Congenital abnormalities and childhood cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The examination of specific characteristics of neoplasms diagnosed in children have suggested that a significant proportion can be attributed to a genetic mutation or genetic predisposition. Although the study of a genetic predisposition to cancer in children remains in the early stages, congenital abnormalities could provide essential information for mapping predisposing lesions in children with cancer. METHODS: In the current study, 2 large cohorts of children with and without congenital abnormalities were followed for the occurrence of cancer and death up to 18 years. Through this study, the risk of developing cancer by age at diagnosis, effects of birth characteristics on cancer risk, and possible associations between specific anomalies and tumor types were examined. RESULTS: Based on the follow-up of 90,400 children, the risk of developing cancer during the first year of life was found to be nearly 6 times higher in children with anomalies (rate ratio [RR] of 5.8; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.7-9.1). Children with birth defects were found to be at a higher risk for developing leukemia (RR of 2.7; 95% CI, 2.1-3.6), tumors of the central nervous system (RR of 2.5; 95% CI, 1.8-3.4), sympathetic nervous system tumors (RR of 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.4), and soft tissue sarcomas (RR of 1.9; 95% CI, 1.0-3.5). Among children with birth defects, children with Down syndrome, nervous system anomalies, and anomalies of the urinary system had the highest incidence rates of cancer. In the presence of birth defects, other factors such as birth weight, gestational age, age of the mother, and birth order were not found to be associated significantly with the risk of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The significant relative risks found in the current study provided evidence of links between the presence of abnormalities and the development of cancer. Some "cancer-prone" abnormalities were identified in the current study. Such anomalies may be markers of other exposures or processes that increase the risk of developing cancer.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".