10 / ENDOCRINE ABNORMALITIES AND THEIR ASSOCIATION WITH FATIGUE IN ADVANCED CANCER PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Fatigue in cancer patients is common and distressing symptom. Objectives: We investigated the association of endocrine abnormalities with fatigue in advanced cancer patients seen in a supportive care clinic.Methods: A retrospective review of 234 consecutive cancer patients who had completed a laboratory workup for cancer fatigue collected the following: patient demographic data, cancer diagnosis, ECOG functional status, serum levels of total, free, and bio-available testosterone, 25(OH) vitamin D, thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), and body mass index (BMI). Symptoms were measured by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. We used descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon rank-sum test to examine the difference in fatigue between patients with normal and abnormal endocrinopathies.Results: Patients were predominantly male (66%) and white (67%), with a median age of 62 (range, 22-91), a mean of BMI 25.8 (range, 15 u2013 54). Gastrointestinal (27%) and lung (20%) malignancies were predominant. 98 patients (42%) had vitamin D deficiency (25(OH) vitamin D <20 ng/dL) and 64 patients (28%) were insufficient (20 ng/dL u226425(OH) vitamin D <30 ng/dL). Low vitamin D levels were significantly more likely in non-Caucasian patients, p<0.001. 43 patients (18%) were noted to have thyroid dysfunction (TSH >4.2 mcu/L). In 143 male patients, 119 patients (83%) were hypogonadic (bioavailable testosterone (<61 ng/dL). Hypogonadism was significantly associated with increased fatigue intensity, (mean 5.3 vs 4.3, p=0.03); however, no association was noted in patients with vitamin D deficiency or thyroid dysfunction.Conclusion: Hypogonadism in male patients, but not low vitamin D levels or thyroid dysfunction, was significantly associated with fatigue in advanced cancer patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".