Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality of life and preferences for treatment following systemic adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer.

Lindley, C, Vasa, S, Sawyer, W T, Winer, E P·1998·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the quality of life (QOL) of breast cancer patients who survived 2 to 5 years following initiation of adjuvant cytotoxic and/or hormonal therapy and to characterize relationships between QOL and patient physical symptoms, sexual function, and preferences regarding adjuvant treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-six patients who had completed systemic adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer between 1988 and 1991 were surveyed by written questionnaire and telephone interview. Sociodemographic information was obtained for each patient, and patients were asked to complete the Functional Living Index-Cancer (FLIC), the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS), the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short Form 36 (SF-36), a series of questions regarding sexual function, and a survey about preferences for adjuvant therapy in relation to possible benefit. RESULTS: The mean FLIC score among all patients was 138.3 (+/- 12.2), which suggests a high level of QOL. The reported frequency of moderate to severe symptoms was generally low (ie, < 15%), with fatigue (31.4%), insomnia (23.3%), and local numbness at the site of surgery (22.1%) occurring with greatest frequency. Patients reported a wide range of sexual difficulties. Preference assessment showed that more than 65% of patients were willing to undergo 6 months of chemotherapy for a 5% increase in likelihood of cancer cure. CONCLUSION: Self-rated QOL in breast cancer patients 2 to 5 years following adjuvant therapy was generally favorable. Less than one third of patients reported moderate to severe symptoms. Selected aspects of sexual function appeared to be compromised. The majority of patients indicated a willingness to accept 6 months of chemotherapy for small to modest potential benefit.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.1998.16.4.1380

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 296

Metadata

Authors
Lindley, C., Vasa, S., Sawyer, W. T., & Winer, E. P.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1998-04
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
1380-1387
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2120649398
Cited by
296
References
1
FWCI
6.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.