Circulating insulin-like growth factor axis and the risk of pancreatic cancer in four prospective cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I induces growth in pancreatic cancer cells and blockade of the IGF-I receptor has antitumour activity. The association of plasma IGF-I and IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) with pancreatic cancer risk has been investigated in two small studies, with conflicting results. We conducted a nested case-control study within four large, prospective cohorts to investigate whether prediagnostic plasma levels of IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 were associated with pancreatic cancer risk. Plasma levels in 212 cases and 635 matched controls were compared by conditional logistic regression, with adjustment for other known pancreatic cancer risk factors. No association was observed between plasma levels of IGF-I, IGF-II, or IGFBP-3 and incident diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Relative risks for the highest vs the lowest quartile of IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 were 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-1.48), 0.96 (95% CI, 0.61-1.52), and 1.21 (95% CI, 0.75-1.92), respectively. The relative risk for the molar ratio of IGF-I and IGFBP-3, a surrogate measure for free IGF-I, was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.54-1.31). Additionally, no association was noted in stratified analyses or when requiring longer follow-up. In four prospective cohorts, we found no association between the risk of pancreatic cancer and prediagnostic plasma levels of IGF-I, IGF-II, or IGFBP-3.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".