The LEGACY Girls Study: Growth and Development in the Context of Breast Cancer Family History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundAlthough the timing of pubertal milestones has been associated with breast cancer risk, few studies of girls' development include girls at increased breast cancer risk due to their family history.MethodsThe Lessons in Epidemiology and Genetics of Adult Cancer from Youth (LEGACY) Girls Study was initiated in 2011 in the USA and Canada to assess the relation between early life exposures and intermediate markers of breast cancer risk (e.g., pubertal development, breast tissue characteristics) and to investigate psychosocial well being and health behaviors in the context of family history. We describe the methods used to establish and follow a cohort of 1,040 girls ages 6-13 years at baseline, half with a breast cancer family history, and the collection of questionnaire data (family history, early life exposures, growth and development, psychosocial and behavioral), anthropometry, biospecimens, and breast tissue characteristics using optical spectroscopy.ResultsDuring this initial 5-year phase of the study, follow-up visits are conducted every 6 months for repeated data and biospecimen collection. Participation in baseline components was high (98% for urine, 97.5% for blood or saliva, and 98% for anthropometry). At enrollment, 77% of girls were premenarcheal and 49% were at breast Tanner stage T1.ConclusionsThis study design allows thorough examination of events affecting girls' growth and development and how they differ across the spectrum of breast cancer risk. A better understanding of early life breast cancer risk factors will be essential to enhance prevention across the lifespan for those with and without a family history of the disease.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".