Components of Metabolic Syndrome and Metachronous Colorectal Neoplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The consistent association between obesity and colorectal cancer is thought to be explained by metabolic disturbances common, but not exclusive, to the obese. METHODS: We assessed the relation between metachronous neoplasia and the components of metabolic syndrome (MetS) as defined by the National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III in 2,392 participants of two previously conducted chemoprevention trials. Waist circumference, fasting plasma glucose, trigylcerides, high-density lipoprotein, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure were measured at baseline. RESULTS: MetS classification was associated with increased odds of metachronous neoplasia among women [odds ratio (OR), 1.37; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.01-1.85] but not among men (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81-1.21). High waist circumference in men (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.15-1.72) and women (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.05-1.90) and elevated fasting glucose in women (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.09-1.96), as defined by Adult Treatment Panel III cutpoints, were associated with increased odds, whereas none of the other criteria were independently associated with metachronous neoplasia. When each trait was evaluated using quartiles, elevated glucose among women and large waist circumference among men were significantly associated with metachronous lesions. Exploratory analysis of waist circumference and fasting glucose suggested an interaction, where only the combination of large waist circumference and elevated glucose conferred significant increased odds of metachronous neoplasia among both men (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.04-1.78; P(interaction) = 0.08) and women (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.26-2.67; P(interaction) = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that, of the specific components of MetS, those that capture impaired glucose uptake increased the odds of metachronous neoplasia.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".