Trajectories of body fatness in adulthood and the risk of ovarian cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While excess body fatness in older adulthood has been linked to ovarian cancer, the influence of changes in body fatness over time is unclear. This study examined the association between adulthood trajectories of body mass index (BMI), a proxy for body fatness, and ovarian cancer. METHODS: In a population-based case-control study (440 cases, 820 controls), we used a group-based trajectory approach to identify BMI trajectories from age 20-70. Using unconditional logistic regression, we estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) for the associations between the estimated trajectories and ovarian cancer. RESULTS: We identified three distinct BMI trajectories: a normal-stable trajectory, a normal-to-overweight trajectory and an overweight-to-obese trajectory, which included 63.2 %, 31.0 % and 6.8 % of the population, respectively. Multivariable aORs suggested that participants with normal weight at the onset of adulthood who became overweight over their adulthood time did not differ in their risk of ovarian cancer compared to those who maintained a normal weight throughout adulthood (aOR (95 %CI): 0.89 (0.69-1.16)). Among those in the overweight-to-obese trajectory, the aOR (95 %CI) was 1.45 (0.87-2.43), and thus in the direction of an increased ovarian cancer risk compared to those who maintained a normal weight. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the need for further research to clarify the role of body fatness across the lifetime in the etiology of ovarian cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".