MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412390413 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32070402

Optimizing Adjuvant Care in Early Breast Cancer: Multidisciplinary Strategies and Innovative Models from Canadian Centers

2025· review· en· W4412390413 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Angela W. Chan, Nancy Nixon, Muna Alkhaifi, Alain Bestavros, Christine Blyth, Winson Y. Cheung, Caroline Hamm, Thomas Joly‐Mischlich, Mita Manna, Thomas McFarlane, Laura V. Minard, Sarah Naujokaitis, Christine Peragine, Cindy Railton, Scott Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreNova Scotia Health AuthorityUniversité de SherbrookeWindsor Regional HospitalHealth Sciences CentreOccupational Cancer Research CentreMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of WaterlooSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals Canada
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachBreast cancerAdjuvantCancerMedical physicsOncologyFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adjuvant treatment landscape for hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early breast cancer (EBC) is rapidly evolving, with a diverse range of therapeutic options-including endocrine therapies, bisphosphonates, ovarian function suppression, olaparib, CDK4/6 inhibitors, and emerging agents such as immunotherapy. While these advances have markedly improved patient outcomes, they also introduce challenges related to implementation, monitoring, and resource allocation. Notably, therapies like CDK4/6 inhibitors require particularly close monitoring, creating logistical and capacity challenges for medical oncologists, whose workloads are already stretched due to rising cancer incidence and treatment complexities. These challenges underscore the need for innovative care delivery solutions to ensure patients with EBC continue to receive optimal care. This paper offers a comprehensive guide-a playbook-of multidisciplinary-team-based care models designed to optimize adjuvant treatment delivery in EBC. Drawing on real-world evidence and successful applications across Canadian centers, we explore models led by nurses, nurse practitioners (NPs), general practitioners in oncology (GPO), and pharmacists. Each model leverages the unique expertise of its team to manage treatment toxicities, facilitate adherence, and enhance patient education, thereby promoting effective and sustainable care delivery. Importantly, these models are not intended to compete with one another, but rather to serve as a flexible recipe book from which breast cancer care teams can draw strategies tailored to their local resources and patient needs. By detailing implementation strategies, benefits, and challenges-in many instances supported by quantitative metrics and economic evaluations-this work aims to inspire care teams nationwide to optimize the adjuvant management of patients with HR+, HER2- EBC.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→