MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161598849 · doi:10.1136/tc.2010.035931

Active smoking and secondhand smoke increase breast cancer risk: the report of the Canadian Expert Panel on Tobacco Smoke and Breast Cancer Risk (2009)

2010· review· en· W2161598849 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kenneth C. Johnson, Anthony B. Miller, Neil Collishaw, Julie R. Palmer, S. Katharine Hammond, Andrew G. Salmon, Kenneth P. Cantor, Mark Miller, Norman F. Boyd, J Millar, Fernand Turcotte

Bibliographic record

VenueTobacco Control · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalProvincial Health Services AuthorityPhysicians for a Smoke-Free CanadaPublic Health Agency of CanadaOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerTobacco smokeEnvironmental healthCancerEpidemiologyPublic healthOncologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four authoritative reviews of active smoking and breast cancer have been published since 2000, but only one considered data after 2002 and conclusions varied. Three reviews of secondhand smoke (SHS) and breast cancer (2004-2006) each came to different conclusions. With 30 new studies since 2002, further review was deemed desirable. An Expert Panel was convened by four Canadian agencies, the Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, the Public Health Agency of Canada, Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada and the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer to comprehensively examine the weight of evidence from epidemiological and toxicological studies and understanding of biological mechanisms regarding the relationship between tobacco smoke and breast cancer. This article summarises the panel's full report (http://www.otru.org/pdf/special/expert_panel_tobacco_breast_cancer.pdf). There are 20 known or suspected mammary carcinogens in tobacco smoke, and recognised biological mechanisms that explain how exposure to these carcinogens could lead to breast cancer. Results from the nine cohort studies reporting exposure metrics more detailed than ever/never and ex/current smoker show that early age of smoking commencement, higher pack-years and longer duration of smoking increase breast cancer risk 15% to 40%. Three meta-analyses report 35% to 50% increases in breast cancer risk for long-term smokers with N-acetyltransferase 2 gene (NAT2) slow acetylation genotypes. The active smoking evidence bolsters support for three meta-analyses that each reported about a 65% increase in premenopausal breast cancer risk among never smokers exposed to SHS. The Panel concluded that: 1) the association between active smoking and breast cancer is consistent with causality and 2) the association between SHS and breast cancer among younger, primarily premenopausal women who have never smoked is consistent with causality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations238
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTobacco ControlSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207