ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2026
One size does not fit all: data-driven insights of patient-reported outcomes to tailor supportive care in breast cancer.
Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSupportive care resources are limited, requiring a strategic, tailored approach, especially with the growing population of breast cancer patients. We examined whether routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can identify meaningful health-related quality of life (HRQoL) trajectories and help guide resource allocation of supportive care.
methodsAs part of routine care at the Netherlands Cancer Institute, 2181 early-stage breast cancer patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR23 before treatment and six months later. Through Latent Class and Latent Transition Analyses, we identified HRQoL subgroups and transitions between subgroups over time. Multinomial regression examined sociodemographic and clinical correlates. Network analysis detected key domains and inter-domain connections within subgroups.
resultsThree HRQoL subgroups were identified at baseline: Excellent HRQoL (53%), Good HRQoL with Psychosocial concerns (33%), and Poor HRQoL with severe functional limitations (13%). Multiple comorbidities and history of depression were independently and strongly associated with membership to less favorable subgroups. Subgroup transitions were rare (1–5%). Network analysis showed subgroup-specific key domains: emotional functioning in the Psychosocial concerns-subgroup, and menopausal symptoms, social, and role functioning in the Poor HRQoL-subgroup; the latter subgroup showing the highest interconnectivity between HRQoL-domains.
conclusionBaseline HRQoL and sociodemographic factors, independent of treatment, is associated with HRQoL trajectories and can guide efficient re-allocation of resources to those patients with complex needs. Most patients maintain excellent HRQoL and may benefit from low-intensity or self-management support, whereas targeted, multidisciplinary interventions should be prioritized for those with complex needs. Different key domains and connectivity suggest different types of supportive care are needed for different subgroups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.