The integrative role of leptin, oestrogen and the insulin family in obesity‐associated breast cancer: potential effects of exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity is an established risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer. The mechanisms through which obesity influences the development and progression of breast cancer are not fully elucidated; however, several factors such as increased oestrogen, concentrations of various members of the insulin family and inflammation that are associated with adiposity are purported to be important factors in this relationship. Emerging research has also begun to focus on the role of adipokines, (i.e. adipocyte secreted factors), in breast cancer. Leptin secretion is directly related to adiposity and is believed to promote breast cancer directly and independently, as well as through involvement with the oestrogen and insulin signalling pathways. As leptin is secreted from white adipose tissue, any intervention that reduces adiposity may be favourable. However, it is also important to consider that energy expenditure through exercise, independent of fat loss, may improve leptin regulation. The purpose of this narrative review was to explore the role of leptin in breast cancer development and progression, identify key interactions with oestrogen and the insulin family, and distinguish the potential effects of exercise on these interactions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".