MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946979636 · doi:10.1097/cej.0000000000000506

Doneness preferences, meat and meat-derived heterocyclic amines intake, and N-acetyltransferase 2 polymorphisms: association with colorectal adenoma in Japanese Brazilians

2019· article· en· W2946979636 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjeev Budhathoki, Motoki Iwasaki, Taiki Yamaji, Gerson Shigueaki Hamada, Nelson Tomio Miyajima, J Zampieri, Sangita Sharma, Mohammadreza Pakseresht, Fariba Kolahdooz, Junko Ishihara, Ribeka Takachi, Hadrien Charvat, Loïic Le Marchand, Shoichiro Tsugane

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cancer Prevention · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsColorectal adenomaOdds ratioConfidence intervalRed meatMedicinePopulationColorectal cancerProcessed meatFood scienceAdenomaInternal medicineBiologyEnvironmental healthCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intake of heterocyclic amines (HCAs) and other mutagenic compounds formed during cooking has been hypothesized to be responsible for the positive association observed between red meat and colorectal cancer. We evaluated whether well-done/very well-done preferences for various meat and fish items, higher intakes of meat and fish, and meat-derived and fish-derived HCA are associated with the risk of colorectal adenoma (CRA) in a Japanese-Brazilian population. We selected 302 patients with adenoma and 403 control individuals who underwent total colonoscopy between 2007 and 2013, and collected information on aspects of meat intake using a detailed questionnaire. We also estimated HCA intake of the study participants using an HCA database that matched the cooking methods of this population. Latent class analysis on the basis of response to doneness preferences for different cooking methods of commonly consumed meat and fish items identified four distinct subgroups. Compared with the subgroup characterized by a preference for rare/medium well-done cooking for most meat and fish items, the odds ratio of CRA for the well-done/very well-done preference subgroup was 1.19 (95% confidence interval: 0.51-2.75). High intake of mixed-meat dishes was suggestively associated inversely with CRA, whereas a high intake of poultry was associated positively with CRA. No clear association with intake of total or specific HCAs and no effect modification by N-acetyltransferase 2 acetylation genotype were observed. We found no statistically significant associations between meat and HCA intake and CRA. These findings do not support a positive association between meat and meat-derived HCA intake and the risk of CRA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cancer PreventionSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207