MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029399149 · doi:10.1586/eem.11.9

Gender differences in thyroid cancer: a critical review

2011· review· en· W2029399149 on OpenAlexaff
Reina Yao, Connie G. Chiu, Scott S. Strugnell, Sabrina Gill, Sam M. Wiseman

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health CareSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThyroidMedicineThyroid cancerInternal medicineHormoneCancerEstrogen receptorEndocrinologyCarcinogenesisEstrogenThyroid diseaseAndrogen receptorThyroid hormone receptorCancer researchBreast cancerProstate cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has long been known that the incidence of thyroid cancer in women is significantly higher than that in men. The objective of this article is to review gender differences in thyroid cancer, as well as epidemiological, clinical and experimental research on the role of sex hormones, their receptors and other molecular factors in this well-established thyroid cancer gender discrepancy. Although more common in women, thyroid cancer typically presents at a more advanced stage and with a worse disease prognosis in men. Clinical evidence on the impact of estrogen and other sex hormones on thyroid cancer has remained inconclusive, although numerous experimental studies have suggested that these hormones and their receptors may play a role in tumorigenesis and tumor progression. Studies of thyroid cancer cell lines suggest that an imbalance between the two estrogen receptor (ER) isoforms, α and β, may be responsible for the cell proliferation seen with estrogen treatment. Expression studies on thyroid tumors indicate that they express ER and possibly progesterone receptors and androgen receptors, but there is conflicting evidence as to whether or not there is a difference in receptor status between thyroid cancers, benign thyroid lesions and normal thyroid tissue. There have been few studies evaluating the ERα/ERβ profiles in thyroid tumors and normal thyroid tissue. Our understanding of the underlying basis for sex differences in thyroid cancer has improved over the last few decades, but the relationship between gender and thyroid cancer risk has remained elusive. Areas for future research include ERα/ERβ profiling of normal and neoplastic thyroid tissue, association between ER status and tumor dedifferentiation, and evaluation of the signaling pathways by which estrogen and other sex steroids exert their effects on thyroid cancer cells. Sex steroid receptors, and then downstream signaling pathways, represent promising future therapeutic targets for thyroid cancer treatment, and further study is required.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations64
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207