The Effects of Soy Consumption before Diagnosis on Breast Cancer Survival: The Multiethnic Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study tested the hypothesis that prediagnostic soy intake was inversely associated with all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality. The analyses included 3842 women in the Multiethnic Cohort (MEC) study of African Americans, Native Hawaiians, Japanese Americans, Latinos, and Caucasians, who completed a quantitative food frequency questionnaire, aged ≥50 yr at cohort entry, and diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer following cohort entry (1993-2007). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated from Cox proportional hazards regression with adjustment for known clinical and lifestyle factors. During a mean follow-up after diagnosis of invasive breast cancer of 6.2 ± 3.8 yr, there were 804 deaths including 376 breast cancer-specific deaths. The HR (95%CI) for all-cause and breast cancer-specific morality comparing the highest versus lowest tertiles were 1.03 (0.81-1.33) and 1.03 (0.71-1.50) for soy products and 0.99 (0.82-1.20) and 0.95 (0.71-1.28) for total isoflavones, respectively (Ptrend > 0.60 for all). There was limited evidence of differences by hormone receptor status, tumor stage, or ethnic group. Prediagnostic soy intake was unrelated to mortality in postmenopausal women. Our findings are consistent with the literature that soy consumption does not adversely affect breast cancer survival in women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".