call density by race or ethnicity. Conclusions: In a phase III WLI trial, engagement with tools designed to support weight loss was significantly lower in Black and Hispanic pts. Future work is needed to explore ways to enhance engagement and improve weight loss outcomes for racial and ethnic minority pts. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, UG1CA189823; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT02750826 . Measure of engagement Race Ethnicity WhiteN=1281 BlackN=204 p-value Non-HispanicN=1459 HispanicN=113 p-value Withdrew from intervention n (%) 58 (4.5%) 13 (6.4%) 0.56 70 (4.8%) 6 (5.3%) 0.51 Call Duration (min)Mean (SD) 34.5 (7.6) 34.6 (9.1) 0.99 34.6 (7.8) 33.3 (7.9) 0.25 Call density(weeks)Mean (SD) 14.2 (7.2) 14.2 (8.8) 0.99 14.2 (7.3) 14.2 (9.7) 0.99 Days of Fitbit UseMean (SD) 159.8 (132.2) 113.6 (124.7) < 0.0001 154.9 (131.8) 108.8 (125.7) 0.001 Days of weight trackingMean (SD) 135.6 (109.5) 77.9 (87.5) < 0.0001 129.5 (108.8) 87 (96.5) 0.0002
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".