Prospective evaluation of body size and breast cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests that larger body size in early life confers lifelong protection from developing breast cancer, few studies have investigated the relationship between body size and breast cancer risk among BRCA mutation carriers. Therefore, we conducted a prospective evaluation of body size and the risk of breast cancer among BRCA mutation carriers. METHODS: Current height and body mass index (BMI) at age 18 were determined from baseline questionnaires. Current BMI and weight change since age 18 were calculated from updated biennial follow-up questionnaires. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Among 3734 BRCA mutation carriers, there were 338 incident breast cancers over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years. There was no association between height, current BMI or weight change and breast cancer risk. Women with BMI at age 18 ≥22.1 kg/m2 had a decreased risk of developing post-menopausal breast cancer compared with women with a BMI at age 18 between 18.8 and 20.3 kg/m2 (HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.30-0.82; P = 0.006). BMI at age 18 was not associated with risk of pre-menopausal breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: There was no observed association between height, current BMI and weight change and risk of breast cancer. The inverse relationship between greater BMI at age 18 and post-menopausal breast cancer further supports a role of early rather than current or adulthood exposures for BRCA-associated breast cancer development. Future studies with longer follow-up and additional measures of adiposity are necessary to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".