MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Five-Year Efficacy and Safety Analysis of the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib Trial

2009· article· en· W2151849899 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Monica M. Bertagnolli, Craig Eagle, Ann G. Zauber, Mark Redston, Aurora Breazna, KyungMann Kim, Jie Tang, Rebecca B. Rosenstein, Asad Umar, Donya Bagheri, Neal T. Collins, John Burn, Daniel C. Chung, Thomas Dewar, T. Raymond Foley, Neville E. Hoffman, Finlay Macrae, Ronald E. Pruitt, John R. Saltzman, Bruce Salzberg, Thomas Sylwestrowicz, Ernest T. Hawk

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Prevention Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersClaude Pepper Older Americans Independence Center, Wake Forest School of MedicineUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignDartmouth CollegeUniversity of MinnesotaMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterMassachusetts General HospitalMcMaster UniversityVanderbilt UniversityNational Cancer InstituteBrigham and Women's HospitalJohns Hopkins UniversityVanderbilt University Medical CenterWake Forest UniversityPfizerU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsCelecoxibMedicinePlaceboAdverse effectAdenomaInternal medicineColorectal adenomaColorectal cancerColonoscopyIncidence (geometry)Clinical trialGastroenterologySurgeryCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib Trial examined the efficacy and safety of the cyclooxygenase (Cox)-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, for sporadic colorectal adenoma prevention in patients at high risk for colorectal cancer. The trial randomized 2,035 subjects to receive either placebo, celecoxib 200 mg twice daily, or celecoxib 400 mg twice daily. The primary study safety and efficacy analyses involved 3 years of treatment. The results showed significant antitumor effect but also indicated increased cardiovascular adverse events in patients treated with celecoxib compared with placebo. A total of 933 patients participated in an extension of the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib Trial, with a planned total treatment and surveillance duration of 5 years. Study medication was stopped early, resulting in a median treatment duration of 3.1 years for those with a year 5 colonoscopy. Patients treated on the placebo arm had a cumulative adenoma incidence of 68.4% over 5 years of observation. This figure was 59.0% (P < 0.0001) for those receiving low-dose celecoxib, and 60.1% (P < 0.0001) for those receiving high-dose celecoxib. The cumulative incidence of advanced adenomas over 5 years was 21.3% of those taking placebo, 12.5% (P < 0.0001) of those taking low dose celecoxib and 15.8% (P < 0.0001) of those taking high-dose celecoxib. Investigator reported treatment emergent adverse events were similar across all treatment groups for categories including renal and hypertensive events and gastrointestinal ulceration and hemorrhage events. For a category composed of cardiovascular and thrombotic events, the risk relative to placebo was 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.0, 2.5) for those using 200 mg twice daily celecoxib and 1.9 (95% confidence interval, 1.2, 3.1) for those using 400 mg twice daily celecoxib. Secondary analysis showed an interaction between a baseline history of atherosclerotic heart disease and study drug use with respect to cardiovascular and thrombotic adverse events (P = 0.004). These results confirm the inhibitory effect of celecoxib on colorectal adenoma formation, and provide additional safety data indicating an elevated risk for cardiovascular and thrombotic adverse events, particularly for patients with preexisting atherosclerotic heart disease.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Citations193
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Prevention ResearchSame topicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effectsFrench-language works237,207