MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P2-03-01: Sexual health in unpartnered women after breast cancer: Report from a joint analysis of two international multi-site prospective cohorts of young breast cancer survivors

2025· article· en· W4411287646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sharon L. Bober, Eleonora Pagan, Monica Ruggeri, Shari Gelber, Vincenzo Bagnardi, Ann Partridge, Olivia Pagani, Shoshana Rosenberg, Karin Ribi

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCancerProspective cohort studyOncologyGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives: Sexual dysfunction is a distressing potential side effect of breast cancer (BC) treatment. However, little is known about the experience of unpartnered young women whose concerns may differ from partnered peers. Helping Ourselves, Helping Others: The Young Women’s Breast Cancer Study (YWS-HOHO) investigates gaps in knowledge about young BC survivors in 2 multi-site prospective cohorts. Methods: The North American (USA, Canada) and European (Italy, Switzerland) YWS-HOHO cohorts jointly enrolled 1602 women. Participants were ≤40 yrs. and diagnosed with stage 0-IV BC <6 months before enrollment. Serial surveys were completed every 6 months for the first 3 yrs. and annually thereafter. Surveys included assessment of body image, sexual health, menopausal symptoms (using the CARES and BCPT scales, score range: 0-4, with higher scores indicating greater severity) and menopausal concerns. Unpartnered and partnered women were compared at baseline and 2-yrs. post-enrollment using T-tests. Results: A total of 1342 women were included in this analysis (1054 from N.A., 288 from Europe). The median age at enrollment was 37 yrs. (IQR 33-39), 81% of women had stage 0-2 disease. Most women (n = 1000, 74.5%) had received chemotherapy, 63.8% (n = 856) had undergone mastectomy. At baseline, 13% of women were unpartnered (n=180). Unpartnered young women reported significantly higher body image concerns than partnered peers at baseline (mean CARES body image scale 1.28 vs 1.09, p-value=0.04) but not at 2-yrs (1.17 vs 1.08, p-value=0.35). Concern about general sexual function was comparable for unpartnered and partnered women at baseline (1.97 vs 1.81, p-value=0.11) and at 2-yrs (1.43 vs 1.42, p-value=0.92). For example, >47% of both unpartnered and partnered women endorsed a loss of sexual interest at baseline and >36% of both groups also at 2-yrs. Unpartnered women reported fewer vaginal symptoms (e.g., vaginal dryness, pain with intercourse) than partnered women at both timepoints (mean BCPT vaginal scale at baseline 0.53 vs 0.83, p-value<0.001; at 2-yrs 0.74 vs 1.01, p-value=0.002), while there were no differences in hot flashes and urinary symptoms at either timepoint. Greater than 50% of both unpartnered and partnered women reported concern about becoming post-menopausal at both timepoints. Approximately half of unpartnered women reported difficulty with dating at both timepoints, including difficulty with initiating contact with potential partners and difficulty with discloser about their cancer experience. Conclusion and Implications: Unpartnered young BC survivors report similar levels of sexual dysfunction as partnered peers as well as distinct concerns about body image and dating. These findings underscore the need to routinely address sexual health regardless of partner status and to better investigate specific concerns of unpartnered women such as dating and relationship-building. Citation Format: Sharon Bober, Eleonora Pagan, Monica Ruggeri, Shari Gelber, Vincenzo Bagnardi, Ann Partridge, Olivia Pagani, Shoshana Rosenberg, Karin Ribi. Sexual health in unpartnered women after breast cancer: Report from a joint analysis of two international multi-site prospective cohorts of young breast cancer survivors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2024; 2024 Dec 10-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2025;31(12 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-03-01.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 venueClinical Cancer Research→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→