MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975103646 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.disp-10-a99

Abstract A99: Passive smoking increases the risk of breast cancer among pre-and post-menopausal Mexican women

2010· article· en· W1975103646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olivia Lingdao Chilian-Herrera, Kenneth P. Cantor, Raúl Ulises Hernández‐Ramírez, Lizbeth López-Carrillo

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePassive smokingTobacco smokeBreast cancerIncidence (geometry)DemographyEnvironmental healthTobacco controlPopulationCancerGynecologyPublic healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Active and passive tobacco smoke exposures are considered modifiable risk factors for female breast cancer (BC). According to a recent expert panel report, active smoking (AS) increases the risk of BC by 20%, while the association between passive smoking (PS) and BC in younger, primarily premenopausal women who have never smoked, is consistent with causality; however, the evidence for risk among post menopausal women is inconclusive [Canadian Expert Report, 2009]. Since 2006, BC has become the leading cause of female cancer in Mexico, followed by cervical malignant tumors, with highest incidence in Mexican northern states [Knaul, 2009]. According to the National Surveys of Addictions, 6.5 million Mexican women between 12 and 65 years who have never smoked are currently exposed to environmental tobacco smoke. The mean age of tobacco smoking onset decreased from 18.3 years in 2008 to 16.8 years in 2009 [ENA, 2008; GATS, 2009]. Objective: To estimate the risk of breast cancer due to lifetime tobacco passive smoking exposure among pre and postmenopausal women residing in Mexico-US border states; to estimate risk associated with active smoking; and to explore age windows of susceptibility for both passive and active exposures. Methods: The first 504 histologically confirmed incident BC cases and 504 age-matched controls from an ongoing population-based case-control study, are included in this analysis. Active (number of cigarettes/year) and passive (number of smokers/year) lifetime tobacco exposures, at home and the workplace, targeting periods of suspected susceptibility (i.e. puberty until first birth etc.) were estimated from direct interviews. Never active smokers without a history of passive smoking exposure were considered as the referent group and were compared with active smokers as well as passive smokers with no history of active smoking. Known reproductive BC risk factors were included as covariables in multivariate logistic regression models. Results: Passive smoking significantly increased BC risk (OR t3 vs. t1 =3.34,95% CI 2.38-4.68, p for trend<0.001) even after stratifying by menopausal status (OR premenopausal t3 vs. t1 =4.75,95% CI 2.58-7.35, p for trend<0.001, OR postmenopausal t3 vs. t1 = 2.83,95% CI 1.87-4.28) and by age windows of susceptibility (i.e. 20 to 39 years OR t3 vs. t1 =2.68,95% CI 1.87-3.83, p for trend<0.001). In the overall population, BC risk was also associated with active smoking (OR t3 vs. t1 =1.72,95%CI 1.11-2.69, p for trend<0.001) that remained significant only when the age of tobacco smoking onset was between menarche and first birth (OR t3 vs. t1 =1.93,95%CI 1.19-3.23, p for trend<0.001). Conclusions: Our results provide evidence that PS is a risk factor not only for premenopausal but also for postmenopausal Mexican women and confirm that active smoking is a risk factor for this tumor. Citation Information: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19(10 Suppl):A99.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207