MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065366744 · doi:10.1593/neo.06745

Telomere Attrition in Isolated High-Grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Surrounding Stroma Is Predictive of Prostate Cancer

2007· article· en· W2065366744 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony M. Joshua, Bisera Vukovic, Ilan Braudey, Sundus Hussein, Maria Zieleńska, John Srigleyb, Andrew Evans, Jeremy A. Squire

Bibliographic record

VenueNeoplasia · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenCredit Valley HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelomereIntraepithelial neoplasiaProstate cancerHazard ratioProstateStromaChromosome instabilityCancerOncologyBiologyGenome instabilityProportional hazards modelTelomeraseHigh-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasiaPathologyInternal medicineMedicineConfidence intervalGeneticsChromosomeImmunohistochemistryGeneDNA damage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The causes of early genomic events underlying the development of prostate cancer (CaP) remain unclear. The onset of chromosomal instability is likely to facilitate the formation of crucial genomic aberrations both in the precursor lesion high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HPIN) and in CaP. Instability generated by telomere attrition is one potential mechanism that could initiate chromosomal rearrangements. In this study, normalized telomere length variation was examined in a cohort of 68 men without CaP who had HPIN only on prostatic biopsies. Multiple significant associations between telomere attrition and eventual diagnosis of CaP in the HPIN and in the surrounding stroma were found. Kaplan-Meier analysis of telomere length demonstrated a significantly increased risk for the development of cancer with short telomeres in the surrounding stroma [P = .035; hazard ratio (HR) = 2.12; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.231-0.956], and a trend for HPIN itself (P = .126; HR = 1.72; 95% CI = 0.287-1.168). Cox regression analysis also demonstrated significance between the time from the original biopsy to the diagnosis of cancer and telomere length in HPIN and in the surrounding stroma. These analyses showed significance, both alone and in combination with baseline prostate-specific antigen, and lend support to the hypothesis that telomere attrition in prostatic preneoplasia may be fundamental to the generation of chromosomal instability and to the emergence of CaP.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeoplasiaSame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207