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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".