MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174319659 · doi:10.1530/erc-21-0192

Celebrating the 80th anniversary of hormone ablation for prostate cancer

2021· article· en· W3174319659 on OpenAlexaff
Amina Zoubeidi, P. Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrine Related Cancer · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsProstate cancerMedicineAndrogenCancerDiseaseRadiation therapyProstateAblationOncologyEndocrine systemInternal medicineHormoneCancer researchBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this issue of Endocrine-Related Cancer, we are celebrating the 80th anniversary of hormone ablation as treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. Our understanding has evolved from the observation that androgen withdrawal, either surgical or pharmacological, resulted in prostatic atrophy in animal models, to its application in patients, to investigation of the mysterious way in which prostate cancer escapes androgen dependence. We are now in an era of novel AR pathway inhibitors, the combination of androgen ablation with chemotherapy, PARP inhibitors, immunotherapies, guided radiotherapy, and novel drug application based upon genetic testing of individual tumors. In this special issue, we bring together a collection of eight reviews that cover not only the history of 80 years of progress after the initial identification of androgen ablation as an effective treatment of prostate cancer, but subsequent improvements in the understanding of the biology of the disease, development of novel treatment paradigms, resistance to those treatments and disease progression following that resistance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.012

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndocrine Related CancerSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207