The 2023 Impact of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Canada: Cancer and IBD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Intestinal cancers may arise as a complication of IBD itself, while extra-intestinal cancers may arise due to some of the immunosuppressive therapies used to treat IBD. Colorectal cancer (CRC) and small bowel cancer risks remain elevated among persons with IBD as compared to age-and sex-matched members of the general population, and the lifetime risk of these cancers is strongly correlated to cumulative intestinal inflammatory burden. However, the cumulative risk of cancer, even among those with IBD is still low. Some studies suggest that IBD-CRC incidence has declined over the years, possibly owing to improved treatment standards and improved detection and management of early neoplastic lesions. Across studies of extra-intestinal cancers, there are generally higher incidences of melanoma, hepatobiliary cancer, and lung cancer and no higher incidences of breast cancer or prostate cancer, with equivocal risk of cervical cancer, among persons with IBD. While the relative risks of some extra-intestinal cancers are increased with treatment, the absolute risks of these cancers remain low and the decision to forego treatment in light of these risks should be carefully weighed against the increased risks of intestinal cancers and other disease-related complications with undertreated inflammatory disease. Quality improvement efforts should focus on optimized surveillance of cancers for which surveillance strategies exist (colorectal cancer, hepatobiliary cancer, cervical cancers, and skin cancers) and the development of cost-effective surveillance strategies for less common cancers associated with IBD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.003 |
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".