A Matched Case-Control Study Examining the Association Between Exposure to Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate and Cerebral Meningioma Using an Active Comparator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent literature has reported an increased association between the use of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (dMPA) and cerebral meningioma (CM). Prior studies have been limited in generalizability and did not use an active comparator as a control. The current matched case-control study utilized a bootstrapped sampling design, matching 241 CM cases with controls (i.e., women diagnosed with non-meningioma brain, breast, or skin tumor, one control per type for three total) on age ± 5 years and diagnosis date ± 3 months. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) compared with an active (norethindrone or levonorgestrel) and non-active control group. Exposure to dMPA at any time point was not associated with the diagnosis of cerebral meningioma (OR 1.75, 95% CI 0.81-4.95). Exposure to dMPA within a year of diagnosis was associated with the diagnosis of CM compared to both an active control (OR 3.38, 95% CI 1.13-9.70) and a non-active control (OR 6.90, 95% CI 2.31-17.58). This association was also present for those who were exposed within two years prior when compared to a non-active control (OR 3.54, 95% CI 1.50-11.88) but not an active control. Combined with the prior literature, the current results suggest that future research is warranted to understand this association.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".