Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs and Aspirin for the Prevention of Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the prevention or regression of colorectal adenomas and cancer. METHODS: Randomized, controlled trials through September 2003 were identified. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were the interventions. The primary outcomes were the number of patients with at least one colorectal adenoma, a change in polyp burden, or colorectal cancer. The secondary outcome was adverse events. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risks with 95 percent confidence intervals. The data were combined if clinically and statistically reasonable. RESULTS: Nine trials with 150 familial adenomatous polyposis and 24,143 population patients met the inclusion criteria. The interventions included sulindac, celecoxib, or aspirin. From the combined results of three trials, significantly fewer patients in the aspirin group developed recurrent sporadic colorectal adenomas (relative risk, 0.77 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.61, 0.96), number needed to treat 12.5 (95 percent confidence interval, 7.7, 25)) after one to three years. In another three trials, patients with familial adenomatous polyposis who received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs had a greater proportional reduction (range, 11.9-44 percent) in the number of colorectal adenomas compared with those in the control group (range, 4.5-10 percent). There was no significant difference for the outcomes of colorectal cancer or adverse events in any of the trials. CONCLUSIONS: There is combined evidence from three randomized trials that aspirin significantly reduced the recurrence of sporadic adenomatous polyps. There was evidence from short-term trials to support regression, but not elimination or prevention, of colorectal polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis.
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 | 0.009 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".