Exploratory research on occupational exposures and breast cancer risk in the CECILE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In 'exploratory mode', to examine associations between occupational exposure to 49 prevalent agents and breast cancer risk. METHODS: In a French population-based case-control study on breast cancer (2005-2007), lifetime occupational histories of 1230 incident cases and 1315 controls were collected. An industrial hygienist coded each job held by a participant. Job codes were subsequently linked to the Canadian job-exposure matrix, and exposure level estimates for numerous agents were generated. Multivariable unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate associations between occupational exposure to 49 prevalent agents and breast cancer risk, adjusting for established breast cancer risk factors and selected sociodemographic covariates. RESULTS: Increased ORs, ranging between 1.33 and 2.39, were observed for women in the highest tertile of cumulative exposure versus unexposed for the following 12 agents: sodium carbonate, synthetic fibres, wool fibres, silk fibres, organic dyes and pigments, plastic dusts, plastics pyrolysis fumes, ozone, nitrogen oxides, anaesthetic gases, aliphatic ketones and mononuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. When stratified by menopausal status, the ORs for many of these agents were stronger among premenopausal versus postmenopausal women. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the possible role of some occupational agents in the aetiology of breast cancer. Further studies, based on large sample sizes and high-quality exposure assessment, are needed to confirm our findings.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".