Effect of soy isoflavones on breast cancer recurrence and death for patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The intake of soy isoflavones among women with breast cancer has become a public health concern, because these compounds have weak estrogenic effects. There is little clinical evidence about their safety for patients with breast cancer who are receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy. METHODS: For patients who underwent surgery for breast cancer between August 2002 and July 2003 and who were receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy, we examined associations between dietary intake of soy isoflavones and recurrence of breast cancer and death. We measured dietary intake of soy isoflavones at baseline using a validated food frequency questionnaire. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by means of multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. We further stratified the analyses by hormonal receptor status and endocrine therapy. RESULTS: The median follow-up period for the 524 patients in this study was 5.1 years. Among premenopausal patients, the overall death rate (30.6%) was not related to intake of soy isoflavones (HR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.78-1.71 for the highest quartile [> 42.3 mg/day] v. the lowest quartile [< 15.2 mg/day], p for trend = 0.87). Relative to post-menopausal patients in the lowest quartile of soy isoflavone intake, the risk of recurrence for post-menopausal patients in the highest quartile was significantly lower (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.85, p for trend = 0.02). Inverse associations were observed in patients with estrogen and progesterone receptor positive disease and those receiving anastrozole therapy. INTERPRETATION: High dietary intake of soy isoflavones was associated with lower risk of recurrence among post-menopausal patients with breast cancer positive for estrogen and progesterone receptor and those who were receiving anastrozole as endocrine therapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".