MRI background parenchymal enhancement, breast density and serum hormones in postmenopausal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) is the degree to which normal breast tissue enhances on contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MRI‐density is a volumetric measure of breast density that is highly correlated with mammographic density, an established breast cancer risk factor. Endogenous estrogen concentrations are positively associated with postmenopausal breast cancer risk and BPE has been shown to be sensitive to hormonal exposures. The objective of our study was to examine the relationship between BPE and MRI‐density and serum hormone concentrations in postmenopausal women. This was a study of cancer‐free postmenopausal women undergoing contrast‐enhanced breast MRI ( N = 118). At the time of MRI all women completed a self‐administered questionnaire and blood samples were collected for hormone analyses. Serum concentrations of estrone (E1), estradiol (E2) and bioavailable E2 were examined by category of BPE and MRI‐density. Compared to women with “minimal” BPE, those who had “marked” BPE had significantly higher serum concentrations of E1, E2 and bioavailable E2 (90% increase, p trend across all categories = 0.001; 150% increase, p trend = 0.001; and 158% increase, p trend = 0.001, respectively). These associations were only affected to a minor extent by adjustment for BMI and other variables. After adjustment for BMI, no significant associations between MRI‐density and serum E1, E2 and bioavailable E2 were observed. Serum estrogen concentrations were significantly positively associated with BPE. Our study provides further evidence of the hormone‐sensitive nature of BPE, indicating a potential role for BPE as an imaging marker of endogenous and exogenous hormonal exposures in the breast.
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".