Cancer Stem Cells in Prostate Cancer: Implications for Targeted Therapy
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
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in men and the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality among men in the developed world. Conventional anti-PCa therapies include surgery, radiation, hormonal ablation, and chemotherapy. Despite increasing efforts, these therapies are not effective for patients with advanced and/or metastatic disease. In most cases, cancer therapies fail due to an incomplete depletion of tumor cells, resulting in tumor relapse. The cancer stem cell (CSC) hypothesis is an emerging model that explains many of the molecular characteristics of oncological disease as well as the tendency of cancers to relapse, metastasize, and develop resistance to conventional therapies. CSCs are a reservoir of cancer cells that exhibit properties of self-renewal and the ability to reestablish the heterogeneous tumor cell population. The existence of PCa stem cells offers a theoretical explanation for many uncertainties regarding PCa and also for treatment resistance and disease progression once clinical cure is achieved. Therapies targeting CSCs might therefore lead to more effective cancer treatments, divergent from a traditional anti-proliferative approach, based on tumor bulk reduction accompanied by CSC-specific inhibition. Here, we focus on reviewing the historical perspective as well as concepts regarding stem cells and CSCs in PCa. In addition, we will report possible strategies and new clinical approaches that address the CSC-based concept of tumorigenesis in PCa.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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