739 Pancreatic Cancer and Bariatric Surgery: Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the deadliest types of cancer with an estimated incidence of 8 per 100,000 person-years and mortality of 7 per 100,000 person-years worldwide. Method A narrative review of the literature was conducted. PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane database were searched for all published papers in Pancreatic cancer post Bariatric surgery from 1990 to November 2020. Results Epidemiological evidence in the literature has shown that obesity as a risk factor for the development of PDAC is a dose dependent risk. The review found that the risk of developing pancreatic cancer in obese or overweight individuals is 1.5 times higher than individuals with a normal BMI. At the same time, evidence from literature demonstrated that weight reduction by dietary restriction, physical activities, pharmacotherapy or weight reduction surgery reduces risk of PDAC.A total of 24 cases of pancreatic cancer were identified in the literature reported post Bariatric Surgery. The average age at diagnosis was 57.2 years and onset from surgery to diagnosis ranged from 2 months to 25 years. Of the identified cases, 23 cases were post Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and one case post Duodenal Switch. The review found that PDAC was the commonest reported pancreatic cancer post bariatric surgery accounting for 85.3%, followed by Neuroendocrine Tumours (NET) 16.7%. Given the variation in onset of diagnosis, bariatric surgery did not increase cancer risk but rather accelerated the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Conclusions Along with weight reduction and improving comorbidities, Bariatric surgery reduces risk of obesity-related carcinogenesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".