MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042132903 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-14-0897

Red Meat Intake, NAT2, and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of 11 Studies

2014· article· en· W2042132903 on OpenAlexaff
Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan, Mengmeng Du, Sonja I. Berndt, Hermann Brenner, Bette J. Caan, Graham Casey, Jenny Chang‐Claude, David Duggan, Charles S. Fuchs, Steven Gallinger, Edward L. Giovannucci, Tabitha A. Harrison, Richard B. Hayes, Michael Hoffmeister, John L. Hopper, Lifang Hou, Li Hsu, Mark A. Jenkins, Peter Kraft, Jing Ma, Hongmei Nan, Polly A. Newcomb, Shuji Ogino, John D. Potter, Daniela Seminara, Martha L. Slattery, Mark Thornquist, Emily White, Kana Wu, Ulrike Peters, Andrew T. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsRed meatColorectal cancerMedicinePooled analysisOncologyCancerInternal medicinePhysiologyFood scienceBiologyPathologyMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Red meat intake has been associated with risk of colorectal cancer, potentially mediated through heterocyclic amines. The metabolic efficiency of N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) required for the metabolic activation of such amines is influenced by genetic variation. The interaction between red meat intake, NAT2 genotype, and colorectal cancer has been inconsistently reported. METHODS: We used pooled individual-level data from the Colon Cancer Family Registry and the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium. Red meat intake was collected by each study. We inferred NAT2 phenotype based on polymorphism at rs1495741, highly predictive of enzyme activity. Interaction was assessed using multiplicative interaction terms in multivariate-adjusted models. RESULTS: From 11 studies, 8,290 colorectal cancer cases and 9,115 controls were included. The highest quartile of red meat intake was associated with increased risk of colorectal cancer compared with the lowest quartile [OR, 1.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-1.55]. However, a significant association was observed only for studies with retrospective diet data, not for studies with diet prospectively assessed before cancer diagnosis. Combining all studies, high red meat intake was similarly associated with colorectal cancer in those with a rapid/intermediate NAT2 genotype (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.20-1.59) as with a slow genotype (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.28-1.61; P interaction = 0.9). CONCLUSION: We found that high red meat intake was associated with increased risk of colorectal cancer only from retrospective case-control studies and not modified by NAT2 enzyme activity. IMPACT: Our results suggest no interaction between NAT2 genotype and red meat intake in mediating risk 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207