Alcohol rehabilitation and cancer risk: a nationwide hospital cohort study in France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Even though alcohol consumption is an established risk factor for cancer, evidence regarding the effect of a reduction or cessation of alcohol consumption on cancer incidence is scarce. Our main study aim was to assess the effect of alcohol rehabilitation and abstinence on cancer incidence in people with alcohol dependence. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide hospital retrospective cohort study which included all adults residing in mainland France and discharged in 2018-21. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of rehabilitation treatment at hospital or a history of abstinence versus alcohol dependence without rehabilitation or abstinence on the risk for incident alcohol-associated cancers by sex, controlled for potential confounding risk factors. FINDINGS: 10 260 056 men and 13 739 369 women were discharged from French hospitals in 2018-21. Alcohol dependence was identified in 645 720 (6·3%) men and 219 323 (1·6%) women. Alcohol dependence was strongly related to alcohol-associated cancer sites in both sexes (hepatocellular carcinoma and oral, pharyngeal, laryngeal, oesophageal, and colorectal cancers), except for breast cancer. Rehabilitation treatment or abstinence was associated with significantly lower risks compared with alcohol dependence without rehabilitation or abstinence (adjusted hazard ratios: 0·58, 99·89% CI 0·56-0·60 in men and 0·62, 0·57-0·66 in women). Relative risk reductions were significant for each alcohol-associated cancer site in both sexes and supported by all subgroup and sensitivity analyses. INTERPRETATION: Our study results support the clear benefits of alcohol rehabilitation and abstinence in reducing the risk for alcohol-associated cancers. As only two in five patients with alcohol dependence were recorded with a history of rehabilitation treatment or abstinence, a large untapped potential exists for reducing cancer incidence. FUNDING: European Union's EU4Health programme.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".