Age at Menarche and Late Adolescent Adiposity Associated with Mammographic Density on Processed Digital Mammograms in 24,840 Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: High mammographic density is strongly associated with increased breast cancer risk. Some, but not all, risk factors for breast cancer are also associated with higher mammographic density. Methods: The study cohort (N = 24,840) was drawn from the Research Program in Genes, Environment and Health of Kaiser Permanente Northern California and included non-Hispanic white females ages 40 to 74 years with a full-field digital mammogram (FFDM). Percent density (PD) and dense area (DA) were measured by a radiological technologist using Cumulus. The association of age at menarche and late adolescent body mass index (BMI) with PD and DA were modeled using linear regression adjusted for confounders. Results: Age at menarche and late adolescent BMI were negatively correlated. Age at menarche was positively associated with PD (P value for trend <0.0001) and DA (P value for trend <0.0001) in fully adjusted models. Compared with the reference category of ages 12 to 13 years at menarche, menarche at age >16 years was associated with an increase in PD of 1.47% (95% CI, 0.69–2.25) and an increase in DA of 1.59 cm2 (95% CI, 0.48–2.70). Late adolescent BMI was inversely associated with PD (P < 0.0001) and DA (P < 0.0001) in fully adjusted models. Conclusions: Age at menarche and late adolescent BMI are both associated with Cumulus measures of mammographic density on processed FFDM images. Impact: Age at menarche and late adolescent BMI may act through different pathways. The long-term effects of age at menarche on cancer risk may be mediated through factors besides mammographic density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(9); 1450–8. ©2017 AACR.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".