MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415453319 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaf149.1891

MON-154 Breast areolar diameter in healthy menstruating women—a single cycle cross-sectional study of associations with body size and ovulatory characteristics

2025· article· en· W4415453319 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Baaske, Sonia Shirin, Constance Bos, Dharani Kalidasan, Jerilynn C. Prior

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's HealthWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvulationLuteal phaseMenstrual cycleBasal body temperatureFollicular phaseSupine positionLuteinizing hormoneCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Disclosure: A.V. Baaske: None. S. Shirin: None. C. Bos: None. D. Kalidasan: None. J.C. Prior: None. Background: Tanner Breast Stage 3 (TB3, at menarche) and Tanner 5 (TB5, once ovulatory cycles established), despite being similar with an “upstanding” nipple, are different. Evidence suggests that steady and high ovulatory-level progesterone exposure accounts for the larger areolar diameter in TB5. Progesterone levels indicate whether the menstrual cycle is ovulatory and have crucial implications for women’s reproductive, metabolic, cardiovascular, and bone health. However, few data show average areolar diameter in regularly cycling women in whom SES, body size, and reproductive variables have been documented. Objective: As a step towards better understanding the role of areolar diameter in reflecting estradiol-progesterone balance, this study aims to document the average mean bilateral lateral areolar diameter (AD) in a cohort of regularly menstruating, premenopausal women in whom ovulation was documented in one cycle. We also aim to describe relationships between AD and demographic, anthropometric, and reproductive/ovulation variables. Methods: Women were eligible if aged 19-35 years with about month-apart cycles and no exogenous hormone use in the last 3-months. Participants completed one cycle with a daily Menstrual Cycle Diary© (cycle length, CL) and first morning temperatures for Quantitative Basal Temperature© (QBT©) ovulation analysis (normal luteal phase length ≥10 days). Questionnaires gathered SES, ethnic, general health, and reproductive characteristics. Bilateral horizontal areolar diameters were measured by a woman researcher with the participant supine in a warm room. Results: From February 2020 to September 2022 (during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic), 73 women from Metro Vancouver, British Columbia participated. Women were of median (min-max) age 30 (19-35) years, BMI 24.5 (17.1-41.4) and most identified as White (61.6%) with a median of 16 years of education. Median CL was 29 days (n=65) and QBT data showed 39.3% were normally ovulatory, 34.4% had short luteal phases and 26.2% were anovulatory. Median within-woman bilateral AD was 3.85 (2.35-8.00) cm. Left AD exceeded right (L 3.8 [2.3,8.2]; R 3.7 [ 2.4,7.8]; P=.003). Larger AD (≥3.85cm) was associated with greater body size (BMI r=.534), weight and waist circumference. However, earlier age at menarche (P=.02) was also significantly associated. No other reproductive variables (cycle length, luteal phase length, parity, ever use of CHC) were related to AD before body size adjustments. Conclusions: This study is the first to document, and describe demographic, anthropomorphic and reproductive associations with, AD in community dwelling, regularly cycling, premenopausal women. Future steps will determine the most influential of the anthropometric variables; adjustment for these will facilitate assessments of associations with ovulation related characteristics. Presentation: Monday, July 14, 2025

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207