MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975742490 · doi:10.1038/aja.2011.155

Mathematically modelling and controlling prostate cancer under intermittent hormone therapy

2012· review· en· W1975742490 on OpenAlexaff
Yoshito Hirata, Gouhei Tanaka, Nicholas Bruchovsky, Kazuyuki Aihara

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Andrology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCouncil for Science and Technology Policy
KeywordsAndrogen suppressionProstate cancerAndrogenMedicineScheduleHormone therapyHormoneProstateCancerOncologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this review, we summarize our recently developed mathematical models that predict the effects of intermittent androgen suppression therapy on prostate cancer (PCa). Although hormone therapy for PCa shows remarkable results at the beginning of treatment, cancer cells frequently acquire the ability to grow without androgens during long-term therapy, resulting in an eventual relapse. To circumvent hormone resistance, intermittent androgen suppression was investigated as an alternative treatment option. However, at the present time, it is not possible to select an optimal schedule of on- and off-treatment cycles for any given patient. In addition, clinical trials have revealed that intermittent androgen suppression is effective for some patients but not for others. To resolve these two problems, we have developed mathematical models for PCa under intermittent androgen suppression. The mathematical models not only explain the mechanisms of intermittent androgen suppression but also provide an optimal treatment schedule for the on- and off-treatment periods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of AndrologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207