MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992877350 · doi:10.1002/pbc.21406

Vitamin D status and bone biomarkers in childhood cancer

2007· review· en· W1992877350 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie A. Atkinson

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBone remodelingN-terminal telopeptideInternal medicineBone resorptionEndocrinologyLeptinOsteocalcinVitamin D and neurologyCancerOncologyAlkaline phosphataseObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early detection of abnormalities in bone turnover may be facilitated by assessing biomarkers of bone metabolism including vitamin D status. In many children with cancer, biomarkers of bone formation (osteocalcin, bone specific alkaline phosphatase and carboxy-(or N terminal) propeptide of type 1 procollagen) were observed to be suppressed, while bone resorption was elevated as measured by serum cross-linked (or C-terminal) telopeptide of type 1 collagen. Insulin-like growth factor 1, which stimulates bone formation, may be suppressed indirectly indicating a growth hormone insufficiency. Leptin may also play a role in bone remodeling as hyperleptinemia has been observed in association with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Evaluation of bone status using such biomarkers is complicated by the lack of universally accepted reference values and the variation by age, gender, or pubertal status. Etiologic factors contributing to the observed skeletal morbidities include disease process, chemotherapy (drugs such as glucocorticoids and methotrexate) and radiotherapy. Other factors common to children with cancer, such as chronic inflammation, dietary changes and physical inactivity, must also be taken into account. The current evidence for abnormalities in biomarkers of vitamin D status and bone turnover will be the focus of this review of published studies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.331 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Blood & CancerSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207