Short- and Long-term Cause-specific Survival of Patients with Inflammatory Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) had been perceived to have a poor prognosis. Oncologists were not enthusiastic in the past to give aggressive treatment. Single institution studies tend to have small patient numbers and limited years of follow-up. Most studies do not report 10-, 15- or 20-year results.\nMethods: Data was obtained from the population-based database of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program of the National Cancer Institute from 1975-1995 using SEER*Stat5.0 software. This period of 21 years was divided into 7 periods of 3 years each. The years were chosen so that there was adequate follow-up information to 2000. ICD-O-2 histology 8530/3 was used to define IBC. The lognormal model was used for statistical analysis.\nResults: A total of 1684 patients were analyzed, of which 84% were white, 11% were African Americans, and 5% belonged to other races. Age distribution was < 30 years in 1%, 30-40 in 11%, 40-50 in 22%, 50-60 in 24%, 60-70 in 21%, and > 70 in 21%. The lognormal model was validated for 1975-77 and for 1978-80, since the 10-, 15- and 20-year cause-specific survival (CSS) rates, could be calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method with data available in 2000. The data were then used to estimate the 10-, 15- and 20-year CSS rates for the more recent years, and to study the trend of improvement in survival. There were increasing incidences of IBC: 134 patients in the 1975-77 period to 416 patients in the 1993-95 period. The corresponding 20-year CSS increased from 9% to 20% respectively with standard errors of less than 4%.\nConclusion: The improvement of survival during the study period may be due to introduction of more aggressive treatments. However, there seem to be no further increase of long-term CSS, which should encourage oncologists to find even more effective treatments. Because of small numbers of patients, randomized studies will be difficult to conduct. The SEER population-based database will yield the best possible estimate of the trend in improvement of survival for patients with IBC.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | medium |
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".