The impact of BMI on breast cancer – an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most frequent form of cancer in women all over the world. It is the main cause of cancer death and the most often diagnosed cancer in women in 140 of the world's 184 countries. The link between breast cancer risk and body mass index (BMI) has gotten increasing attention in recent years, although the results are still debatable. Therefore, the current systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the impact of BMI on breast cancer. METHODS: The current study was carried out as a systematic review and meta-analysis, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We systematically searched Cochrane, Google Scholar, PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus databases to identify eligible articles impact of BMI on breast cancer with the appropriate Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). The Newcastle-Ottawa checklist was used for the risk of assessment for the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3 software. RESULTS: Forty-six studies were included in the current review, which met the selection criteria of the current review. Among included 46 studies in this review, 50% (n = 23) of the studies found the HER2 type of breast cancer followed by triple-negative and HR-positive. The obesity was significantly higher in the case group compared with the control group (P < .001). Heterogeneity between the 14 studies is medium (I2 = 72%). In this review, there was no significant relation between overweight and breast cancer in women (P > .05). Heterogenecity between the 14 studies is medium (I2 = 89%). However, after removing the publication bias a significant relation between overweightness and breast cancer in women (P = .0005) was observed. CONCLUSION: Obese breast cancer patients are a specific type of patient. They are more likely to develop cancer. Their need to surgery and radiation may cause greater difficulties. Obesity and overweight in women greatly increase the risk of breast cancer, according to the findings of the current meta-analysis. To confirm these findings and understand the pathogenic pathways, more research is required.
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 | 0.016 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".