High coffee consumption and different brewing methods in relation to postmenopausal endometrial cancer risk in the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study: a population-based prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coffee and its compounds have been proposed to inhibit endometrial carcinogenesis. Studies in the Norwegian population can be especially interesting due to the high coffee consumption and increasing incidence of endometrial cancer in the country. METHODS: A total of 97 926 postmenopausal Norwegian women from the population-based prospective Norwegian Women and Cancer (NOWAC) Study, were included in the present analysis. We evaluated the general association between total coffee consumption and endometrial cancer risk as well as the possible impact of brewing method. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to estimate risks, and heterogeneity tests were performed to compare brewing methods. RESULTS: During an average of 10.9 years of follow-up, 462 incident endometrial cancer cases were identified. After multivariate adjustment, significant risk reduction was found among participants who drank ≥8 cups/day of coffee with a hazard ratio of 0.52 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.34-0.79). However, we did not observe a significant dose-response relationship. No significant heterogeneity in risk was found when comparing filtered and boiled coffee brewing methods. A reduction in endometrial cancer risk was observed in subgroup analyses among participants who drank ≥8 cups/day and had a body mass index ≥25 kg/m2, and in current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that in this population with high coffee consumption, endometrial cancer risk decreases in women consuming ≥8 cups/day, independent of brewing method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".