MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract CN06-03: Randomized double-blinded phase II trial of esomeprazole versus esomeprazole + two doses of aspirin in Barrett's esophagus patients

2011· article· en· W2127748557 on OpenAlexaff
Gary W. Falk, Steven Sontag, Marica Cruz-Correa, David S. Weinberg, Amitabh Chak, Chin Hur, David Fleischer, Thomas C. Smyrk, Navtej Butar, Nathan R. Foster, Yvonne Romero, Douglas A. Corley, Kenneth R. DeVault, Norman E. Marcon, Thomas Schnell

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Prevention Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEsomeprazoleAspirinMedicinePlaceboGastroenterologyInternal medicineClinical endpointProton-pump inhibitorRandomized controlled trialEsophagusBarrett's esophagusCancerAdenocarcinomaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Aims: In patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), reflux-induced injury promotes esophageal adenocarcinoma, presumably through cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) related pathways. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may interrupt reflux-associated carcinogenesis by reducing acid exposure and subsequent inflammation. However, clinical trial data regarding the chemopreventive efficacy of a PPI + NSAID combination are limited. The aim of this multi-center, randomized, phase II trial was to assess the effects of a 28-day intervention with esomeprazole 40 mg bid and aspirin 81 mg qd, 325 mg qd, or placebo qd on tissue prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) concentrations in BE patients. Methods: Using the infrastructure of the Cancer Prevention Network, participants (> 18 years) with histologically confirmed non dysplastic BE were randomly assigned to receive one of three interventions for 28 days: (arm A) esomeprazole 40 mg bid+ aspirin 81 mg placebo qd + aspirin 325 mg placebo qd (n=42); (arm B) esomeprazole 40 mg bid+ aspirin 81 mg qd + aspirin placebo 325 qd (n=63); (arm C) esomeprazole 40 mg bid + aspirin 81 mg qd placebo + aspirin 325 mg qd (n=63). Esophageal biopsies were obtained pre- and post-intervention to assess change in PGE2 concentration as the primary endpoint. Results: In total, 122 participants were randomized, 121 (99%) completed the trial per protocol, and 115 (94%) were evaluated for the primary endpoint. Baseline characteristics were similar across intervention arms. The absolute change (mean + SD) in tissue PGE2 concentration was −67.6 (229.68) in Arm A, −120.9 (281.28) in Arm B (p = 0.10 vs Arm A) and −174.9 (263.62) in Arm C (p = 0.02 vs Arm A). Conclusions: In combination with esomeprazole 40 mg twice per day, aspirin 325 mg per day significantly reduced tissue PGE2 concentration in BE patients after a 28-day intervention, as compared to aspirin placebo. Given the relevance of PGE2 pathways in BE-associated carcinogenesis, further evaluation of this chemoprevention strategy in larger, more definitive phase III trials is warranted. Citation Information: Cancer Prev Res 2011;4(10 Suppl):CN06-03.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Prevention ResearchSame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207