MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984249810 · doi:10.1002/pros.20278

Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a pilot study investigating medical characteristics of patients participating in a prostate cancer prevention clinic

2005· article· en· W1984249810 on OpenAlexaff
Sheri Horsburgh, Andrew Matthew, Robert G. Bristow, John Trachtenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Prostate · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerMedicineProstatePathologicalOncologyInternal medicineCancerMutationFamily historyPopulationGynecologyGeneticsGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are at an increased risk to develop prostate cancer and are subject to screening protocols for high-risk men. The utility of targeted screening, and the clinical and pathological features associated with prostate cancer, have received little attention in this population. METHODS: We report on the clinical screening and pathological characteristics of a group of 19 men with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, as compared to an age-matched group of men with a family history of prostate cancer. RESULTS: Mutation carriers were significantly more likely to have an elevated PSA at first visit (P = 0.03). Prostate cancer was twice as likely to be diagnosed in mutation carriers although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is warranted. Further research on larger cohorts is needed to evaluate whether unique pathological prostate cancer characteristics exist in these men.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe ProstateSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207