Adherence to Mediterranean Diet, Physical Activity and Survival after Prostate Cancer Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the considerable number of studies investigating the Mediterranean diet in prostate cancer (PCa) etiology, very few focused on cancer survival. We assessed the pre-diagnostic diet and physical activity in a cohort of 777 men with PCa diagnosed between 1995 and 2002 in north-eastern Italy; adherence to the Mediterranean diet was evaluated through the Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS). Hazard ratios (HR) of death with confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using the Cox model, adjusting for potential confounders. During 10 years of follow-up, 208 patients (26.8%) died, 75 (9.7%) due to PCa. Patients reporting MDS ≥ 5 showed a higher overall survival than those with MDS < 5 (HR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.56-0.99). Although high physical activity was not significantly associated with overall survival (HR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.59-1.07), the HR for all-cause death was the lowest (HR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.38-0.90) for men reporting MDS ≥ 5 and high physical activity compared to those reporting MDS < 5 and low/moderate physical activity. No association emerged for PCa specific survival. Study findings support the beneficial impact of pre-diagnostic adherence to the Mediterranean diet and physical activity on overall survival; they are mainly driven by risk reduction in non-prostate cancer mortality, which however accounts for about 80% of death in men with 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".