MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125681453 · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70404-1

Association between endometriosis and risk of histological subtypes of ovarian cancer: a pooled analysis of case–control studies

2012· article· en· W2125681453 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalBC Cancer Agency
FundersMedical Research and Materiel CommandU.S. Public Health ServiceUniversity of South ChinaAmerican University of SharjahBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungLon V. Smith FoundationNational Cancer InstituteSeventh Framework ProgrammeUniversity College LondonNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesMedical Research CouncilRoswell Park Alliance Foundation, Roswell Park Cancer InstituteDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumNational Health and Medical Research CouncilState of Connecticut Department of Public HealthCalifornia Breast Cancer Research ProgramKræftens BekæmpelseCalifornia Department of Public HealthOak FoundationCancer Council TasmaniaNational Institutes of HealthOvarian Cancer Research Fund
KeywordsEndometriosisOvarian cancerMedicineSerous fluidOdds ratioOncologyInternal medicineCase-control studyLogistic regressionClear cellCancerGynecologyCarcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a risk factor for epithelial ovarian cancer; however, whether this risk extends to all invasive histological subtypes or borderline tumours is not clear. We undertook an international collaborative study to assess the association between endometriosis and histological subtypes of ovarian cancer. METHODS: Data from 13 ovarian cancer case-control studies, which were part of the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium, were pooled and logistic regression analyses were undertaken to assess the association between self-reported endometriosis and risk of ovarian cancer. Analyses of invasive cases were done with respect to histological subtypes, grade, and stage, and analyses of borderline tumours by histological subtype. Age, ethnic origin, study site, parity, and duration of oral contraceptive use were included in all analytical models. FINDINGS: 13 226 controls and 7911 women with invasive ovarian cancer were included in this analysis. 818 and 738, respectively, reported a history of endometriosis. 1907 women with borderline ovarian cancer were also included in the analysis, and 168 of these reported a history of endometriosis. Self-reported endometriosis was associated with a significantly increased risk of clear-cell (136 [20·2%] of 674 cases vs 818 [6·2%] of 13 226 controls, odds ratio 3·05, 95% CI 2·43-3·84, p<0·0001), low-grade serous (31 [9·2%] of 336 cases, 2·11, 1·39-3·20, p<0·0001), and endometrioid invasive ovarian cancers (169 [13·9%] of 1220 cases, 2·04, 1·67-2·48, p<0·0001). No association was noted between endometriosis and risk of mucinous (31 [6·0%] of 516 cases, 1·02, 0·69-1·50, p=0·93) or high-grade serous invasive ovarian cancer (261 [7·1%] of 3659 cases, 1·13, 0·97-1·32, p=0·13), or borderline tumours of either subtype (serous 103 [9·0%] of 1140 cases, 1·20, 0·95-1·52, p=0·12, and mucinous 65 [8·5%] of 767 cases, 1·12, 0·84-1·48, p=0·45). INTERPRETATION: Clinicians should be aware of the increased risk of specific subtypes of ovarian cancer in women with endometriosis. Future efforts should focus on understanding the mechanisms that might lead to malignant transformation of endometriosis so as to help identify subsets of women at increased risk of ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Ovarian Cancer Research Fund, National Institutes of Health, California Cancer Research Program, California Department of Health Services, Lon V Smith Foundation, European Community's Seventh Framework Programme, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany, Programme of Clinical Biomedical Research, German Cancer Research Centre, Eve Appeal, Oak Foundation, UK National Institute of Health Research, National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Cancer Council Tasmania, Cancer Foundation of Western Australia, Mermaid 1, Danish Cancer Society, and Roswell Park Alliance Foundation.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.325 · 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