Abstract LB-323: Self-reported sleep duration and subsequent risk of colorectal cancer in two large cohorts of women and men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Short sleep duration was associated with an increased risk of colorectal adenomas in a recent report. To date, no data are available on the relationship between sleep duration and colorectal cancer risk. Method: We prospectively followed 76,368 women aged 40 to 73 years in the Nurses’ Health Study and 28,676 men aged 41 to 79 years in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study who reported their habitual sleep duration in the mid-1980s. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to estimate multivariable relative risks (MV RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusting for known risk factors (dietary and non-dietary) for colorectal cancer. Results: A total of 1,925 incident colorectal cancer cases (1,264 in women and 661 in men) were documented during up to 22 years of follow-up. The median of sleep duration was 7 hours in both cohorts and was used as the reference group. In both age-adjusted and the multivariate models, long sleep duration (i.e., at least 9 hours of sleep) was significantly positively associated with risk of colorectal cancer in men (MV RR=1.49; 95%CI: 1.10, 2.03) but not in women (MV RR=1.10; 95%CI: 0.85, 1.43). However, for the same comparison (i.e., at least 9 hours vs. 7 hours of sleep), among overweight (body mass index at least 25 kg/m2) individuals, we found significant positive associations for both men (MV RR=2.66; 95%CI: 1.81, 3.90) and women (MV RR=1.42; 95%CI: 1.01, 1.99). Short sleep duration (i.e., 5 hours or less of sleep) was not associated with colorectal cancer risk in either men (MV RR=0.65; 95%CI: 0.33, 1.28) or women (MV RR=1.14; 95%CI: 0.88, 1.48). Results were essentially unchanged when we excluded cases occurred in the first 4 years of follow-up. In addition, the association was not significantly modified by physical activity, alcohol consumption, endoscopy screening, family history of colorectal cancer, menopausal status, or shift work (women only). Conclusion: These prospective data from two large cohorts suggest that overweight men and women with a sleep duration of 9 or longer hours had a significantly increased risk of developing colorectal cancer when compared to those with 7 hours of sleep, which cannot be explained by known risk factors or reverse causality. The potential mechanisms behind this association deserve further investigation. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-323. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-LB-323
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".