MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073571283 · doi:10.1080/00039890409602948

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon–DNA Adducts and Breast Cancer: A Pooled Analysis

2004· article· en· W2073571283 on OpenAlexaff
Marilie D. Gammon, Sharon K. Sagiv, Sybil M. Eng, Sumitra Shantakumar, Mia M. Gaudet, Susan L. Teitelbaum, Julie A. Britton, Mary Beth Terry, Lian Wen Wang, Qiao Wang, Steve D. Stellman, Jan Beyea, Maureen Hatch, Geoffrey C. Kabat, Mary S. Wolff, Bruce Levin, Alfred I. Neugut, Regina M. Santella

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Environmental Health An International Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthGillings School of Public HealthBreast Cancer Research Foundation
KeywordsBreast cancerOdds ratioPolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbonPopulationInternal medicineConfidence intervalCancerCarcinogenChemistryDNA adductMedicineOncologyEndocrinologyBiochemistryEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-DNA adducts have been associated with breast cancer in several small studies. The authors' pooled analysis included 873 cases and 941 controls from a population-based case-control study. Competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in peripheral mononuclear cells was conducted in 2 rounds, and results were pooled on the basis of round-specific quantiles. The odds ratio for breast cancer was elevated in relation to detectable PAH-DNA adducts (1.29 as compared with nondetectable adduct levels; 95% confidence interval = 1.05, 1.58), but there was no apparent dose-response relationship with increasing quantiles. No consistent pattern emerged when the results were stratified by PAH sources (e.g., active cigarette smoking or PAH-containing foods), or when the cases were categorized by stage of disease or hormone receptor status. These data provide only modest support for an association between PAH-DNA adducts and breast cancer development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.009
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations104
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Environmental Health An International JournalSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207