Plasma Antibodies against <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i>, Human Papillomavirus, and Human Herpesvirus Type 8 in Relation to Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, case-control studies of sexually transmitted infections and prostate cancer have focused on gonorrhea and syphilis, with overall positive associations. More recently, researchers have begun to expand their focus to include additional sexually transmitted infections, such as Chlamydia trachomatis, human papillomavirus (HPV), and human herpesvirus type 8 (HHV-8) infections. Continuing this investigation, we examined each of these infections in relation to incident prostate cancer in a nested case-control study within the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Prostate cancer cases were men diagnosed with prostate cancer between the date of blood draw (1993-1995) and 2000 (n = 691). Controls were men free of cancer and alive at the time of case diagnosis who had had at least one prostate-specific antigen test between the date of blood draw and case diagnosis. One control was individually matched to each case by age; year, time of day, and season of blood draw; and prostate-specific antigen screening history before blood draw (n = 691). C. trachomatis and HPV-16, HPV-18, and HPV-33 antibody serostatus were assessed by enzyme-based immunoassays and HHV-8 antibody serostatus was assessed by an immunofluorescence assay. No associations were observed between C. trachomatis [odds ratio (OR), 1.13; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.65-1.96], HPV-16 (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.57-1.23), HPV-18 (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.66-1.64), and HPV-33 (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.76-1.72) antibody seropositivity and prostate cancer. A significant inverse association was observed between HHV-8 antibody seropositivity and prostate cancer (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.95). As this study is the first, to our knowledge, to observe such an inverse association, similar additional studies are warranted.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".