Reproductive factors, tumor estrogen receptor status and contralateral breast cancer risk: results from the WECARE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several reproductive factors are known to be associated with risk of breast cancer; however, relationships between these factors with risk of second primary asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (CBC) have not been widely studied. The Women's Environmental, Cancer, and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study is a population-based case-control study of 1521 CBC cases and 2212 individually matched controls with unilateral breast cancer. Using multivariable conditional logistic regression models, we examined associations between reproductive factors and CBC risk, and whether associations differed by estrogen receptor (ER) status and menopausal status of the first breast cancer. Older age at menarche was inversely associated with CBC risk (≥14 vs. ≤11 years risk ratio (RR) = 0.82, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.65-1.03, P trend = 0.02). Among parous women, an increasing number of full-term pregnancies (FTP) was inversely associated with risk (≥4 vs. 1 FTP RR = 0.60, 95 % CI 0.41-0.88, P trend = 0.005). Ever breast-feeding was inversely associated with CBC risk only among women with ER-negative first tumors (ever vs. never breast-fed RR = 0.69, 95 % CI 0.48-1.00, P heterogeneity = 0.05). Older age at first FTP was inversely associated with CBC risk among women with ER-negative first tumors (≥30 vs. <20 years old RR = 0.66, 95 % CI 0.35-1.27, P trend = 0.03), but suggestively positively associated with risk among women with ER-positive first tumors (P heterogeneity = 0.03). Young age at menarche and low parity, both risk factors for first primary breast cancer, were also associated with overall CBC risk. Reductions in risk associated with breast-feeding were limited to women with ER-negative first tumors, who are at higher CBC risk than women with ER-positive primaries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".