MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182650029 · doi:10.4239/wjd.v12.i7.1010

Current cancer therapies and their influence on glucose control

2021· review· en· W3182650029 on OpenAlexaff
Carly Yim, Kerry Mansell, Nassrein Hussein, Terra Arnason

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Diabetes · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusCancerCurrent (fluid)Intensive care medicineOncologyInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review focuses on the development of hyperglycemia arising from widely used cancer therapies spanning four drug classes. These groups of medications were selected due to their significant association with new onset hyperglycemia, or of potentially severe clinical consequences when present. These classes include glucocorticoids that are frequently used in addition to chemotherapy treatments, and the antimetabolite class of 5-fluorouracil-related drugs. Both of these classes have been in use in cancer therapy since the 1950s. Also considered are the phosphatidyl inositol-3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)-inhibitors that provide cancer response advantages by disrupting cell growth, proliferation and survival signaling pathways, and have been in clinical use as early as 2007. The final class to be reviewed are the monoclonal antibodies selected to function as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). These were first used in 2011 for advanced melanoma and are rapidly becoming widely utilized in many solid tumors. For each drug class, the literature has been reviewed to answer relevant questions about these medications related specifically to the characteristics of the hyperglycemia that develops with use. The incidence of new glucose elevations in euglycemic individuals, as well as glycemic changes in those with established diabetes has been considered, as has the expected onset of hyperglycemia from their first use. This comparison emphasizes that some classes exhibit very immediate impacts on glucose levels, whereas other classes can have lengthy delays of up to 1 year. A comparison of the spectrum of severity of hyperglycemic consequences stresses that the appearance of diabetic ketoacidosis is rare for all classes except for the ICIs. There are distinct differences in the reversibility of glucose elevations after treatment is stopped, as the mTOR inhibitors and ICI classes have persistent hyperglycemia long term. These four highlighted drug categories differ in their underlying mechanisms driving hyperglycemia, with clinical presentations ranging from potent yet transient insulin resistant states [type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) -like] to rare permanent insulin-deficient causes of hyperglycemia. Knowledge of the relative incidence of new onset hyperglycemia and the underlying causes are critical to appreciate how and when to best screen and treat patients taking any of these cancer drug therapies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of DiabetesSame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207