Hormone and Fertility Drug Use and the Risk of Neuroblastoma: A Report from the Children's Cancer Group and the Pediatric Oncology Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous epidemiologic studies have suggested an association between maternal sex hormone use during pregnancy, including infertility medication, and an increased risk of neuroblastoma in the offspring. The authors conducted a case-control interview study from 1992 to 1996 that included 504 children less than 19 years of age whose newly diagnosed neuroblastoma was identified by two national collaborative clinical trials groups in the United States and Canada, the Children's Cancer Group and the Pediatric Oncology Group. Controls, matched to cases on age, were identified by random digit dialing. No association was found for use of oral contraceptives before or during pregnancy (first trimester odds ratio (OR) = 1.0, 95 % confidence interval (Cl): 0.5, 2.1). The odds ratio was slightly elevated for history of infertility (OR = 1.4, 95 % Cl: 0.9, 2.1) and ever use of any infertility medication (OR = 1.2, 95 % Cl: 0.7, 2.2). Specifically, ever use of clomiphene was associated with a 1.6-fold increased risk (95 % Cl: 0.8, 3.0) but not periconceptionally or during the index pregnancy. A suggestive pattern was found for gender of the offspring, with an increased risk for males but not for females after exposure to oral contraceptives or clomiphene. This study did not find consistent and large increased risks for maternal use of hormones, but the suggestion of an association for male offspring requires further consideration. Am J Epidemiol 1999:150:930-8. child; fertility agents; hormones; neuroblastoma; pregnancy; sex
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".