Risk of Second Primary Thyroid Cancer in Women with Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to estimate the risk of thyroid cancer following breast cancer and to identify therapeutic and genetic risk factors for the development of thyroid cancer after breast cancer. We followed 10,832 breast cancer patients for a mean of 14 years for new cases of thyroid cancer. All women were genotyped for three Polish founder mutations in BRCA1 (C61G, 4153delA, 5382insC) and four mutations in CHEK2 (1100delC, IVS2 + 1G/A, del5395, I157T). Information was collected on chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormonal therapies, and oophorectomy. Of the 10,832 women, 53 (0.49%) developed a second primary thyroid cancer. Based on Polish population statistics, the expected number was 12.4 (SIR = 4.3). The ten-year risk of developing thyroid cancer was higher in women who carried a CHEK2 mutation (1.5%) than in women who carried no mutation (0.9%). The age-adjusted hazard ratio for developing thyroid cancer was 1.89 (0.46–7.79; p = 0.38) for those with a CHEK2 protein-truncating mutation and 2.75 (1.29–5.85; p = 0.009) for those with a CHEK2 missense mutation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".