Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some diets, such as high lipid and high glucose diets, are known to increase the risk of colorectal cancer. On the other hand, little is known about diets that prevent colonic carcinogenesis. The ketogenic diet, which is characterized by high fat and very low carbohydrate content, is one such diet. The ketogenic diet decreases the amount of available glucose for tumors and shifts to the production of ketone bodies as an alternative energy source for healthy cells. Cancer cells are unable to use the ketone bodies for energy thus depriving them of the energy needed for progression and survival. Many studies reported the beneficial effects of the ketogenic diet in several types of cancers. Recently, the ketone body β-hydroxybutyrate has been found to possess anti-tumor potential in colorectal cancer. Despite its beneficial effects, the ketogenic diet also has some drawbacks, some of which are related to gastrointestinal disorders and weight loss. Thus, studies are being directed at this time towards finding alternatives to following a strict ketogenic diet and supplementing patients with the ketone bodies responsible for its beneficial effects in the hope of overcoming some potential setbacks. This article discusses the mechanism by which a ketogenic diet influences growth and proliferation of tumor cells, it sheds the light on the most recent trials regarding its use as an adjunctive measure to chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, and it explains the limitations of its usage in metastatic patients and the promising role of exogenous ketone supplementation in this setting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".