Lifetime ovulatory years and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer: a multinational pooled analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of ovulation in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is supported by the consistent protective effects of parity and oral contraceptive use. Whether these factors protect through anovulation alone remains unclear. We explored the association between lifetime ovulatory years (LOY) and EOC. METHODS: LOY was calculated using 12 algorithms. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) estimated the association between LOY or LOY components and EOC among 26 204 control participants and 21 267 case patients from 25 studies. To assess whether LOY components act through ovulation suppression alone, we compared beta coefficients obtained from regression models with expected estimates assuming 1 year of ovulation suppression has the same effect regardless of source. RESULTS: LOY was associated with increased EOC risk (OR per year increase = 1.014, 95% CI = 1.009 to 1.020 to OR per year increase = 1.044, 95% CI = 1.041 to 1.048). Individual LOY components, except age at menarche, also associated with EOC. The estimated model coefficient for oral contraceptive use and pregnancies were 4.45 times and 12- to 15-fold greater than expected, respectively. LOY was associated with high-grade serous, low-grade serous, endometrioid, and clear cell histotypes (ORs per year increase = 1.054, 1.040, 1.065, and 1.098, respectively) but not mucinous tumors. Estimated coefficients of LOY components were close to expected estimates for high-grade serous but larger than expected for low-grade serous, endometrioid, and clear cell histotypes. CONCLUSIONS: LOY is positively associated with nonmucinous EOC. Differences between estimated and expected model coefficients for LOY components suggest factors beyond ovulation underlie the associations between LOY components and EOC in general and for non-HGSOC.
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 | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".