Associations of life course obesity with endometrial cancer in the Epidemiology of Endometrial Cancer Consortium (E2C2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adult obesity is a strong risk factor for endometrial cancer (EC); however, associations of early life obesity with EC are inconclusive. We evaluated associations of young adulthood (18-21 years) and adulthood (at enrolment) body mass index (BMI) and weight change with EC risk in the Epidemiology of Endometrial Cancer Consortium (E2C2). METHODS: We pooled data from nine case-control and 11 cohort studies in E2C2. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for BMI (kg/m2) in young adulthood and adulthood, with adjustment for BMI in adulthood and young adulthood, respectively. We evaluated categorical changes in weight (5-kg increments) and BMI from young adulthood to adulthood, and stratified analyses by histology, menopausal status, race and ethnicity, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use and diabetes. RESULTS: We included 14 859 cases and 40 859 controls. Obesity in adulthood (OR = 2.85, 95% CI = 2.47-3.29) and young adulthood (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.06-1.50) were positively associated with EC risk. Weight gain and BMI gain were positively associated with EC; weight loss was inversely associated with EC. Young adulthood obesity was more strongly associated with EC among cases diagnosed with endometrioid histology, those who were pre/perimenopausal, non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black, among never HRT users and non-diabetics. CONCLUSIONS: Young adulthood obesity is associated with EC risk, even after accounting for BMI in adulthood. Weight gain is also associated with EC risk, whereas weight loss is inversely associated. Achieving and maintaining a healthy weight over the life course is important for EC prevention efforts.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".