Regular aspirin use and the risk of lethal prostate cancer in the Physicians' Health Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
306 Background: Aspirin exerts chemopreventive effects against several malignancies. An inverse association between regular aspirin intake and advanced prostate cancer is suggested by previous reports, but potential effects on lethal prostate cancer have not been characterized. Methods: The study population comprised 22,071 male physicians enrolled in the prospective Physicians' Health Study followed from 1982-2009. We evaluated the relationship between regular aspirin intake ( > 3 tablets per week) and lethal prostate cancer (metastases or prostate cancer death). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of total, high-grade (Gleason 8-10), and advanced (T3b-T4 or N1 or M1) cancers. Cox proportional hazards models estimated age- and multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for the incidence of primary and secondary outcomes and survival among participants with prostate cancer. Results: Over 27 years of follow-up (533,261 person-years), 3,183 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, of whom 402 developed lethal disease. Decreased multivariate-adjusted risks of lethal prostate cancer were observed for regular aspirin users (HR: 0.67, 95%CI: 0.55-0.82). Recent regular use (within 12 months) was protective, with effects diminishing with time since last regular use (p for trend = 0.007). Among men with prostate cancer, regular aspirin use after diagnosis was associated with decreased prostate cancer mortality (HR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.64-0.98), whereas pre-diagnostic use did not confer a measurable benefit. Regular aspirin use was not significantly associated with the incidence of total, high-grade, or advanced cancers. Conclusions: Regular aspirin use was associated with a decreased risk of lethal prostate cancer in this cohort of American physicians. An inhibitory effect of regular aspirin use on prostate cancer progression is suggested.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".