P4-11-12: Molecular Phenotype of Breast Cancers in a Large Cohort of Young Women According to Time Interval Since Pregnancy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: The increase in breast cancer risk during pregnancy and post partum is well recognized. The cross-over to protective effect does not occur until many years later and varies with age at first birth. Recently, a genomic signature specific to the pregnant compared with the non-pregnant breast has been identified; this signature remains present in the postmenopausal parous breast. Given this, we investigated whether time interval since pregnancy affects the phenotype of breast cancers arising in young women compared with nulliparous women. Methods: We examined molecular phenotype, according to histologic grade and biomarker status, in relation to time since pregnancy in an ongoing prospective cohort study (n=355) of young women (≤40yrs) with breast cancer. Medical records were reviewed for tumor stage and receptor status. Parity was ascertained from questionnaires completed within 9 months of diagnosis. Tumor grade was determined by central pathology review. Using tumor grade and biomarker expression, cancers were categorized as luminal A (ER+ and/or PR+, HER2−, histologic grade 1 or 2); luminal B ( ER+ and/or PR+, HER2+, or ER and/or PR+, HER2− and grade 3); HER2 type (ER-, PR-, HER2+); and triple negative (ER-, PR-, HER2−). Results: The median age of the study population is 37 years (range 17–40). Overall, 80% of women had stage 1 or 2 disease; 67% of cancers were ER positive and 32% showed HER2 overexpression. The distribution of breast cancer molecular phenotypes by time interval since last pregnancy is shown in the table. Distribution of molecular phenotype by interval between last pregnancy and diagnosis In our large cohort of parous young women, we found no differences in the distribution of molecular phenotype according to time interval since pregnancy. However, nulliparous young women were more likely to develop luminal A cancers compared to parous women (40% vs. 29%; unadjusted chi square p-value=0.03) and appeared less likely to develop HER2−type and triple negative cancers (7% vs. 13%, p-value=0.09 and 17% vs. 23%, p-value=0.22 respectively). There were no differences in the distribution of luminal B cancers. Conclusions: The distribution of molecular phenotypes is similar among parous young women regardless of the time interval since parturition. Nulliparous young women appear more likely to develop luminal A cancers compared to parous women. Whether the difference in molecular phenotypes of pregnancy-associated breast cancers vs. cancers arising in nulliparous women is due to the effects of genomic alteration remains to be investigated. Effects of a prior pregnancy appear consistent across a 5-year period, in keeping with the concept of genomic alterations identified in the normal pregnant breast and thereafter. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-11-12.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".