MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biomarkers to evaluate distress in cancer patients.

2017· article· en· W2769029338 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elise Labbe-Coldsmith, Thomas W. Butler, Paige D. Naylor, Ileana Aragon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBiopsychosocial modelDistressClinical psychologyBiomarkerCancerAngerPopulationInternal medicineAnxietyOncologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

251 Background: Self-report assessments of stress are a popular, but limiting practice, particularly for underserved populations that may struggle with poor psychological insight and illiteracy. Assessment of stress via biomarkers may be a more inclusive approach to stress assessment for patients with cancer. However, as the rise in popularity regarding biomarker function as outcome data has risen, so to have questions regarding the validity of this endeavor. The current study aimed to explore the convergent validity of inflammatory biomarkers (C-Reactive Protein; CRP, Interleukin 6; IL-6, and Cortisol) while also exploring predictors of stress (e.g., sex, race, marital status) in an underserved, diverse cancer population. Methods: Upon IRB approval, patients ( N = 37) were consented and contributed plasma and serum for the examination of biomarkers (CRP, IL-6, and Cortisol). Next, patients completed the Calgary Symptoms of Stress Inventory (CSOSI; Carlson & Thomas, 2007) to assess for biopsychosocial stress levels. The C-SOSI produces one total score and eight subscales measuring physiological, psychological, and social domains of stress. Results: The mean age of patients was 59.6 ( SD= 13.3) and 56.8% were women. The majority of participants identified as White (56.8%), and a wide variety of cancer types was represented. Biomarkers were analyzed via Quantikine ELISA kits. Correlational analyses revealed that certain subscales showed a positive relationship via medium sized significant correlations. Aside from the Anger subscale, only the physiological subscales were correlated with the biomarkers. The Anger subscale was significantly correlated with Cortisol ( r = .348, p = .035), as was Muscle Tension ( r = .341, p = .039), and Upper Respiratory ( r = .382, p = .02). While Cardiopulmonary Arousal was correlated with CRP ( r = .437, p = .007) and IL-6 ( r = .340, p = .04). Interestingly, IL-6 and CRP were correlated, however, Cortisol was not correlated with IL-6 or CRP. Additional analyses demonstrated significant differences for stress between men and women, which will be discussed. Conclusions: It appears that the biomarkers capture physiological aspects of stress, which may serve in screening patients for psychological intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.379 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune ResponseFrench-language works237,207