Impact of Elimination or Reduction of Dietary Animal Proteins on Cancer Progression and Survival: Protocol of an Online Pilot Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current evidence suggests that the incidence of cancer is low in vegan populations, and experimental studies have revealed a significant role of dietary proteins in cancer development and progression. However, little data currently exists regarding the effect of a plant-based diet on the progression of diagnosed cancer. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study is to determine if a reduction or total elimination of animal protein from the diet can positively influence the outcome of an existing cancer and, in addition to standard oncological therapies, increase remission rates. METHODS: The primary aim of this online study is to test the effect on remission rates in cancer patients (primary outcome) with distinct self-selected dietary patterns (omnivore, lacto-ovo-vegetarian, vegan), and allow for an estimation of the effect size. Secondary outcomes are tumor behavior, relapse-free interval, therapies, therapy tolerability and side-effects, comorbidities, medication, quality of life, acceptance, and feasibility of the selected diet. Safety concerns exist for vegan diets (especially in cancer patients) and the study will carefully monitor for deterioration of health, tumor progression, or malnutrition. Furthermore, the study will evaluate the online portal as a study platform (technical and safety aspects, and sequence of displayed questionnaires) as well as the validity of self-reported and online-generated data. RESULTS: The study was performed between April, 2015 and June, 2016, and a preliminary evaluation of safety aspects was undertaken after June, 2016. Primary and secondary outcomes will be evaluated when the final patients complete the study in December, 2016. CONCLUSIONS: This study will reveal information about the effects of dietary patterns on cancer disease and progression. The methodology of the study addresses several aspects and limitations of nutrition studies in cancer patients, such as precision of nutrition data, acceptance criteria, online methodology, and safety aspects. CLINICALTRIAL: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02437474; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02437474 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6jL7UUCVq).
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 | 0.020 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.005 |
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".