Diabetes mellitus and risk of prostate cancer in the EuropeanProspectiveInvestigation into Cancer and Nutrition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current epidemiologic evidence suggests that men with type 2 diabetes mellitus may be at lower risk of developing prostate cancer, but little is known about its association with stage and grade of the disease. The association between self-reported diabetes mellitus at recruitment and risk of prostate cancer was examined in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Among 139,131 eligible men, 4,531 were diagnosed with prostate cancer over an average follow-up of 12 years. Multivariable hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models stratified by EPIC-participating center and age at recruitment, and adjusted for education, smoking status, body mass index, waist circumference, and physical activity. In a subset of men without prostate cancer, the cross-sectional association between circulating concentrations of androgens and insulin-like growth factor proteins with diabetes status was also investigated using linear regression models. Compared to men with no diabetes, men with diabetes had a 26% lower risk of prostate cancer (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.86). There was no evidence that the association differed by stage (p-heterogeneity, 0.19) or grade (p-heterogeneity, 0.48) of the disease, although the numbers were small in some disease subgroups. In a subset of 626 men with hormone measurements, circulating concentrations of androstenedione, total testosterone and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-three were lower in men with diabetes compared to men without diabetes. This large European study has confirmed an inverse association between self-reported diabetes mellitus and subsequent risk of prostate cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".