MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158773526 · doi:10.1002/cncr.33461

Consumption of sugar‐sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages and breast cancer survival

2021· article· en· W3158773526 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam S. Farvid, Nicholas D. Spence, Bernard Rosner, Wendy Y. Chen, A. Heather Eliassen, Walter C. Willett, Michelle D. Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet, Metabolism, and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthBreast Cancer Research FoundationAmerican Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerHazard ratioProportional hazards modelCancerInternal medicineConfidence intervalProspective cohort studyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The activation of insulin pathways is hypothesized to promote tumor growth and worsen breast cancer survival. Sugar‐sweetened beverages (SSBs) can lead to a higher risk of insulin resistance and may affect survival. The authors prospectively evaluated the relation of postdiagnostic SSB and artificially sweetened beverage (ASB) consumption with mortality among women with breast cancer. Methods In total, 8863 women with stage I through III breast cancer were identified during follow‐up of the Nurses' Health Study (NHS; 1980‐2010) and Nurses' Health Study II (NHSII; 1991‐2011). Women completed a validated food frequency questionnaire every 4 years after diagnosis and were followed until death or the end of follow‐up (2014 for the NHS and 2015 for the NHSII). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer‐specific and all‐cause mortality after adjusting for measures of adiposity and other potential predictors of cancer survival. Results With a median follow‐up of 11.5 years, 2482 deaths were prospectively documented, including 1050 deaths from breast cancer. Compared with women who had no consumption, women who had SSB consumption after diagnosis had higher breast cancer‐specific mortality (>1 to 3 servings per week: HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.09‐1.58]; >3 servings per week: HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.12‐1.62]; P trend = .001) and all‐cause mortality (>1 to 3 servings per week: HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.07‐1.37]; >3 servings per week: HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.13‐1.45]; P trend = .0001). In contrast, ASB consumption was not associated with higher breast cancer‐specific or all‐cause mortality. Furthermore, replacing 1 serving per day of SSB consumption with 1 serving per day of ASB consumption was not associated with a lower risk of mortality. Conclusions Higher postdiagnostic SSB consumption among breast cancer survivors was associated with higher breast cancer‐specific mortality and death from all causes.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207