Oral Contraceptive Use and Risk of Early-Onset Breast Cancer in Carriers and Noncarriers of <i>BRCA1</i> and <i>BRCA2</i> Mutations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent oral contraceptive use has been associated with a small increase in breast cancer risk and a substantial decrease in ovarian cancer risk. The effects on risks for women with germ line mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are unclear. METHODS: Subjects were population-based samples of Caucasian women that comprised 1,156 incident cases of invasive breast cancer diagnosed before age 40 (including 47 BRCA1 and 36 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and 815 controls from the San Francisco Bay area, California, Ontario, Canada, and Melbourne and Sydney, Australia. Relative risks by carrier status were estimated using unconditional logistic regression, comparing oral contraceptive use in case groups defined by mutation status with that in controls. RESULTS: After adjustment for potential confounders, oral contraceptive use for at least 12 months was associated with decreased breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers [odds ratio (OR), 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.10-0.49; P < 0.001], but not for BRCA2 mutation carriers (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.34-3.09) or noncarriers (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.69-1.24). First use during or before 1975 was associated with increased risk for noncarriers (OR, 1.52 per year of use before 1976; 95% CI, 1.22-1.91; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that use of current low-dose oral contraceptive formulations increases risk of early-onset breast cancer for mutation carriers, and there may be a reduced risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. Because current formulations of oral contraceptives may reduce, or at least not exacerbate, ovarian cancer risk for mutation carriers, they should not be contraindicated for a woman with a germ line mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".