MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387326639 · doi:10.1080/01635581.2023.2261651

Dietary Inflammatory Potential and the Risk of Serrated and Adenomatous Colorectal Polyps

2023· article· en· W4387326639 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lillian Sung, Helen G. Coleman, Nitin Shivappa, James R. Hébert, Harvey J. Murff, Ginger L. Milne, Reid M. Ness, Walter E. Smalley, Wei Zheng, Martha J. Shrubsole

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition and Cancer · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesQueen's University BelfastNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UKVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchQueen's UniversityVanderbilt University Medical CenterVanderbilt University
KeywordsHyperplastic PolypMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyOdds ratioColonoscopyColorectal cancerQuartileInflammationAdenomaConfidence intervalCase-control studyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies of dietary inflammation potential and risks of colorectal cancer precursors are limited, particularly for sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). This study examines the association using the energy-adjusted dietary inflammatory index (E-DIITM), a measure of anti- and/or pro-inflammatory diet, in a large US colonoscopy-based case-control study of 3246 controls, 1530 adenoma cases, 472 hyperplastic polyp cases, and 180 SSL cases. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived from logistic regression models. Analyses were stratified by participant characteristics, and urinary prostaglandin E2 metabolite (PGE-M) and high-sensitivity plasma C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels, inflammation biomarkers. Highest E-DII™ intake was associated with significantly increased risks of colorectal adenomas (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.11, 1.67), and hyperplastic polyps (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06, 1.98), compared with participants consuming the lowest E-DII™ quartile. A similar, but non-significant, increased risk was also observed for SSLs (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.82, 2.41). The positive association was stronger in females (pinteraction <0.001), normal weight individuals (ptrend 0.01), and in individuals with lower inflammatory biomarkers (ptrend 0.02 and 0.01 for PGE-M and hs-CRP, respectively). A high E-DII™ is associated with colorectal polyp risk, therefore promoting an anti-inflammatory diet may aid in preventing colorectal polyps.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition and CancerSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207