Dietary Patterns and Risk of Colorectal Cancer Subtypes Classified by Fusobacterium nucleatum in Tumor Tissue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance—Fusobacterium nucleatum appears to play a role in colorectal carcinogenesis through suppression of host immune response to tumor. Evidence also suggests that diet influences intestinal F. nucleatum. However, the role of F. nucleatum in mediating the relationship between diet and the risk of colorectal cancer is unknown. Objective—To test the hypothesis that the associations of prudent diets (rich in whole grains and dietary fiber) and Western diets (rich in red and processed meat, refined grains, and desserts) with colorectal cancer risk may differ according to the presence of F. nucleatum in tumor tissue. Design—Prospective cohort study. Setting—The Nurses’ Health Study (1980–2012) and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986–2012). Participants—121,700 US female nurses and 51,529 US male health professionals aged 30 to 55 years and 40 to 75 years, respectively, at enrollment. Exposures—Prudent and Western dietary patterns. Main Outcomes and Measures—Incidence of colorectal carcinoma subclassified by F. nucleatum status in tumor tissue, determined by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Results—We documented 1,019 incident colon and rectal cancer cases with available F. nucleatum data among predominantly white 137,217 individuals over 26–32 years of follow-up encompassing 3,643,562 person-years. The association of prudent diet with colorectal cancer significantly differed by tissue F. nucleatum status (Pheterogeneity = .01). Prudent diet score was associated with a lower risk of F. nucleatum-positive cancers [Ptrend = .003; multivariable hazard ratio of 0.43 (95% confidence interval 0.25–0.72) for the highest vs. the lowest prudent score quartile], but not with F. nucleatum-negative cancers (Ptrend = .47). Dietary component analyses suggested possible differential associations for the cancer subgroups according to intakes of dietary fiber (Pheterogeneity = .02). There was no significant heterogeneity between the subgroups according to Western dietary pattern scores (Pheterogeneity = .23). Conclusions and Relevance—Prudent diets rich in whole grains and dietary fiber are associated with a lower risk for F. nucleatum-positive colorectal cancer but not F. nucleatum-negative cancer, supporting a potential role for intestinal microbiota in mediating the association between diet and colorectal neoplasms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".