ASA, NSAIDs, Coxibs and Colorectal Cancer Prevention — How Far Have We Come?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper described a nested case-control study on all Quebec patients over 65 years of age who underwent total colonic imaging or surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) during a specified six-month period without similar testing in the preceding year. Information from the provincial government database was collected for each subject to estimate the consumption of prescription acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), standard nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclooxygenase-2- specific inhibitors (coxibs) during the previous year. Of 2568 subjects, 730 were found to have at least one adenoma (but not carcinoma) and 129 were found to have CRC (with or without adenoma). Patients with and without adenoma or carcinoma were compared for type, amount and duration of drug exposure to determine if there was a protective effect. Rofecoxib and NSAIDs were associated with reduced incidence of colorectal adenoma (CRA), and these drugs and celecoxib protected against CRA and CRC.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".