Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF)-1, IGF-Binding Protein-3, and Pancreatic Cancer in Male Smokers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate whether insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1 and IGF-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) are prospectively associated with exocrine pancreatic cancer, we conducted a nested case-control study within the Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta-Carotene Cancer Prevention Study cohort of 29,133 male Finnish smokers, aged 50-69 years. To avoid the potential influence of subclinical cancer on IGF-1 and IGFBP-3, all subjects in this study were alive without clinical evidence of cancer during their 5th year of the cohort follow-up. Four hundred randomly selected cohort controls and 93 incident pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases that occurred between their 5th follow-up year through 1997 (i.e., up to 12.7 years of follow-up) were included in this study. Concentrations of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 were measured in serum samples obtained at baseline using ELISA. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression models, adjusted for confounders. Neither IGF-1, IGFBP-3, nor the IGF-1:IGFBP-3 molar ratio was significantly associated with pancreatic cancer: highest compared to lowest tertile, OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.37-1.21, P trend = 0.17; OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.38-1.27, P trend = 0.12; and OR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.50-1.46, P trend = 0.54, respectively. Our results do not support the hypothesis that serum IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 concentrations are associated with pancreatic cancer risk among male smokers. Further studies are necessary to evaluate these associations in other populations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".