MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897317105 · doi:10.1002/mgg3.478

Impact of colonoscopic screening in Familial Colorectal Cancer Type X

2018· article· en· W2897317105 on OpenAlexafffund
Jane S. Green, Michael O. Woods, Geoff M. Warden, Patrick S. Parfrey

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerAsymptomaticInternal medicineColonoscopyRelative riskIncidence (geometry)CancerFirst-degree relativesConfidence intervalRisk factorOncologyFamily history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hereditary Non-Polyposis Colorectal cancer is caused by Lynch Syndrome (LS; an autosomal dominant condition) or by Familial Colorectal Cancer Type-X (FCCTX; a condition of high family risk that fulfills Amsterdam criteria). The lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) in FCCTX family members is high and CRC occurs later than in LS. METHODS: To determine the impact of primary prevention colonoscopic screening in asymptomatic first-degree relatives of incident CRC cases in 20 families with FCCTX, we compared cancer incidence and survival in 79 males and 83 females, assumed to be at 50% risk of inheriting a genetic CRC susceptibility factor, who entered screening to an unscreened control group from the families, matched for age at entry into screening and for sex. RESULTS: In males, median age at entry into screening was 44.8 years, median follow-up 12.4 years, 12% developed CRC, and 46% died after 30 years of follow-up. Compared to the unscreened group, relative risk of CRC was 0.27 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.10-0.71). In screened females, comparable results were 44.5 years at entry, 11.2 years of follow-up, 7.1% developed CRC, and 7.2% died after 30 years of follow-up. The relative risk of CRC compared to the unscreened group was 0.19 (95% CI 0.07-0.48). CONCLUSION: Primary prevention screening colonoscopy in asymptomatic family members significantly decreased the risk of CRC in FCCTX.

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)0.005
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.347
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Genetics & Genomic MedicineSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207