MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407196067 · doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2369-z

Importance of hereditary and selected environmental risk factors in the etiology of inflammatory breast cancer: a case-comparison study

2016· article· en· W2407196067 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Roxana Moslehi, Elizabeth Freedman, Nur Zeinomar, Carmela C. Veneroso, Paul H. Levine

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Cancer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of TorontoSusan G. KomenUniversity of British ColumbiaSusan G. Komen for the CureU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsSurgical oncologyMedicineBreast cancerEtiologyInflammatory breast cancerOncologyCancerInternal medicineBioinformaticsEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To assess the importance of heredity in the etiology of inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), we compared IBC patients to several carefully chosen comparison groups with respect to the prevalence of first-degree family history of breast cancer. METHODS: IBC cases (n = 141) were compared to non-inflammatory breast cancer cases (n = 178) ascertained through George Washington University (GWU) with respect to the prevalence of first-degree family history of breast cancer and selected environmental/lifestyle risk factors for breast cancer. Similar comparisons were conducted with subjects from three case-control studies: breast cancer cases (n = 1145) and unaffected controls (n = 1142) from the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) study, breast cancer cases (n = 465) and controls (n = 9317) from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study, and ovarian cancer cases (n = 260) and controls (n = 331) from a study by University of Toronto (UT). RESULTS: The frequency of first-degree breast cancer family history among IBC cases was 17.0 % compared to 24.4 % for GWU breast cancer cases, 23.9 % and 17.9 % for CGEMS breast cancer cases and controls, respectively, 16.9 % and 12.6 % for WHI breast cancer cases and controls, respectively, and 24.2 % and 11.2 % for UT ovarian cancer cases and controls, respectively. IBC cases had a significantly lower prevalence of parous women than WHI breast cancer cases (OR = 0.46, 95 % CI:0.27-0.81) and controls (OR = 0.31, 95 % CI:0.20-0.49). Oral contraceptive use was significantly higher among IBC cases compared to WHI breast cancer cases (OR = 7.77, 95 % CI:4.82-12.59) and controls (OR = 8.14, 95 % CI:5.28-12.61). IBC cases had a significantly higher frequency of regular alcohol consumption (≥1 drink per day) compared to WHI controls (OR = 1.84, 95 % CI:1.20-2.82) and UT controls (OR = 1.86, 95 % CI:1.07-3.22) and higher (statistically non-significant) prevalence (21.3 %) compared to breast cancer cases from GWU (18.2 %) and WHI (15.2 %). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of first-degree breast cancer family history among IBC cases was lower compared to breast and ovarian cancer cases but higher than unaffected individuals. Our multiple-case inflammatory and non-inflammatory breast cancer families may reflect aggregation of common genetic and/or environmental factors predisposing to both types of breast cancer. Our findings that oral contraceptive use and regular alcohol consumption may be associated with IBC warrant further investigations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC CancerSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207