Alcoholic beverage consumption and female breast cancer risk: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective cohort studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alcohol consumption is an established cause of female breast cancer. This systematic review examines in detail the association between alcohol and female breast cancer overall and among the described subgroups, using all of the evidence to date. A systematic review of PubMed and Embase was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search included articles published up to November 15, 2023. Meta-analyses and regressions were performed for alcohol consumption of less than 1 standard drink (10 g of ethanol) per day and for a range of alcohol consumption categories in relation to breast cancer. Analyses by menopausal status, hormone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, and molecular subtype were performed. The search yielded 5645 publications, of which 23 publications of individual and pooled studies examined the association between overall alcohol consumption and breast cancer incidence. The meta-regression showed a positive association; relative risks (RR) of breast cancer were 1.05 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.06), 1.10 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.12), 1.18 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.21), and 1.22 (95% CI: 1.19, 1.25) for 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 standard drinks per day compared with nondrinking, respectively. A meta-analysis of nine studies indicated that for consumption of less than one standard drink per day, the RR estimate of breast cancer was 1.04 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.07) compared with nondrinking. Consumption of an additional 1 standard drink per day was associated with a higher risk of premenopausal (RR: 1.03 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.06)) and postmenopausal (RR: 1.10 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.12)) breast cancer. Alcohol consumption increases female breast cancer risk, even for women who consume one drink per day. Furthermore, alcohol consumption is associated with both pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer risk. These findings support evidence-based cancer prevention guidelines to reduce alcohol-related risks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".