MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529610077 · doi:10.1002/cam4.890

Body mass index, weight change, and risk of second primary breast cancer in the <scp>WECARE</scp> study: influence of estrogen receptor status of the first breast cancer

2016· article· en· W2529610077 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer D. Brooks, Esther M. John, Lene Mellemkjær, Charles F. Lynch, Julia A. Knight, Kathleen E. Malone, Anne S. Reiner, Leslie Bernstein, Xiaolin Liang, Roy E. Shore, Marilyn Stovall

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerBody mass indexCancerGynecologyInternal medicineOncologyWeight gainEstrogen receptorPopulationObesityWeight changeObstetricsWeight lossBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies examining the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) have reported mixed findings. We previously showed that obese postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer have a fivefold higher risk of CBC compared with normal weight women. In the current analysis, we reexamined this relationship in the expanded Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study, focusing on the impact of menopausal status and ER status of the first breast cancer. The WECARE Study is a population-based case-control study of young women with CBC (cases, N = 1386) and with unilateral breast cancer (controls, N = 2045). Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to assess the relationship between BMI and risk of CBC stratified by menopausal and ER status. Positive associations with obesity and weight gain were limited to women who became postmenopausal following their first primary breast cancer. Among those with an ER-negative first breast cancer, obesity (vs. normal weight) at first diagnosis was associated with an increased risk of CBC (RR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.02, 3.4). Also, weight gain of ≥10 kg after first diagnosis was associated with an almost twofold increased risk of CBC (RR = 1.9, 95% CI: 0.99, 3.8). These results suggest that women with an ER-negative first primary cancer who are obese at first primary diagnosis or who experience a large weight gain afterward may benefit from heightened surveillance. Future studies are needed to address the impact of weight loss interventions on risk of CBC.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations26
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer MedicineSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207