Plasma Levels of Homocysteine and the Occurrence and Progression of Rectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND:The aim of this study was to investigate the association between plasma levels of homocysteine and the occurrence and progression of rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS:The 320 study participants included healthy controls (n=80). and patients with rectal tumors (n=240), including 155 patients with rectal cancer, Stage I (n=32), Stage II (n=38), Stage III (n=50), and Stage IV (n=35), and patients with low-risk rectal adenomas (n=31), and high-risk rectal adenomas (n=54). All study participants had fasting blood samples taken, and plasma levels of homocysteine and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were measured and compared. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were prepared to determine whether single, combined, or series levels of the two markers were diagnostic. RESULTS:A significantly increasing trend in the plasma levels of homocysteine from the healthy controls, to the individuals with low-risk rectal adenoma, high-risk rectal adenoma, and Stage I–IV rectal cancer were found. There were no statistically significant differences in the area under the curve (AUC) between the two single factors of plasma homocysteine and CEA. The AUC showed that the use of combined or parallel measurement of plasma CEA and homocysteine had the greatest diagnostic associations. CONCLUSIONS:Plasma levels of homocysteine were significantly associated with occurrence and progression of rectal cancer. The combined use of measurement of plasma homocysteine and CEA levels might have the potential to increase the diagnostic efficiency of screening for early rectal cancer.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".