Racial Differences in the Incidence of Colorectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colon cancer is one of the most common cancers and the second most common cause of cancer mortality in Western societies. Population screening has been introduced as a means to reducing its impact; however, there are little or no data on the incidence of this disorder in the different populations that comprise the Canadian population. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively determine the incidence of colorectal cancer in selected racial populations of British Columbia. METHODS: The British Columbia Cancer Agency database was used to retrieve information on the incidence of cancers occurring during the years 1994 to 1998, with the British Columbia and national population censuses used to derive the age-specific and age-standardized incidence rates of colorectal cancers. Surnames were used to identify the origin of individuals from South Asian and Chinese backgrounds. RESULTS: For the Caucasian Canadian (C) population, the weighted age-standardized incidence rate ranged from 51.99 per 100,000 in 1995, to 57.68 per 100,000 in 1998. For Chinese Canadians (CC), the range was 39.2 per 100,000 in 1996, to 31.2 per 100,000 in 1998. For South Asian Canadians (SAC), the range was 7.40 per 100,000 in 1994, to 24.85 per 100,000 in 1998. The RR for the development of cancer were significantly different when comparing C versus CC (RR 1.9; 95% CI 1.58 to 2.31; P<0.001), C versus SAC (RR 7.1; 95% CI 4.20 to 12.0; P<0.0001) and CC versus SAC (RR 3.7; 95% CI 2.14 to 6.5; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in the incidence of colorectal cancers have been defined for the first time in various racial subgroups in British Columbia. This finding may have important implications for both screening and understanding of the environmental factors influencing the biology of these lesions. Because SAC have among the highest incidence of atherosclerotic heart disease and diabetes, it suggests that unidentified genetic and/or environmental protective factors are capable of countering the traditionally recognized risk of high saturated fat intake for the development of colorectal cancer.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".