Cancer incidence attributable to the use of oral contraceptives and hormone therapy in Alberta in 2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background:</h3> Hormonal contraceptives and hormone replacement therapies are classified as carcinogenic to humans (group 1) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. We sought to estimate the proportion and total number of cancers attributable to the use of oral contraceptives and hormone therapy in Alberta in 2012. <h3>Methods:</h3> Population attributable risks were used to estimate the proportion of attributable cases for each associated cancer site. Relative risk estimates were obtained from the most relevant and recent epidemiologic literature. Prevalences of the use of oral contraceptives and hormone therapy in Alberta were collected from Alberta9s Tomorrow Project. Specific cancer incidence data were obtained from the Alberta Cancer Registry for the year 2012. <h3>Results:</h3> Overall, 6.3% of breast cancers (<i>n</i> = 135) diagnosed in Alberta in 2012 were estimated to be attributable to the use of oral contraceptives, and the exposure potentially prevented about 57.3% of endometrial cancers (<i>n</i> = 276) and 29.1% of ovarian cancers (<i>n</i> = 52). About 15.5% of breast cancers (<i>n</i> = 258) and 8.9% of ovarian cancers (<i>n</i> = 13) were estimated to be attributable to the use of hormone therapy, whereas 11.3% of endometrial cancers (<i>n</i> = 48) were possibly prevented by the exposure. <h3>Interpretation:</h3> Based on our estimates, oral contraceptive use resulted in a net protective effect among the cancer sites studied, thus reducing the cancer burden in Alberta in 2012. The use of hormone therapy was estimated to increase the cancer burden in the province, therefore the risk and benefit of hormone therapy should be carefully considered before use.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".