<i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> and invasive cervical cancer: A pooled analysis of the IARC multicentric case‐control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine whether Chlamydia trachomatis infection is consistently associated with an increased risk of invasive cervical carcinoma (ICC) after accounting for the strong effect of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, a case-control study of 1,238 cases of ICC and 1,100 control women from 7 countries was carried out (hospital-based studies in Thailand, the Philippines, Morocco, Peru, Brazil and population-based studies in Colombia and Spain, all coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France). C. trachomatis serum antibody detection was made by means of a microfluorescence assay. Among HPV DNA-positive cases and controls, the risk of squamous cell ICC was elevated in C. trachomatis seropositive women (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.2-2.7) after adjustment for age, center, oral contraceptive use, history of Pap smears, number of full-term pregnancies and herpes simplex virus 2 seropositivity. The effect of C. trachomatis seropositivity on squamous cell ICC risk increased with increasing C. trachomatis antibody titers and was higher in women under 55 years of age. C. trachomatis antibodies were not associated with adeno- or adenosquamous cell carcinoma (OR = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.53-1.9) in HPV DNA-positive women. An association of C. trachomatis with squamous cell ICC was found among all cases and control women with or without adjustment for HPV.
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 | 0.017 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".