Semen and serum platinum levels in cisplatin‐treated survivors of germ cell cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer survivors often have impaired gonadal function possibly related to chemotherapy. Platinum is a heavy metal that can be detected at low levels in serum many years after treatment, it is not known whether platinum also persists in semen and if platinum persistence in semen is associated with impaired fertility. METHODS: Adult cisplatin-treated testicular cancer survivors were enrolled. High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to measure semen and serum platinum levels. Semen quality and DNA Fragmentation Index (DFI) were assessed. RESULTS: (range: 274-404). Platinum levels were higher in semen than in blood (p = 0.03). Semen platinum levels were not significantly associated with time from last cisplatin dosing (r = -0.34; p = 0.09) nor cumulative dose (r = -0.10, p = 0.63). Sperm concentration was correlated with time from last cisplatin dosing (r = 0.58, p < 0.001) but not with semen platinum level (r = -0.15, p = 0.46). DFI was not significantly associated with time from last cisplatin dosing (r = 0.55, p = 0.08) or semen platinum level (r = -0.32, p = 0.33). In four patients with serial semen samples, platinum level decreased and sperm concentration and motility increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Platinum is detected in semen of testicular cancer survivors at higher levels than matched blood samples. These preliminary findings may have important implications for the reproductive health of survivors of advanced testicular cancer, further study is needed to assess the relationship between platinum persistence in semen and recovery of fertility postchemotherapy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".