Sustained Weight Loss and Risk of Breast Cancer in Women 50 Years and Older: A Pooled Analysis of Prospective Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Excess body weight is an established cause of postmenopausal breast cancer, but it is unknown if weight loss reduces risk. METHODS: Associations between weight change and risk of breast cancer were examined among women aged 50 years and older in the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer. In 10 cohorts, weight assessed on three surveys was used to examine weight change patterns over approximately 10 years (interval 1 median = 5.2 years; interval 2 median = 4.0 years). Sustained weight loss was defined as no less than 2 kg lost in interval 1 that was not regained in interval 2. Among 180 885 women, 6930 invasive breast cancers were identified during follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with women with stable weight (±2 kg), women with sustained weight loss had a lower risk of breast cancer. This risk reduction was linear and specific to women not using postmenopausal hormones (>2-4.5 kg lost: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70 to 0.96; >4.5-<9 kg lost: HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.90; ≥9 kg lost: HR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.50 to 0.93). Women who lost at least 9 kg and gained back some (but not all) of it were also at a lower risk of breast cancer. Other patterns of weight loss and gain over the two intervals had a similar risk of breast cancer to women with stable weight. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that sustained weight loss, even modest amounts, is associated with lower breast cancer risk for women aged 50 years and older. Breast cancer prevention may be a strong weight-loss motivator for the two-thirds of American women who are overweight or obese.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it