Breast, ovarian, and endometrial malignancies in systemic lupus erythematosus: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An increased lymphoma risk is well documented in systemic lupus (SLE). Less attention has been focused on women's cancers, even though SLE affects mostly females. Our objective was to estimate the risk of breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancers in SLE, relative to the general population. METHODS: Data were included from five recent studies of large SLE cohorts. The number of cancers observed was determined for each cancer type. The expected number of malignancies was ascertained from general population data. The parameter of interest was the standardised incidence ratio (SIR), the ratio of observed to expected malignancies. RESULTS: The five studies included 47,325 SLE patients (42,171 females) observed for 282,553 patient years. There were 376 breast cancers, 66 endometrial cancers, and 44 ovarian cancers. The total number of cancers observed was less than that expected, with SIRs of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.85) for breast cancer, 0.71 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.91) for endometrial cancer, and 0.66 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.90) for ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Data strongly support a decreased risk of breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancers in SLE. This may be due to inherent differences in women in SLE (vs the general population) regarding endogenous oestrogen, other medications, and/or genetic make-up.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".