MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029954820 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzaa061_089

Plasma Phospholipid Fatty Acids and Breast Cancer Risk in Alberta’s Tomorrow Project

2020· article· en· W3029954820 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marnie Newell, Sunita Ghosh, Susan Goruk, Mohammedreza Pakseresht, Jennifer E. Vena, Catherine J. Field

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesAlberta HealthUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyunsaturated fatty acidArachidonic acidFatty acidConfidence intervalLinoleic acidInternal medicineOdds ratioOmega 3 fatty acidPhospholipidMedicineChemistryEndocrinologyFood scienceDocosahexaenoic acidBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is estimated that lifestyle factors, such as dietary intake, contribute up to 21% of all breast cancer (BC) cases. High dietary intakes of omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 LCPUFA) have been associated with a reduced incidence of BC. Dietary intake of n-3 LCPUFA typically correlate with blood fatty acid concentrations, but the relationship between blood fatty acid concentrations and BC risk has not yet been established. We hypothesized that higher plasma phospholipid (PL) content of n-3 LCPUFAs would be associated with a reduced risk of BC. Plasma samples and relevant covariables were obtained from 614 age-matched women (203 with BC/411 control) from a nested case-control within Alberta's Tomorrow Project. PL fatty acid concentration and relative % composition were determined from baseline plasma samples (collected 9–16 years pre-BC diagnosis). Principal component analysis was employed to determine predictive models for fatty acid clusters. Conditional logistic regression models controlled for covariates were used to assess the relative risk of BC (odds ratio-OR) by fatty acid content. Sub-group analyses by menopausal status and BMI at baseline were also performed. When adjusted for BMI and menopausal status, individual fatty acids, including linoleic acid (OR = 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08,2.84, P < 0.04) and arachidonic acid (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.03,2.49, P < 0.04), were positively associated with BC risk. However, composite analysis of grouped fatty acids were found to be stronger indicators of risk – total PUFA (µg/mL; OR = 2.25, 95% CI = 1.4,3.44, P < 0.001), total n-6 PUFA (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.32,3.36, P < 0.002), and total n-3 PUFA (OR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.06,2.32, P < 0.02), were independent predictors of BC risk. In contrast to epidemiological dietary evidence, this study found an increased risk of BC with higher plasma concentrations of n-3 LCPUFA. However, the absolute n-3 concentration in this population was low, and therefore a second cohort is being assessed to validate these results. Overall, this study suggests that risk of BC cannot be predicted by isolated fatty acid blood concentrations, but that the balance of different fatty acids or the combination of n-3 and n-6 fatty acids may be a better predictor of BC. Funded by Women and Children's Health Research Institute.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207