Plasma osteopontin as a biomarker of prostate cancer aggression: relationship to risk category and treatment response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High plasma osteopontin (OPN) has been linked to tumour hypoxia, metastasis, and poor prognosis. This study aims to assess whether plasma osteopontin was a biomarker of increasing progression within prostate cancer (PCa) prognostic groups and whether it reflected treatment response to local and systemic therapies. METHODS: Baseline OPN was determined in men with localised (n=199), locally recurrent (n=9) and castrate-resistant, metastatic PCa (CRPC-MET; n=37). Receiver-operating curves (ROC) were generated to describe the accuracy of OPN for distinguishing between localised risk groups or localised vs metastatic disease. We also measured OPN pre- and posttreatment, following radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), androgen deprivation (AD) or taxane-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: The CRPC-MET patients had increased baseline values (mean 219; 56-513 ng ml(-1); P<0.0001) compared with the localised, non-metastatic group (mean 72; 12-438 ng ml(-1)). The area under the ROC to differentiate localised vs metastatic disease was improved when OPN was added to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (0.943-0.969). Osteopontin neither distinguished high-risk PCa from other localised PCa nor correlated with serum PSA at baseline. Osteopontin levels reduced in low-risk patients after radical prostatectomy (P=0.005) and in CRPC-MET patients after chemotherapy (P=0.027), but not after EBRT or AD. CONCLUSION: Plasma OPN is as good as PSA at predicting treatment response in CRPC-MET patients after chemotherapy. Our data do not support the use of plasma OPN as a biomarker of increasing tumour burden within localised PCa.
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) | 0.000 | 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".