In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Input: Consider Input: Context: Both obesity and type 2 diabetes are among the risk factors for breast cancer development. Combined effect of these metabolic abnormalities on breast cancer risk however, has not been examined in premenopausal women. We tested this association in type 2 diabetic women, categorized as obese, overweight and normal body weight groups based on BMI.', 'A total of 101 subjects were included in this study. Serum levels of IL-6, TNF-alpha, C reactive protein, leptin, TGF-alpha, adiponectin and insulin were measured by ELISA. Data were logarithmically transformed for variables not normally distributed. Analysis of variance with post-hoc Bonferroni was applied to compare the data between the groups. Simple and partial correlation coefficients between the variables were determined and a stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was performed to determine the relationships between the variables of interest.', 'Significantly increased levels of IL-6, C reactive protein, leptin and significantly decreased levels of adiponectin were found in obese group, while the levels of TNF-alpha and TGF-alpha were unaltered. A positive correlation between waist circumference and IL-6 was found in obese group. Similarly, C reactive protein, waist and hip circumferences were linearly correlated with BMI in obese group. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis revealed several significant predictors for breast cancer risk.\Question: Do combined effects of obesity and type 2 diabetes contribute to increased breast cancer risk in premenopausal women?

Output: Obesity and type 2 diabetes, owing to their effects on adipocytokines and inflammatory mediators, contribute to increased breast cancer risk in premenopausal women. This study emphasizes healthy life style and better management of these metabolic disorders to avoid the pathogenesis of breast cancer and of other chronic diseases.


Input: Consider Input: Context: Stat6 signaling is active in cancer cells and IL-4-induced Stat6 activities or Stat6 activational phenotypes vary among cancer cells. This study aimed at investigating possible mechanism(s) involved in the formation of varying Stat6 activities/phenotypes.', "Stat6 regulatory genes, SOCS-1 and SHP-1, were examined for mRNA expression using RT-PCR, and their promoter DNA methylation was assayed by methylation-specific PCR in Stat6-phenotyped colon cancer cell lines. DNA methylation was then verified by sequencing. RT-PCR assay and Western blotting were used to detect the expression of SOCS-1 and SHP-1 after demethylation using 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine.", "Compared with Stat6(null) Caco-2 cells, Stat6(high) HT-29 cells showed decreased constitutive expression of SOCS-1 and SHP-1, which correlated with DNA hypermethylation in these genes' promoters. Interestingly, demethylation in HT-29 cells recovered the constitutive expression of SOCS-1 and SHP-1.\Question: Does dNA methylation regulate constitutive expression of Stat6 regulatory genes SOCS-1 and SHP-1 in colon cancer cells?

Output: These findings suggest that DNA methylation controls the constitutive expression of negative Stat6 regulatory genes, which may affect Stat6 activities.


Input: Consider Input: Context: Social influence is prominent across the lifespan, but sensitivity to influence is especially high during adolescence and is often associated with increased risk taking. Such risk taking can have dire consequences. For example, in American adolescents, traffic-related crashes are leading causes of nonfatal injury and death. Neural measures may be especially useful in understanding the basic mechanisms of adolescents' vulnerability to peer influence.", 'We examined neural responses to social exclusion as potential predictors of risk taking in the presence of peers in recently licensed adolescent drivers. Risk taking was assessed in a driving simulator session occurring approximately 1 week after the neuroimaging session.', 'Increased activity in neural systems associated with the distress of social exclusion and mentalizing during an exclusion episode predicted increased risk taking in the presence of a peer (controlling for solo risk behavior) during a driving simulator session outside the neuroimaging laboratory 1 week later. These neural measures predicted risky driving behavior above and beyond self-reports of susceptibility to peer pressure and distress during exclusion.\Question: Do neural responses to exclusion predict susceptibility to social influence?


Output: These results address the neural bases of social influence and risk taking; contribute to our understanding of social and emotional function in the adolescent brain; and link neural activity in specific, hypothesized, regions to risk-relevant outcomes beyond the neuroimaging laboratory. Results of this investigation are discussed in terms of the mechanisms underlying risk taking in adolescents and the public health implications for adolescent driving.