Alcohol intake and risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a pooled analysis from the BEACON Consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alcohol intake is a strong and well established risk factor for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), but the association with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OA) or adjacent tumours of the oesophagogastric junction (OGJA), remains unclear. Therefore, the association of alcohol intake with OSCC, OA, and OGJA was determined in nine case-control studies and two cohort studies of the Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information was collected on alcohol intake, age, sex, education, body mass index, gastro-oesophageal reflux, and tobacco smoking from each study. Along with 10,854 controls, 1821 OA, and 1837 OGJA, seven studies also collected OSCC cases (n=1016). Study specific ORs and 95% CIs were calculated from multivariate adjusted logistic regression models for alcohol intake in categories compared to non-drinkers. Summary risk estimates were obtained by random effects models. Results No increase was observed in the risk of OA or OGJA for increasing levels of any of the alcohol intake measures examined. ORs for the highest frequency category (≥ 7 drinks per day) were 0.97 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.36) for OA and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.54 to 1.10) for OGJA. Suggestive findings linked moderate intake (eg, 0.5 to <1 drink per day) to decreased risk of OA (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.99) and OGJA (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.99). In contrast, alcohol intake was strongly associated with increased risk of OSCC (OR for ≥ 7 drinks per day 9.62, 95% CI 4.26 to 21.71). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to OSCC, higher alcohol consumption was not associated with increased risk of either OA or OGJA. The apparent inverse association observed with moderate alcohol intake should be evaluated in future prospective studies.
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 | 0.019 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".