Use of Medroxyprogesterone Acetate and Risk of Meningiomas: A Comparative Safety Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), a popular contraceptive agent has recently been associated with meningiomas. However, this risk compared to other available contraceptive agents has not been elucidated. We sought to quantify the risk of meningiomas in women on MPA compared to those using oral contraceptives containing ethinylestradiol-levonorgestrel (EE-LNG) by undertaking a nested case-controls study using the PharMetrics Plus database (IQVIA, USA). After creating a cohort of new users of MPA and EE-LNG from 2006 to 2020 new cases of meningioma were identified. Cases were and matched to controls by age and calendar time. Conditional logistic regression was used to adjust for previous exposure to radiotherapy, previous use of hormonal contraceptives, and obesity The adjusted incident rate ratio (IRR) for meningioma for greater than one year of use was 3.55 (95%ICI: 1.85-6.55). Women using MPA have an increased risk of developing meningioma compared to users of EE-LNG.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".