MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353096527 · doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2023.100742

Endogenous sex steroid hormones and risk of liver cancer among US men: Results from the Liver Cancer Pooling Project

2023· article· en· W4353096527 on OpenAlexaff
Zeni Wu, Jessica L. Petrick, Andrea A. Florio, Chantal Guillemette, Laura E. Beane Freeman, Julie E. Buring, Gary Bradwin, Patrick Caron, Yu Chen, A. Heather Eliassen, Lawrence S. Engel, Neal D. Freedman, J. Michael Gaziano, Edward L Giovannuci, Jonathan N. Hofmann, Wen‐Yi Huang, Victoria A. Kirsh, Cari M. Kitahara, Jill Koshiol, I‐Min Lee, Linda M. Liao, Christina C. Newton, Julie R. Palmer, Mark P. Purdue, Thomas E. Rohan, Lynn Rosenberg, Howard D. Sesso, Rashmi Sinha, Meir J. Stampfer, Caroline Y. Um, Stephen K. Van Den Eeden, Kala Visvanathan, Jean Wactawski‐Wende, Anne Zeleniuch‐Jacquotte, Xuehong Zhang, Barry I. Graubard, Peter T. Campbell, Katherine A. McGlynn

Bibliographic record

VenueJHEP Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersNational Cancer InstituteHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthNational Institutes of HealthBrigham and Women's Hospital
KeywordsTestosterone (patch)Sex hormone-binding globulinInternal medicineEndocrinologyHormoneDihydrotestosteroneDehydroepiandrosteroneMedicineOdds ratioCancerAndrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & Aims: Incidence rates of liver cancer in most populations are two to three times higher among men than women. The higher rates among men have led to the suggestion that androgens are related to increased risk whereas oestrogens are related to decreased risk. This hypothesis was investigated in the present study via a nested case-control analysis of pre-diagnostic sex steroid hormone levels among men in five US cohorts. Methods: Concentrations of sex steroid hormones and sex hormone-binding globulin were quantitated using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and a competitive electrochemiluminescence immunoassay, respectively. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for associations between hormones and liver cancer among 275 men who subsequently developed liver cancer and 768 comparison men. Results: = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.38-2.29), dihydrotestosterone (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.21-2.57), oestrone (OR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.08-2.79), total oestradiol (OR = 1.58, 95% CI=1.22-20.05), and sex hormone-binding globulin (OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.27-2.11) were associated with increased risk. Higher concentrations of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), however, were associated with a 53% decreased risk (OR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.33-0.68). Conclusions: Higher concentrations of both androgens (testosterone, dihydrotestosterone) and their aromatised oestrogenic metabolites (oestrone, oestradiol) were observed among men who subsequently developed liver cancer compared with men who did not. As DHEA is an adrenal precursor of both androgens and oestrogens, these results may suggest that a lower capacity to convert DHEA to androgens, and their subsequent conversion to oestrogens, confers a lower risk of liver cancer, whereas a greater capacity to convert DHEA confers a greater risk. Impact and implications: This study does not fully support the current hormone hypothesis as both androgen and oestrogen levels were associated with increased risk of liver cancer among men. The study also found that higher DHEA levels were associated with lower risk, thus suggesting the hypothesis that greater capacity to convert DHEA could be associated with increased liver cancer risk among men.

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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJHEP ReportsSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207