MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963478039 · doi:10.1002/ijc.32589

Polyphenol intake and differentiated thyroid cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort

2019· article· en· W2963478039 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Raúl Zamora‐Ros, Valerie Cayssials, Silvia Franceschi, Cecilie Kyrø, Elisabete Weiderpass, Joakim Hennings, Maria Sandström, Anne Tjønneland, Anja Olsen, Kim Overvad, Marie‐Christine Boutron‐Ruault, Thérèse Truong, Francesca Romana Mancini, Verena Katzke, Tilman Kühn, Heiner Boeing, Antonia Trichopoulou, Anna Karakatsani, Georgia Martimianaki, Domenico Palli, Vittorio Krogh, Salvatore Panico, ­Rosario ­Tumino, Carlotta Sacerdote, Cristina Lasheras, Miguel Rodríguez‐Barranco, Pilar Amiano, Sandra M. Colorado‐Yohar, Eva Ardanáz, Martin Almquist, Ulrika Ericson, H. Bas Bueno‐de‐Mesquita, Roel Vermeulen, Julie A. Schmidt, Graham Byrnes, Augustin Scalbert, Antonio Agudo, Sabina Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Social FundInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIAgència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de RecercaWorld Cancer Research FundMedical Research Council CanadaMedical Research CouncilInstitut Gustave-RoussyDeutsche KrebshilfeMutuelle Générale de l'Education NationaleAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroHealth Research Fund of Central Denmark RegionVetenskapsrådetCancerfondenCancer Research UKWorld Health OrganizationEuropean CommissionDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumLigue Contre le CancerGeneralitat de CatalunyaEuropean Regional Development FundBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCentres de Recerca de CatalunyaInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleEuropean Research CouncilHellenic Health FoundationKræftens BekæmpelseCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
KeywordsEuropean Prospective Investigation into Cancer and NutritionProspective cohort studyMedicineCancerThyroid cancerEPICCohort studyCohortOncologyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPhysiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polyphenols are bioactive compounds with several anticarcinogenic activities; however, human data regarding associations with thyroid cancer (TC) is still negligible. Our aim was to evaluate the association between intakes of total, classes and subclasses of polyphenols and risk of differentiated TC and its main subtypes, papillary and follicular, in a European population. The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort included 476,108 men and women from 10 European countries. During a mean follow‐up of 14 years, there were 748 incident differentiated TC cases, including 601 papillary and 109 follicular tumors. Polyphenol intake was estimated at baseline using validated center/country‐specific dietary questionnaires and the Phenol‐Explorer database. In multivariable‐adjusted Cox regression models, no association between total polyphenol and the risks of overall differentiated TC (HRQ4 vs. Q1 = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77–1.29), papillary (HRQ4 vs. Q1 = 1.06, 95% CI 0.80–1.41) or follicular TC (HRQ4 vs. Q1 = 1.10, 95% CI 0.55–2.22) were found. No associations were observed either for flavonoids, phenolic acids or the rest of classes and subclasses of polyphenols. After stratification by body mass index (BMI), an inverse association between the intake of polyphenols (p‐trend = 0.019) and phenolic acids (p‐trend = 0.007) and differentiated TC risk in subjects with BMI ≥ 25 was observed. In conclusion, our study showed no associations between dietary polyphenol intake and differentiated TC risk; although further studies are warranted to investigate the potential protective associations in overweight and obese individuals.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207