Prostate Cancer Stem-like Cells Contribute to the Development of Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the standard care for patients with advanced prostate cancer (PC) since the 1940s. Although ADT shows clear benefits for many patients, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) inevitably occurs. In fact, with the two recent FDA-approved second-generation anti-androgens abiraterone and enzalutamide, resistance develops rapidly in patients with CRPC, despite their initial effectiveness. The lack of effective therapeutic solutions towards CRPC largely reflects our limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms responsible for CRPC development. While persistent androgen receptor (AR) signaling under castration levels of serum testosterone (<50 ng/mL) contributes to resistance to ADT, it is also clear that CRPC evolves via complex mechanisms. Nevertheless, the physiological impact of individual mechanisms and whether these mechanisms function in a cohesive manner in promoting CRPC are elusive. In spite of these uncertainties, emerging evidence supports a critical role of prostate cancer stem-like cells (PCSLCs) in stimulating CRPC evolution and resistance to abiraterone and enzalutamide. In this review, we will discuss the recent evidence supporting the involvement of PCSLC in CRPC acquisition as well as the pathways and factors contributing to PCSLC expansion in response to ADT.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".