Effects of Concentrated Long-Chain Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Supplementation on Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy: A Phase II Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial (RCT-EPA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) and associated treatments incur symptoms that may impact patients’ quality of life. Studies have shown beneficial relationships between diet, especially omega-3 fatty acids, and these symptoms. Unfortunately, only few data describing the relationship between long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (LCn3) and PCa-related symptoms in patients are available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of LCn3 supplementation on PCa-specific quality of life in 130 men treated by radical prostatectomy. Men were randomized to receive a daily dose of either 3.75 g of fish oil or a placebo starting 7 weeks before surgery and for up to one-year post-surgery. Quality of life was assessed using the validated EPIC-26 and IPSS questionnaires at randomization, at surgery, and every 3 months following surgery. Between-group differences were assessed using linear mixed models. Intention-to-treat analyses showed no significant difference between the two groups. However, at 12-month follow-up, per-protocol analyses showed a significantly greater increase in the urinary irritation function score (better urinary function) (MD = 5.5, p = 0.03) for the LCn3 group compared to placebo. These results suggest that LCn3 supplementation may improve the urinary irritation function in men with PCa treated by radical prostatectomy and support to conduct of larger-scale studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".