MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242797105 · doi:10.1159/000079775

Author Index

2004· paratext· en· W4242797105 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in psychosomatic medicine · 2004
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Computer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment with an LHRH agonist (HOE-766) alone causes an almost complete blockage of testicular testosterone formation in rat and man. In order to neutralize androgens of adrenal origin, a pure antiandrogen (RU-23908) was given in combination with the LHRH agonist in the rat. At doses where each drug has no or minimal effect alone, prostate and seminal vesicle weight were reduced to 9 and 15 % of control after 5 months of combined treatment, respectively. Among the species studied, man is the most sensitive to the inhibitory effect of treatment with LHRH agonists on testicular steroidogenesis. Near castration levels of serum testosterone and 5 α-dihydrotestosterone are obtained within 1-2 weeks of daily subcutaneous administration of the LHRH agonist [D-Ser(tbu)6, des-Gly-NH210]LHRH ethylamide (HOE-766) in adult men with cancer of prostate. The decrease in serum androgen levels is accompanied by objective remission of the cancer in approximately 75% of cases. In a preliminary study where the LHRH agonist was administered in combination with the pure antiandrogen RU-23908, it was shown that the antiandrogen does not interfere with the LHRH-induced inhibition of serum androgen levels. The ease of application of this new form of hormonal therapy should permit its use at early stages of the disease and thus reduce the development of metastases and androgen-resistant cell clones.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.392 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in psychosomatic medicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207