Abstract P4-13-04: Estrogen and Avoidance of Invasive Breast Cancer, Coronary Heart Disease and All-cause Mortality. Public Health Impact of Estrogen Guidelines for Women entering Menopause.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND. Estrogen [E] for women entering menopause is not perceived beneficial for either iBrCa or CHD. However, data from RCTs suggest that use of Estrogen reduces: a. rates of invasive breast cancer [iBrCa], andb. atherogenesis, vessel pathology and in certain age groups, coronary heart disease [CHD]. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the population-level impact of Estrogen as part of hormone replacement therapy [HRT] for women entering menopause on rates of iBrCa, CHD and all cause mortality [AC- Mort] that could result from a change of Practice where Estrogen would be recommended for women entering menopause. METHODOLOGY. Annualized rates of iBrCa, CHD and AC-Mort in women age 50–59, and annualized iBrCa rates for all participants and those without Past History of Benign Breast Disease [PHBBD] extracted from the results of the Women's Health Initiative trial [E] alone vs placebo [Refs 1,2], were applied to estimate the reduction in the Number of Avoided Events per 100,000 female population per annum [NAE]. The [NAE] over 10 years follow up was calculated as: NAE = (P − E) × 100,000 × 10 where P was the annualized rate among placebo participants and E was the annualized rate among Estrogen participants. RESULTS. [Table 1]. Taking 100,000 exposed versus unexposed women age 50–59, and rate reduction due to [E] of −41% [HR=0.59], −20% [HR=0.80] and −27% [HR=0.73] for CHD, iBrCa and AC-Mort [Ref 1,2], respectively, there will be annual avoidance of −130 cases of CHD, −60 of iBrCa, and −130 of deaths from any cause. iBrCa annual avoidance for women any age, and those without PHBBD, were −80 and −150 events, respectively. CONCLUSION. 1. Estrogen therapy could reduce thousands of BrCa, CHD and AC-Mortality events annually, just in North America. These gains are in addition to the established quality of life improvement for millions of women due to [E]. 2. Of particular importance is the [E] effect on reduction of iBrCa rates, particularly significant for women without PHBBD, confirming the new paradigm of Dual E effect for human BrCa [Ref 3]. 3. These substantial Public Health gains associated with [E] may justify changing policy to incorporate [E] into HRT guidelines for appropriately selected women. 4. Accelerated research to optimize [E] formulations, and identifying subsets that benefit most, is urgently required for optimum HRT use in Prevention of iBrCa, CHD, and reducing AC- mortality. REFERENCES 1. LaCroix AZ, et al. Health outcomes after stopping conjugated equine estrogens among postmenopausal women with prior hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2011;305:1305–14. 2. Anderson GL, et al. Conjugated equine oestrogen and breast cancer incidence and mortality in postmenopausal women with hysterectomy: extended follow-up of the Women's Health Initiative randomised placebo-controlled trial Lancet Oncol 2012;13:476–86. 3. Ragaz J, et al. Dual estrogen effects on breast cancer: endogenous estrogen stimulates, exogenous estrogen protects. Further investigation of estrogen chemoprevention is warranted. Cancer Res 2010;70. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-13-04.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".