Abstract PR016: Supplement And Medication Use in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer: An Analysis of the Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) has increased in the last several decades and now accounts for 10% of new CRC diagnoses in the U.S. Most EOCRC cases are sporadic, with no identified molecular causes that differ from late-onset CRC (LOCRC), suggesting that modifiable environmental factors may have an enhanced role in EOCRC. Despite observed links between supplement and medication use and overall CRC risk, few studies have examined usage in EOCRC, compared usage with LOCRC, or assessed their potential protective effects for EOCRC. To address this gap, we evaluated self-reported supplement and medication use in sporadic EOCRC, compared to LOCRC incidence. We utilized baseline data from the Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative (OCCPI), a statewide initiative to increase access to germline genetic testing for patients with newly diagnosed CRC. OCCPI enrolled 3310 patients from 2013-2016. The current study included 1408 individuals with germline negative CRC and completed baseline questionnaires (n=1408). Model covariates included year of cancer diagnosis, sex, race, education, marital status, employment status, insurance type, and history of other cancer. The primary exposures of interest were the supplements: vitamins A, B-complex, C, D, E, and K, beta-carotene, calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium, selenium, zinc, and fish oil, and the following medications: ACE inhibitors, beta blockers, calcium blocker, digoxin, coumadin, diuretics, anti-diabetic medication, antacids, antidepressants, acetaminophen, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The outcome of interest was odds of EOCRC, with LOCRC as reference, adjusting for multiple comparisons. Among 260 EOCRC and 1148 LOCRC cases, those with EOCRC were significantly more likely to have graduated college (43.6% v. 30.4%), be single/never married (12.4% v. 6.8%), currently employed (72.3% v. 33.6%), and have private insurance (83.7% v. 40.3%). Individuals with EOCRC were more likely to report having a history of asthma (p=0.003) and less likely to report a history of comorbidities, specifically diverticulitis (p<0.001), heart attack (p<0.001), hepatitis B or C (p=0.04), high cholesterol (p<0.001), stroke (p=0.001), and other cancer(s) (p<0.001). Preliminary analyses suggest that current use of vitamin D (aOR, 0.48; 95%CI, 0.25-0.93) and metformin (aOR, 0.24; 95%CI, 0.19-0.59), was associated with lower odds of developing EOCRC, compared to LOCRC, while current (aOR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.23-0.67) and past (aOR, 0.48; 95%CI, 0.27-0.86) use of aspirin was associated with lower odds of EOCRC. Current use of antidepressants (aOR, 2.53; 95%CI, 1.55-4.14) was associated with higher odds of developing EOCRC, compared to LOCRC. Further analyses are ongoing. In conclusion, EOCRC patients differ demographically and in supplement and medication use from those with LOCRC. These findings suggest that these exposures may influence EOCRC risk, warranting further investigation. Citation Format: Holli A. Loomans-Kropp, Yevgeniya Gokun, Rand Akasheh, Rachel Pearlman, Cecilia DeGraffinreid, Jo Freudenheim, Peter Shields, Electra D. Paskett. Supplement And Medication Use in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer: An Analysis of the Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: The Rise in Early-Onset Cancers—Knowledge Gaps and Research Opportunities; 2025 Dec 10-13; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2025;31(23_Suppl):Abstract nr PR016.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».