MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115148771 · doi:10.1093/aje/kwr324

Passive Cigarette Smoke Exposure During Various Periods of Life, Genetic Variants, and Breast Cancer Risk Among Never Smokers

2012· article· en· W2115148771 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura N. Anderson, Michelle Cotterchio, Lucia Mirea, H Ozçelik, Nancy Kreiger

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Epidemiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineCigarette smokeEnvironmental healthPassive smokingSmokeTobacco smokeCigarette smokingOncologyPhysiologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The association between passive cigarette smoke exposure and breast cancer risk is inconclusive and may be modified by genotype. The authors investigated lifetime passive cigarette smoke exposures, 36 variants in 12 carcinogen-metabolizing genes, and breast cancer risk among Ontario, Canada, women who had never smoked (2003-2004). DNA (saliva) was available for 920 breast cancer cases and 960 controls. Detailed information about passive smoke exposure was collected for multiple age periods (childhood, teenage years, and adulthood) and environments (home, work, and social). Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated by multivariable logistic regression, and statistical interactions were assessed using the likelihood ratio test. Among postmenopausal women, most associations between passive smoke and breast cancer risk were null, whereas among premenopausal women, nonsignificant positive associations were observed. Significant interactions were observed between certain types of passive smoke exposure and genetic variants in CYP2E1, NAT2, and UGT1A7. While these interactions were statistically significant, the magnitudes of the effect estimates were not consistent or easily interpretable, suggesting that they were perhaps due to chance. Although the results of this study were largely null, it is possible that premenopausal women exposed to passive smoke or carrying certain genetic variants may be at higher risk of breast cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations37
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of EpidemiologySame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207