Racial Variation in Sex Steroid Hormones and the Insulin-Like Growth Factor Axis in Umbilical Cord Blood of Male Neonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To address whether umbilical cord blood concentrations of sex steroid hormones and the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis differ between African-American and White male neonates. METHODS: In 2004 and 2005, venous cord blood samples were collected from 75 African-American and 38 White male full-term uncomplicated births along with birth weight, placental weight, mother's age and parity, and time of birth. Testosterone, androstanediol glucuronide, estradiol, and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) were measured by immunoassay, and IGF-I, IGF-2, and IGF binding protein (BP)-3 by ELISA. Crude and multivariable-adjusted geometric mean concentrations were computed. RESULTS: Androstanediol glucuronide, estradiol, and SHBG concentrations did not differ by race; however, the molar ratio of testosterone to SHBG was higher in African-American than White male babies after adjustment (P = 0.01). Both before and after adjustment, Whites had higher concentrations of IGF-I (adjusted; White, African-American, 93.1, 71.9 ng/mL), IGF-2 (537.3-474.8 ng/mL), and IGFBP-3 (1,673-1,482 ng/mL) than African-Americans (P < 0.05), although the molar ratio of IGF-I plus IGF-2 to IGFBP-3 did not differ by race. CONCLUSION: The higher cord blood testosterone to SHBG ratio in African-American compared with White male babies after taking into account maternal and birth factors is compatible with the hypothesis that differences in androgen levels in utero contribute to their higher prostate cancer risk, although we would have expected crude differences as well. Lower cord blood IGF-I and IGF-2 levels in African-American compared with White male babies are not consistent with the hypothesis that differences in growth factor levels contribute to their higher prostate cancer risk.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".