Does inflammatory bowel disease increase the risk of lower urinary tract tumors: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inflammatory bowel disease, including ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, is characterized by chronic inflammation that could be a risk factor for extraintestinal cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether inflammatory bowel disease is related to the risk of lower urinary tract tumors. Methods: A systematical research was performed on various medical databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase and Web of Science from inception to April 2020. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria were used to assess the quality of included articles. The analysis was completed by STATA version 14.2. Results: Six hundred and twelve of records were initially identified and 16 studies were included in the final analysis. In general, inflammatory bowel disease patients were not at increased risk of prostate cancer, bladder cancer and male genital cancer. In the subgroup analysis, Crohn’s disease patients seemed to have borderline increased risk of prostate cancer [standardized incidence ratio: 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90–1.21; I 2 =15.1%] and bladder cancer (standardized incidence ratio: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.94–1.44; I 2 =0.0%), and ulcerative colitis patients seemed to have borderline increased risk of prostate cancer (standardized incidence ratio: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.93–1.33; I 2 =73.5%). Conclusions: Inflammatory bowel disease did not significantly increase the risk of prostate cancer, bladder cancer and male genital cancer. Crohn’s disease patients seemed to have a higher risk of prostate cancer and bladder cancer, and ulcerative colitis patients seemed to have a higher risk of prostate cancer. ulcerative colitis patients in East Asian countries have significantly increased prostate cancer risk.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.045 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".