Effects of Lycopene Supplementation in Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiological studies have shown an inverse association between dietary intake of lycopene and prostate cancer risk. We conducted a clinical trial to investigate the biological and clinical effects of lycopene supplementation in patients with localized prostate cancer. Twenty-six men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive a tomato oleoresin extract containing 30 mg of lycopene (n = 15) or no supplementation (n = 11) for 3 weeks before radical prostatectomy. Biomarkers of cell proliferation and apoptosis were assessed by Western blot analysis in benign and cancerous prostate tissues. Oxidative stress was assessed by measuring the peripheral blood lymphocyte DNA oxidation product 5-hydroxymethyl-deoxyuridine (5-OH-mdU). Usual dietary intake of nutrients was assessed by a food frequency questionnaire at baseline. Prostatectomy specimens were evaluated for pathologic stage, Gleason score, volume of cancer, and extent of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Plasma levels of lycopene, insulin-like growth factor-1, insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3, and prostate-specific antigen were measured at baseline and after 3 weeks of supplementation or observation. After intervention, subjects in the intervention group had smaller tumors (80% vs 45%, less than 4 ml), less involvement of surgical margins and/or extra-prostatic tissues with cancer (73% vs 18%, organ-confined disease), and less diffuse involvement of the prostate by high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (33% vs 0%, focal involvement) compared with subjects in the control group. Mean plasma prostate-specific antigen levels were lower in the intervention group compared with the control group. This pilot study suggests that lycopene may have beneficial effects in prostate cancer. Larger clinical trials are warranted to investigate the potential preventive and/or therapeutic role of lycopene in prostate cancer.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".