MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562409701 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2015-1880

Abstract 1880: Associations of coffee drinking with systemic immune and inflammatory markers

2015· article· en· W2562409701 on OpenAlexaff
Erikka Loftfield, Meredith S. Shiels, Barry I. Graubard, Hormuzd A. Katki, Anil K. Chaturvedi, Britton Trabert, Ligia A. Pinto, Troy J. Kemp, Fatma M. Shebl, Susan T. Mayne, Nicolas Wentzensen, Mark P. Purdue, Allan Hildesheim, Rashmi Sinha, Neal D. Freedman

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImmune systemLogistic regressionImmunologyInternal medicineProstate cancerCancerInflammationGastroenterologyOncologyPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Coffee drinking has been inversely associated with mortality as well as cancers of the endometrium, colon, skin and liver. Improved insulin sensitivity and reduced inflammation are among the hypothesized mechanisms by which coffee drinking may affect cancer risk. The association between coffee drinking and systemic levels of immune and inflammatory markers has not been well characterized. Objective: To explore the associations of coffee drinking with levels of a wide range of immune and inflammatory markers. Design: Luminex bead-based assays were used to measure serum levels of 77 immune and inflammatory markers in 1728 older non-Hispanic Whites from three case-control studies nested within the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Usual coffee intake was self-reported using a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire. We used weighted multivariable logistic regression models to examine the associations between coffee drinking and dichotomized marker levels. We conducted statistical trend tests by assigning each coffee category its median value and modeling as a continuous variable. We applied a 20% false discovery rate criterion to the P-values for trend. Results: Ten of the 77 examined markers were nominally associated (P-value<0.05) with coffee drinking. The five markers that withstood correction for multiple comparisons included various aspects of the host response namely chemotaxis of monocytes/macrophages (IFNγ, CX3CL1/fractalkine, CCL4/MIP-1β), pro-inflammatory cytokines (sTNFRII) and regulators of cell growth (FGF-2). Heavy coffee drinkers had lower circulating levels of IFNγ (OR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.16, 0.75; P-trend = 0.0003), CX3CL1/fractalkine (OR = 0.25; 95% CI 0.10, 0.64; P-trend = 0.0031), CCL4/MIP-1β (OR = 0.48; 95% CI 0.24, 0.99; P-trend = 0.0050), FGF-2 (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.28, 1.38; P-trend = 0.0080) and sTNFRII (OR = 0.34; 95% CI 0.15, 0.79; P-trend = 0.0112) than non-coffee drinkers. Conclusions: Coffee drinking was associated with lower circulating levels of inflammatory markers, which may partially mediate previously observed associations of coffee drinking with lower mortality and morbidity. Validation studies, ideally controlled feeding trials, and prospective studies, such as nested case-control studies, are needed to confirm these associations. Citation Format: Erikka Loftfield, Meredith S. Shiels, Barry I. Graubard, Hormuzd A. Katki, Anil Chaturvedi, Britton Trabert, Ligia Pinto, Troy Kemp, Fatma M. Shebl, Susan T. Mayne, Nicolas Wentzensen, Mark P. Purdue, Allan Hildesheim, Rashmi Sinha, Neal D. Freedman. Associations of coffee drinking with systemic immune and inflammatory markers. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 1880. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-1880

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207