MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110230098 · doi:10.1177/1178223420972369

Association of Adipose Tissue Distribution With Type 2 Diabetes in Breast Cancer Patients

2020· article· en· W3110230098 on OpenAlexaff
Jia Qi, Hui Hu, Lusine Yaghjyan, Lejun An, Harris A Kalim, Erinn Cooke, Ting‐Yuan David Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueBreast Cancer Basic and Clinical Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerAdipose tissueType 2 diabetesOdds ratioInternal medicineCancerConfidence intervalOncologyDiabetes mellitusEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We examined the association of adipose tissue distribution with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in breast cancer patients. METHODS: Participants (N = 238) diagnosed with breast cancer at 20-75 years old who received breast cancer treatment at a major hospital from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, with at least one completed and identifiable abdominal or pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan and data regarding race and ethnicity were included. Thirty-two breast cancer patients were identified as T2D patients after their breast cancer diagnoses. The adipose tissue distribution (visceral fat area [VFA], subcutaneous fat area [SFA], and the ratio of VFA to SFA [VFA/SFA]) was quantified on CT images of the third lumbar vertebra. T2D status was retrieved from patients' electronic medical records. The association of adipose tissue distribution with T2D in women with breast cancer was examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: SFA). A positive association of VFA/SFA ratio with T2D was observed (OR = 19.57, 95% CI = 3.26-117.42, per unit VFA/SFA), although the estimate was imprecise. CONCLUSIONS: The amount of subcutaneous adipose tissue was inversely associated with T2D, and the ratio of the amount of visceral adipose tissue to the amount of subcutaneous adipose tissue was positively associated with T2D in breast cancer patients.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBreast Cancer Basic and Clinical ResearchSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207