Negligible Colon Cancer Risk from Food-Borne Acrylamide Exposure in Male F344 Rats and Nude (nu/nu) Mice-Bearing Human Colon Tumor Xenografts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acrylamide, a possible human carcinogen, is formed in certain carbohydrate-rich foods processed at high temperature. We evaluated if dietary acrylamide, at doses (0.5, 1.0 or 2.0 mg/kg diet) reflecting upper levels found in human foods, modulated colon tumorigenesis in two rodent models. Male F344 rats were randomized to receive diets without (control) or with acrylamide. 2-weeks later, rats in each group received two weekly subcutaneous injections of either azoxymethane (AOM) or saline, and were killed 20 weeks post-injections; colons were assessed for tumors. Male athymic nude (nu/nu) mice bearing HT-29 human colon adenocarcinoma cells-derived tumor xenografts received diets without (control) or with acrylamide; tumor growth was monitored and mice were killed 4 weeks later. In the F344 rat study, no tumors were found in the colons of the saline-injected rats. However, the colon tumor incidence was 54.2% and 66.7% in the control and the 2 mg/kg acrylamide-treated AOM-injected groups, respectively. While tumor multiplicity was similar across all diet groups, tumor size and burden were higher in the 2 mg/kg acrylamide group compared to the AOM control. These results suggest that acrylamide by itself is not a "complete carcinogen", but acts as a "co-carcinogen" by exacerbating the effects of AOM. The nude mouse study indicated no differences in the growth of human colon tumor xenografts between acrylamide-treated and control mice, suggesting that acrylamide does not aid in the progression of established tumors. Hence, food-borne acrylamide at levels comparable to those found in human foods is neither an independent carcinogen nor a tumor promoter in the colon. However, our results characterize a potential hazard of acrylamide as a colon co-carcinogen in association with known and possibly other environmental tumor initiators/promoters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".