Salicylic Acid and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Salicylic acid (SA) has observationally been shown to decrease colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid, that rapidly deacetylates to SA) is an effective primary and secondary chemopreventive agent. Through a Mendelian randomization (MR) approach, we aimed to address whether levels of SA affected CRC risk, stratifying by aspirin use. A two-sample MR analysis was performed using GWAS summary statistics of SA (INTERVAL and EPIC-Norfolk, N = 14,149) and CRC (CCFR, CORECT, GECCO and UK Biobank, 55,168 cases and 65,160 controls). The DACHS study (4410 cases and 3441 controls) was used for replication and stratification of aspirin-use. SNPs proxying SA were selected via three methods: (1) functional SNPs that influence the activity of aspirin-metabolising enzymes; (2) pathway SNPs present in enzymes' coding regions; and (3) genome-wide significant SNPs. We found no association between functional SNPs and SA levels. The pathway and genome-wide SNPs showed no association between SA and CRC risk (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.84-1.27 and OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.86-1.34, respectively). Results remained unchanged upon aspirin use stratification. We found little evidence to suggest that an SD increase in genetically predicted SA protects against CRC risk in the general population and upon stratification by aspirin use.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".