MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576652764 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-16-0891

Serum C-peptide, Total and High Molecular Weight Adiponectin, and Pancreatic Cancer: Do Associations Differ by Smoking?

2017· article· en· W2576652764 on OpenAlexaff
Letícia Nogueira, Christina C. Newton, Michaël Pollak, Debra T. Silverman, Demetrius Albanes, Satu Männistö, Stephanie J. Weinstein, Eric J. Jacobs, Rachael Z. Stolzenberg‐Solomon

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAdiponectinPancreatic cancerInternal medicineEndocrinologyObesityMedicinePancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaAdenocarcinomaCancerOncologyPhysiologyInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Studies examining associations between circulating concentrations of C-peptide and total adiponectin, two biomarkers related to obesity and insulin secretion and sensitivity and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) risk have shown inconsistent results and included limited numbers of smokers. Methods: We examined associations of these biomarkers and high molecular weight (HMW) adiponectin with PDA, overall, and by smoking status. We conducted a pooled nested case–control analysis in 3 cohorts (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Trial, Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta-Carotene Cancer Prevention Study, and Cancer Prevention Study-II), with 758 cases (435 current smokers) and 1,052 controls (531 smokers) matched by cohort, age, sex, race, blood draw date and follow-up time. We used conditional logistic regression adjusted for age, smoking, diabetes, and body mass index to calculate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Circulating C-peptide concentration was not associated with PDA in never or former smokers, but was inversely associated with PDA in current smokers (per SD OR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54–0.84; Pinteraction = 0.005). HMW adiponectin was inversely associated with PDA in never smokers (OR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23–0.81), not associated in former smokers, and positively associated in smokers (OR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04–1.45; Pinteraction = 0.009). Total adiponectin was not associated with PDA in nonsmokers or current smokers. Conclusions: Associations of biomarkers of insulin secretion and sensitivity with PDA differ by smoking status. Smoking-induced pancreatic damage may explain the associations in smokers while mechanisms related to insulin resistance associations in nonsmokers. Impact: Future studies of these biomarkers and PDA should examine results by smoking status. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(6); 914–22. ©2017 AACR.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207