Transcriptome evaluation of the relation between body mass index and prostate cancer outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Large epidemiological studies indicate that an increased body mass index (BMI) is associated with increased prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. Data indicate that there is no association between elevated metabolic pathway proteins and PCa mortality. There are no published studies evaluating the relation between BMI and metabolic pathways with respect to PCa outcomes with a genomics approach. METHODS: ) were identified, and genomic data were interrogated for differentially expressed genes with an interquartile range filter and a Wilcoxon test. P values were adjusted for multiple testing with the Benjamini-Hochberg false-discovery rate method. RESULTS: A total of 477 patients with a median follow-up of 108 months had BMI information available. Two genes were found to interact with BMI in both the JHMI I cohort and the TJU cohort, but there was no statistical significance after adjustments for multiple comparisons. Aberrant metabolic gene expression was significantly correlated with distant metastases (P < .05). No relation was found between BMI and metastases or overall survival (both P values > .05). CONCLUSIONS: In a genomic analysis of prostatectomy specimens, metabolic gene expression, but not BMI, was associated with PCa metastases. Cancer 2017;123:2240-2247. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".