MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metabolic Alterations, Vascular Disease and Advanced Prostate Cancer: New Players for Metastatic Advanced Prostate Cancer?

2014· article· en· W2025144649 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simona Di Francesco, R. Tenaglia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerInternal medicineDiseaseOncologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Epidemiologic studies have implicated metabolic imbalance in prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness, nevertheless no clear consensus has been reached. The aim of the research was to investigate the association of hypertension, hypercholesterolemia and vascular disease in advanced PCa with and without bone metastases. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 66 patients with diagnosis of advanced PCa between 2005 and 2009 was conducted. We examined hypertension, hypercholesterolemia and vascular disease in 25 patients with advanced PCa and bone metastases versus 41 patients with advanced non-metastatic PCa. Men with incomplete data available, history of hormone therapy or chemotherapy, vascular surgery or other anticancer therapies were excluded. Results:Hypertensionwas significantly linked to advanced PCa with bone metastases (OR 4.5, p = 0.01). Hypercholesterolemia also was significantly associated with aggressive metastatic PCa (OR 3.28, p = 0.01). A significant association was noted between metastatic PCa and vascular disease (OR 3.8, p = 0.04). Conclusions:In our study,hypertension, hypercholesterolemia and vascular disease were significantly related to advanced metastatic PCa. Further research should elucidate these relations in larger samples to confirm these associations and to stabilize future prevention strategies.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical OncologySame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207