Nut consumption and survival in stage III colon cancer patients: Results from CALGB 89803 (Alliance).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3517 Background: Recent prospective cohort studies suggest states of energy excess and hyperinsulinemia, including type 2 diabetes (T2D), obesity, sedentary lifestyle, Western pattern diet, increased dietary glycemic load, high intake of sugar-sweetened beverages, and elevated plasma C-peptide are each associated with an increased risk of colon cancer (CC) recurrence and mortality. Conversely, observational studies indicate that increasing nut intake is associated with lower risk of T2D, metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance. However, the effect of nut intake on CC recurrence and survival is unknown. Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational study of 826 patients with stage III CC who reported dietary intake with food frequency questionnaires while enrolled in a randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we assessed associations of nut intake with cancer recurrence and mortality. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) defined as time from completion of dietary questionnaire following adjuvant therapy to cancer recurrence, death or last follow-up. Results: Compared to patients who abstained from nuts, those who consumed ≥ 2 servings of nuts per week had an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.58 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.92; P trend = 0.03) for DFS and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.74; P trend = 0.01) for overall survival (OS). On subgroup analysis, the significant association was confined to tree-nut intake: HR = 0.54 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.85; P trend = 0.04) for DFS and HR = 0.47 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.82; P trend = 0.04) for OS. There was no significant association between intake of peanut or peanut butter and patient outcome. Association of total nut intake with improved outcomes was maintained across other known or suspected predictors of recurrence and mortality, including across common genomic alterations (microsatellite instability, KRAS mutation, BRAF mutation, and PIK3CA mutation). Conclusions: Higher consumption of nuts may be associated with significantly reduced cancer recurrence and death in patients with stage III CC. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, Pfizer. Clinical trial information: NCT00003835.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".