MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791426400 · doi:10.1097/ee9.0000000000000006

Number concentrations of ultrafine particles and the incidence of postmenopausal breast cancer

2018· article· en· W2791426400 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark S. Goldberg, France Labrèche, Scott Weichenthal, Éric Lavigne, Marie‐France Valois, Marianne Hatzopoulou, Maryam Shekarrizfard

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Epidemiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of OttawaHealth CanadaMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterquartile rangeMedicineBreast cancerOdds ratioConfidence intervalUltrafine particleIncidence (geometry)Logistic regressionDemographyCancerCase-control studyInternal medicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There have been a number of reports regarding possible associations between the incidence of female breast cancer and ambient air pollution. Only one study has been published about possible association with ultrafine particles (UFPs; <0.1 μm). Methods: We conducted a case–control study of incident postmenopausal breast cancer in Montreal, Canada. Cases were identified between 1996 and 1997 from all hospitals that treated breast cancer. Controls were women diagnosed with other sites of cancer and frequency-matched to cases by hospital and 5-year age groups. Concentrations of UFPs were estimated using a land-use regression model developed in 2011–2012 and assigned to women’s residential addresses at time of diagnosis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using logistic regression models adjusting for individual-level and ecological covariates. Results: We found that the response functions between UFPs and incident, postmenopausal breast cancer were consistent with linearity. Adjusted ORs of 1.08 (95% CI = 0.96, 1.21) were found for an increase in UFPs equal to the interquartile range (IQR). We found higher ORs among cases with positive estrogen (ER+) and negative progesterone receptor (PR−) (OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.04–1.45) and for women with ER−/PR− status (OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 0.99–1.54). We also found stronger associations when analyses were restricted to those women who had not lived at their current address for 10 years or more (OR = 1.27; 95% CI = 0.94–1.71). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that exposure to ambient UFPs may increase the risk of incident postmenopausal breast cancer, especially among cases with ER+/PR− and ER−/PR− receptor status.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.302 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental EpidemiologySame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207