ライフサイエンスコーパス: cancer risk

1 h history of being studied in the context of cancer risk.

2 abetes risk reduction diet (DRRD) and breast cancer risk.

3 high ACR, were independently associated with cancer risk.

4 reduce anal high-risk HPV infection and anal cancer risk.

5 se functional SNPs were associated with lung cancer risk.

6 identified as potential mediators of breast cancer risk.

7 ulin-like growth factors may increase breast cancer risk.

8 germline mutations are known to affect lung cancer risk.

9 and cancer, whereas healthy diets can reduce cancer risk.

10 ls and assessed their contribution to breast cancer risk.

11 rrelates for clinical prediction of prostate cancer risk.

12 nd the effects of ovarian function on breast cancer risk.

13 tifying how treatment and eradication affect cancer risk.

14 Immunodeficiency is associated with cancer risk.

15 HIV-1 RNA level (HIV RNA) best predict anal cancer risk.

16 between immune cell composition and prostate cancer risk.

17 elationship between pleural plaques and lung cancer risk.

18 hol consumption and overall or site-specific cancer risk.

19 sociated with a ~2-fold increase in prostate cancer risk.

20 anges during pregnancy with regard to breast cancer risk.

21 an's reproductive years may increase ovarian cancer risk.

22 e potential benefits on smoking-related lung cancer risk.

23 between long-term oral contraceptive use and cancer risk.

24 peated shows a causal relationship with skin cancer risk.

25 nsistently associated with increased bladder cancer risk.

26 rapeutic targets, and determining hereditary cancer risk.

27 populations at an average underlying breast cancer risk.

28 , is associated with increased human gastric cancer risk.

29 sed differences in smoking behaviors or lung cancer risk.

30 her insights into the links between diet and cancer risk.

31 differentiation, transformation, and breast cancer risk.

32 KIAA0930 as a novel candidate gene for lung cancer risk.

33 breast microenvironment may increase breast cancer risk.

34 obesity-lifestyle factors, affecting breast cancer risk.

35 onventional risk factors in modifying breast cancer risk.

36 hanisms by which circadian disruption alters cancer risk.

37 city and aggressiveness, and increase breast cancer risk.

38 e relationship between bariatric surgery and cancer risk.

39 king mLOY an attractive candidate marker for cancer risk.

40 -penetrance genetic factors increase thyroid cancer risk.

41 igarettes, including any potential effect on cancer risk.

42 y the effect of MC diagnosis and severity on cancer risk.

43 egatively associated with both MD and breast cancer risk.

44 forts should be prioritised to reduce future cancer risk.

45 olangitis, inflammatory diseases with a high cancer risk.

46 s that higher estrogen levels decrease liver cancer risk.

47 umption was positively related to colorectal cancer risk.

48 nisms through which bariatric surgery lowers cancer risk.

49 ents with ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer risk.

50 putative risk factor (OR(SD)) for colorectal cancer risk.

51 and lifestyle factors to reduce their breast cancer risk.

52 ing variants, some of which may not increase cancer risk.

53 as a novel player linking obesity and breast cancer risk.

54 ctors, such as the oncoprotein CagA, augment cancer risk.

55 ppropriate monitoring for reproductive organ cancer risk.

56 mutant allele does not cause any increase in cancer risk.

57 entive role of statins in epithelial ovarian cancer risk.

58 henotypes and their associations with breast cancer risk.

59 markers for identifying PLWH at higher anal cancer risk.

60 M of obese mammary tissue may enhance breast cancer risk.

61 cose (IFG) and their combined effects on the cancer risk.

62 e phenotypes are unique to cases with higher cancer risk.

63 0) was identified for hypopharynx and larynx cancer risk.

64 screening and preventive measures to reduce cancer risk.

65 k and IFG, and their combined effects on the cancer risk.

66 tissues as we age are major determinants of cancer risk.

67 ion, which may influence HIV acquisition and cancer risks.

68 s between relative counts of immune cell and cancer risks.

69 as associated with a 12% reduction of breast cancer risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.88; 95% confiden

70 t of colonoscopist performance on colorectal cancer risk after adenoma removal.

71 First, cancer risk after antireflux surgery was compared to the

72 trates that genetic factors influence breast cancer risk after chest RT for HL.

73 Increases in breast cancer risk after childbirth were pronounced when combin

74 yp characteristics in determining colorectal cancer risk after colonoscopy screening.

75 ere significantly associated with colorectal cancer risk after correction for multiple testing.

76 We compared colorectal cancer risk after removal of high-risk adenomas, low-ris

77 Since HOXB13 p.G84E is a prostate cancer risk allele, we evaluated the association between

78 Second, cancer risk among antireflux surgery patients was compar

79 The stratification of cancer risk among categories was proven with Mann-Whitne

80 ulatory and cytotoxic T cells in determining cancer risk among healthy individuals.See related commen

81 f MITF(E318K)'s contribution to non-melanoma cancer risk among individuals with low inherited risks o

82 ies have examined whether it also determines cancer risk among initially healthy individuals.

83 a healthy lifestyle in lowering endometrial cancer risk among postmenopausal women.

84 We aimed to investigate cervical cancer risk among women living with HIV and to estimate

85 se of powder in the genital area and ovarian cancer risk among women with a patent reproductive tract

86 tion between height and premenopausal breast cancer risk and a negative association with overall adip

87 ological evidence suggests that diet affects cancer risk and also substantially alters therapeutic ou

88 Mammographic features influence breast cancer risk and are used in risk prediction models.

89 ed HRs and 95% CIs for total invasive breast cancer risk and by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone

90 se these features are associated with breast cancer risk and can improve detecting women at short-ter

91 change, which are all associated with breast cancer risk and can indicate women at short-term risk.

92 pression of ZFP161 is associated with higher cancer risk and chromosomal instability.

93 enotypes are strongly associated with breast cancer risk and highly heritable.

94 vestigated the impact of pre-hypertension on cancer risk and IFG, and their combined effects on the c

95 owever, its chronic use can increase uterine cancer risk and induce tamoxifen resistance.

96 cluding ever-smokers who have both high lung cancer risk and long life expectancy.

97 ut there is limited data regarding long-term cancer risk and mortality in pediatric recipients.

98 .33, and 2p23.1) associated with oral cavity cancer risk and oropharyngeal cancer risk, respectively.

99 t in uncovering cross-trait associations for cancer risk and other traits.

100 to identify associations between colorectal cancer risk and patient and adenoma characteristics (dia

101 for patients and their families in terms of cancer risk and prevention.

102 insulin have been associated with increased cancer risk and progression in epidemiology studies.

103 alpha (ER) plays a major role in endometrial cancer risk and progression, however, the molecular mech

104 e association between differentiated thyroid cancer risk and the energy-adjusted Dietary Inflammatory

105 t aberrant mitochondrial function may impact cancer risk and therapeutic response.

106 2A expression may alter smoking-related lung cancer risk and tissue damage from other inhaled toxins.

107 hin the microenvironment of the breast alter cancer risk and tumor growth.

108 hibition confers an irreversible increase in cancer risk and uncovers a biphasic role of autophagy in

109 odels, we assessed associations between anal cancer risk and various time-updated CD4 and HIV RNA mea

110 BRCA1/2) poses tissue-specific variations in cancer risks and primarily associate with familial breas

111 FOXP3(+) regulatory T cells (Tregs) and lung cancer risk, and significant inverse associations were o

112 specialists such as dentists screen for oral cancer risk, and then they refer high-risk patients to s

113 (OH)D) level and/or vitamin D intake on skin cancer risk are conflicting.

114 n molecular function and subsequent roles in cancer risk are uncertain.

115 ukemia, Impact of Remote Familial Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling (Family CARE Proje

116 cilitates gene-informed molecular diagnosis, cancer risk assessment and gene-specific clinical manage

117 tudy illustrates the potential for improving cancer risk assessment by integrating genetic risk score

118 nes are enriched in eoRC patients undergoing cancer risk assessment.

119 t risks [IURs]) available from the USEPA non-cancer risk assessments and cancer risk assessments were

120 om the USEPA non-cancer risk assessments and cancer risk assessments were developed for some of these

121 ovide vaccine targets to affect the lifetime cancer risk associated with LS.

122 Further studies are required to estimate cancer risk associated with these hypomorphic variants.

123 ng carcinogen, little is known regarding the cancer risks associated with low levels of exposure and

124 ed to address current knowledge gaps in lung cancer risks associated with low levels of occupational

125 We conclude that the breast cancer risk association of these two FANCC variants, if

126 However, the genes underlying breast cancer risk associations are largely unknown.

127 d variant showing an association with breast cancer risk at P < 5 x 10(-8).

128 emerging evidence of variability in gastric cancer risk between families with HDGC, the growing capa

129 have suggested potential adverse effects on cancer risk, birth outcomes, and other diseases.

130 Our results predict that statins reduce cancer risk but other lipid-lowering treatments do not.

131 h HIV are a global population with increased cancer risk but their access to modern immunotherapies f

132 hat germline variants contribute not only to cancer risk but to tumor progression as well.

133 fish consumption with upper gastrointestinal cancer risk, but the associations with n-3 and n-6 polyu

134 netic variants that are associated with lung cancer risk, but the biological mechanisms underlying th

135 le factors have been associated with gastric cancer risk, but the extent to which an increased geneti

136 t that physical activity might reduce breast cancer risk by about 20% for women across the risk conti

137 cal impact of strategies focused on lowering cancer risk by preventing premature aging or promoting h

138 Cells associated with increased cancer risk can also be propagated.

139 and multiomics nanotechnology-based prostate cancer risk delineation can enable refinement of prostat

140 s to identify patients with increased breast cancer risk demonstrated low accuracy.

141 nd cancers and can be used as biomarkers for cancer risk determination, early detection of cancer and

142 P47S human and mouse cells show increased cancer risk due to defective ferroptosis.

143 HQ(s)) > 1; hazard index (HI) ~6; the excess cancer risk (ECR) > 1 x 10(-6)) and, therefore, comprehe

144 tamin D may have a protective effect on skin cancer risk, epidemiologic studies investigating the inf

145 d in everyday products contribute to raising cancer risks, especially for vulnerable populations such

146 r adjusting for family ascertainment, breast cancer risk estimates on the basis of multiple case fami

147 Obesity is a major cancer risk factor, but how differences in systemic meta

148 is a highly prevalent and modifiable breast cancer risk factor.

149 odels and further adjusted for known ovarian cancer risk factors (e.g., hormonal factors) and health

150 ing the underlying molecular basis of breast cancer risk factors and improving primary and secondary

151 wed efforts to reduce exposure to the kidney cancer risk factors and to improve the prevention and th

152 Because breast cancer risk factors are often linked to aberrant nitric

153 seeking to decrease exposure to known breast cancer risk factors are warranted in all world regions t

154 continues to rise, and few modifiable breast cancer risk factors have been identified, especially for

155 Information on diet and breast cancer risk factors was repeatedly ascertained in follow

156 ated with these DNA methylation-based breast cancer risk factors, and the observed associations are u

157 Cancer risk factors, such as high-sugar or high-fat diet

158 ic metabolic and immunologic changes and are cancer risk factors.

159 esophageal adenocarinoma, and screening for cancer risk focuses upon histologic assessment of dyspla

160 cal activity is associated with lower breast cancer risk for average-risk women, it is not known if t

161 showed negative association with colorectal cancer risk for cases with microsatellite stable/MSI-low

162 sical activity in adulthood may lower breast cancer risk for women across the spectrum of familial ri

163 ize and visualize functional consequences of cancer risk gene and miRNA pairs while analyzing the tum

164 PVs in cancer-risk genes were identified in 12.8% of patients-w

165 cer, but the impact of weight loss on breast cancer risk has been difficult to quantify.

166 dosimeter of exposure and predictor of skin cancer risk has been proposed by multiple groups.

167 Genetic testing for cancer risk has expanded rapidly.

168 m observational studies of serum retinol and cancer risk have been mixed.

169 vegetables, and fiber intake with colorectal cancer risk have been shown in many, but not all epidemi

170 , the key components of coal that drive lung cancer risk have not been identified.

171 inhibition was associated with lower ovarian cancer risk (hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.51-0.93]; P =

172 erum retinol was not associated with overall cancer risk (highest vs. lowest quintile: hazard ratio (

173 oposed explanations for this heightened skin cancer risk; however, the exact mechanism driving skin c

174 ntile was associated with a 20% lower breast cancer risk (HR, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.9

175 tion was considerable in this area (lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) > 1 x 10(-5); hazard quotients (HQ(s)

176 tinol quintile and overall and site-specific cancer risk in 10,789 cases.

177 longitudinal phthalate exposures and breast cancer risk in a Danish nationwide cohort, using redeeme

178 between HOXB13 germline mutations and breast cancer risk in a previous study consisting of 3,270 fami

179 een air pollution, PM components, and breast cancer risk in a United States-wide prospective cohort.

180 fied MD loci also are associated with breast cancer risk in an independent meta-analysis (P < 0.05).

181 -ancestry women is also predictive of breast cancer risk in Asian women and can help in developing ri

182 ur types associated with increased heritable cancer risk in BRCA1/2 carriers (BRCA-associated cancer

183 hat SP may increase UVB mutagenesis and skin cancer risk in certain individuals.

184 and effectiveness in the prediction of lung cancer risk in Chinese populations.

185 er was identified to be associated with lung cancer risk in Chinese populations.

186 consistently associated with elevated breast cancer risk in cohort studies and are associated with ri

187 h have been shown to be predictive of future cancer risk in cohort studies and could, therefore, pote

188 ng the association between metformin use and cancer risk in diabetic patients.

189 l plaques did not confer any additional lung cancer risk in either cohort (cohort 1: HR, 1.03; 95% co

190 ores (PRS) have been shown to predict breast cancer risk in European women, but their utility in Asia

191 ine levels were associated with lower breast cancer risk in females.

192 agents that appear to significantly increase cancer risk in human populations.

193 populations and is associated with increased cancer risk in humans and mice.

194 increases acid secretion and reduces gastric cancer risk in humans.

195 evels is responsible for the increased liver cancer risk in males.

196 ertension and IFG also was associated with a cancer risk in men.

197 um glucose level status were associated with cancer risk in men.

198 tion has been inconsistently associated with cancer risk in observational studies.

199 ship between incessant ovulation and ovarian cancer risk in order to identify mechanisms of carcinoge

200 sociation of rs1800734 with MSI+ but not MSS cancer risk in our own data and by meta-analysis.

201 ch was identified to be associated with lung cancer risk in our previous GWAS.

202 adiponectin receptor agonist, suppress colon cancer risk in part by reducing the number of Lgr5(+) st

203 Obesity enhances breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women and premenopausal wo

204 E ADVICE 16: Patients should be counseled on cancer risk in the absence of BET, as well as after BET,

205 rent models that suggest that persistence of cancer risk in the absence of continued carcinogen expos

206 be used as a chemopreventive agent to reduce cancer risk in women with high mammographic density.

207 ciated (P trend < 0.01) with increasing lung cancer risks in nonsilicotics and in current, former, an

208 PE is associated with future invasive breast cancer risk independent of breast density.

209 Skin cancer risk information based on melanocortin-1 receptor

210 ening programmes might help to stratify anal cancer risk, irrespective of HIV status.

211 Cancer risk is determined by a complex interplay of envi

212 w that, in addition to accidental mutations, cancer risk is determined by networks of individual gene

213 Cancer risk is elevated among adult transplant recipient

214 Breast cancer risk is reduced by number of pregnancies and brea

215 us (HIV; PLWH) have a markedly elevated anal cancer risk, largely due to loss of immunoregulatory con

216 On the basis of lifetime cancer risks, lead-210 ((210)Pb) and polonium-210 ((210)

217 D-adherence was associated with lower breast cancer risk, likely mediated by less weight gain with a

218 y remains the recommended option for gastric cancer risk management in pathogenic CDH1 variant carrie

219 prediction models and optimize the clinical cancer risk management of PALB2 PV carriers.

220 fects of smoking and silica exposure on lung cancer risks.Methods: Subjects from 14 case-control stud

221 lume changes - although not linked to breast cancer risk - might be an interesting phenotype in this

222 mparisons were made to an established breast cancer risk model that included breast density (Tyrer-Cu

223 phic density improves the accuracy of breast cancer risk models.

224 was associated with a modestly lower breast cancer risk (MVHRQ5vsQ1: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.95; P-tre

225 ar intake was associated with higher overall cancer risk (n = 2503 cases; HR for quartile 4 compared

226 atin treatment, were associated with overall cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] per one standard deviation

227 st cancer cases, the PRS modifies the breast cancer risk of two high-impact frameshift risk variants.

228 ons, anticancer defenses are too weak, given cancer risk, older females could not pursue their reprod

229 Lifetime cancer risks, on the other hand, may well be considered

230 27 for >= 2 versus < 1 times/day) or overall cancer risk (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.75-1.16; P = 0.52 for >=

231 gnificantly associated with decreased breast cancer risk (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.82).

232 -cholesterol was not associated with overall cancer risk (OR per standard deviation increase 1.01, 95

233 cycles (LOC) and its components and ovarian cancer risk overall and by histotype.

234 sociation between CRP and epithelial ovarian cancer risk overall, by histologic subtype and by partic

235 ons between total and added sugar intake and cancer risk (overall, breast, and prostate), taking into

236 are all significantly associated with breast cancer risk (P < 0.05).

237 low expected size also increased the overall cancer risk (P for curvilinearity < 0.0001).

238 howed the strongest association with gastric cancer risk (p=7.56 x 10(-10)).

239 sition were captured using the BROCA Agilent cancer risk panel followed by massively parallel sequenc

240 ce was modestly associated with lower breast cancer risk, particularly among lean women.

241 carcinoma and may also contribute to breast cancer risk, particularly among patients who develop dis

242 sed here could provide new insights into how cancer risk persists following cessation of carcinogenic

243 expression could potentially explain breast cancer risk phenotypes.

244 at has been suspected to increase colorectal cancer risk potentially via endogenous formation of carc

245 ad been done using cohorts for common breast cancer risk prediction models, and those that have been

246 ment, we discuss the current state of breast cancer risk prediction, risk-stratified prevention and e

247 g in tumorigenesis and its potential use for cancer risk prediction.

248 ose older than 45 years, have a similar anal cancer risk profile to that of HIV-positive women.

249 erum retinol was not associated with overall cancer risk (Q5 vs. Q1: HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.91,1.03, p-tre

250 rveillance interventions and 4 had undergone cancer risk-reducing surgery.

251 iponectin signaling pathway attenuates colon cancer risk remains to be addressed.

252 th oral cavity cancer risk and oropharyngeal cancer risk, respectively.

253 w expression levels are associated with lung cancer risk.See related article by Wang et al., p.

254 idate target genes at 139 independent breast cancer risk signals and explore the functional mechanism

255 Rob(13;14) carriers had a higher breast cancer risk (SIR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.12, 2.15).

256 lifestyle as synergistic factors for breast cancer risk, suggesting lifestyle changes can prevent br

257 man leukocyte antigen loci for oropharyngeal cancer risk, suggesting that immunologic mechanisms are

258 ure and smoking was observed on overall lung cancer risks; superadditive effects were observed in ris

259 is more strongly associated with pancreatic cancer risk than BMI at older ages and underscore the im

260 is more strongly associated with pancreatic cancer risk than BMI at older ages, and they underscore

261 st were generally better predictors for anal cancer risk than their corresponding more recent measure

262 fruit or fiber intake and overall colorectal cancer risk that have previously been reported.

263 between fruit or fiber intake and colorectal cancer risk that have previously been reported.

264 ting variants in PALB2 are known to increase cancer risk, the interpretation of missense variants of

265 and p.R217C were not associated with breast cancer risk, the risk estimation for p.R217C was not ver

266 ary mismatch between anticancer defenses and cancer risks, the evolution of prolonged life after repr

267 These exceeded a 1 in 10,000 cancer risk threshold in 35-50% of our simulations.

268 This suggests that statins reduce cancer risk through a cholesterol independent pathway.

269 d on creatinine and cystatin C) and ACR with cancer risk using Cox regression models adjusted for pot

270 ss the potential effect of statin therapy on cancer risk using evidence from human genetics.

271 metabolic equivalents per week) with breast cancer risk using multivariable Cox proportional hazards

272 (self-reported by questionnaire) with breast cancer risk using the Prospective Family Study Cohort, w

273 ity to estimate an individual woman's breast cancer risk using validated risk assessment models, and

274 Cancer risk values for Cr found higher than safe limit (

275 (for adults) and 1.12% (for children) of the cancer risk values surpassed the specified limits at Iju

276 sed the specified limits at Iju, whereas the cancer risk values were considerably lesser at Atan.

277 e association studies have identified breast cancer risk variants in over 150 genomic regions, but th

278 Importantly, breast cancer risk variants, identified through genetic fine-ma

279 ers that loop to regions that contain breast cancer risk variants.

280 Elevated breast cancer risk was based on survivors diagnosed with childh

281 rrying MC1R variants imparting elevated skin cancer risk was consistent across quartiles of European,

282 ociation between c-peptide levels and breast cancer risk was evident in only women age >=51 years (OR

283 ared with the general population, colorectal cancer risk was higher or comparable only for individual

284 A positive association with cancer risk was observed for higher FOXP3(+) T-cell-medi

285 In men only, cancer risk was significantly increased with an increase

286 In addition, significant associations with cancer risk were also observed for added sugars, free su

287 Associations between sugar intake and cancer risk were assessed by Cox proportional hazard mod

288 carbonyl compounds and estimated changes in cancer risk were assessed by production of aerosols gene

289 index, breast density, and estimated breast cancer risk were assessed by using Fisher exact, chi(2),

290 Data on RDS and oral cancer risk were inconclusive.

291 itive associations between E-DII and thyroid cancer risk were observed (comparing extreme tertiles, o

292 ociations between adult adiposity and breast cancer risk were observed in adjusted models (body mass

293 using tertiles, no associations with ovarian cancer risk were observed.

294 and population-level differences in prostate cancer risk were revealed using a novel genotyping array

295 published by the USEPA, no unacceptable non-cancer risks were evident except under extremely high co

296 Breast cancer risks were increased (n = 783 cases; HRQ4vs.Q1 =

297 ombination effect of BP and fasting glucose, cancer risks were serially increased with an increase in

298 how gene-environment interactions influence cancer risk when the initiating genetic defect responsib

299 etween HOXB13 mutations and increased breast cancer risk within 81 studies of the international Breas

300 Short telomeres have been linked to cancer risk, yet other evidence supports them being tumo