MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205301298 · doi:10.1093/jncics/pkab098

Weight Change and Incident Distal Colorectal Adenoma Risk in the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial

2021· article· en· W4205301298 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shisi He, Sonja I. Berndt, Andrew T. Kunzmann, Cari M. Kitahara, Wen‐Yi Huang, Kathryn Hughes Barry

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Cancer Spectrum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthQueen's UniversityDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer InstituteQueen's University BelfastAmerican Association for Cancer Research
KeywordsMedicineWeight changeOverweightOdds ratioWeight gainColorectal adenomaWeight lossAdenomaInternal medicineObesityRisk factorColorectal cancerCancerBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Although obesity is a known risk factor, the impact of weight change on colorectal adenoma risk is less clear and could have important implications in disease prevention. We prospectively evaluated weight change in adulthood and incident colorectal adenoma. Methods We assessed weight change during early-late (age 20 years to baseline, ie, ages 55-74 years), early-middle (20-50 years), and middle-late (50 years-baseline) adulthood using self-reported weight data in relation to incident distal adenoma in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (cases = 1053; controls = 16 576). For each period, we defined stable weight as greater than −0.5 kg to less than or equal to 1 kg/5 years, weight loss as less than or equal to −0.5 kg/5 years, and weight gain as greater than 1-2, greater than 2-3, or greater than 3 kg/5 years. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using logistic regression; all tests were 2-sided. Results Compared with stable weight, weight loss during early-late adulthood was associated with reduced adenoma risk (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.34 to 0.86), particularly among those who were overweight or obese at age 20 years (OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.84). Results were similar for early-middle adulthood but less pronounced for middle-late adulthood. Weight gain greater than 3 kg/5 years during early-late adulthood was associated with increased risk (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.58, Ptrend < .001). Findings appeared stronger among men (OR for >3 kg/5 years = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.80) than women (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.79 to 1.50, Pinteraction = .21). Conclusions Weight loss in adulthood was associated with reduced adenoma risk, particularly for those who were overweight or obese, whereas weight gain greater than 3 kg/5 years increased risk. Findings underscore the importance of healthy weight maintenance throughout adulthood in preventing colorectal adenoma.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Cancer SpectrumSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207