Physical Activity and Cancer Outcomes: A Precision Medicine Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is increasing interest in applying a precision medicine approach to understanding exercise as a potential treatment for cancer. We aimed to inform this new approach by appraising epidemiologic literature relating postdiagnosis physical activity to cancer outcomes overall and by molecular/genetic subgroups. Across 26 studies of breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer patients, a 37% reduction was seen in risk of cancer-specific mortality, comparing the most versus the least active patients (pooled relative risk = 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.54–0.73). Risks of recurrence or recurrence/cancer-specific death (combined outcome) were also reduced based on fewer studies. We identified ten studies of associations between physical activity and cancer outcomes by molecular or genetic markers. Two studies showed statistically significant risk reductions in breast cancer mortality/recurrence for the most (versus least) physically active estrogen receptor–positive/progesterone receptor–positive (ER+/PR+) patients, while others showed risk reductions among ER−PR− and triple-negative patients. In colorectal cancer, four studies showed statistically significant risk reductions in cancer-specific mortality for patients with high (versus low) physical activity and P21 expression, P27 expression, nuclear CTNNB1−, PTGS2 (COX-2)+, or IRS1 low/negative status. One prostate cancer study showed effect modification by Gleason score. As a means to enhance this evidence, future observational studies are needed that will measure physical activity objectively before and after diagnosis, use standardized definitions for outcomes, control for competing risks, assess nonlinear dose–response relations, and consider reverse causality. Ultimately, randomized controlled trials with clinical cancer outcomes and a correlative component will provide the best evidence of causality, relating exercise to cancer outcomes, overall and for molecular and genetic subgroups. Clin Cancer Res; 22(19); 4766–75. ©2016 AACR.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 it