MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379233122 · doi:10.3390/nu15112611

Serum Essential Elements and Survival after Cancer Diagnosis

2023· article· en· W4379233122 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Lubiński, Marcin Lener, Wojciech Marciniak, Sandra Pietrzak, Róża Derkacz, Cezary Cybulski, Jacek Gronwald, Tadeusz Dębniak, Anna Jakubowska, Tomasz Huzarski, Milena Matuszczak, Katherine Pullella, Ping Sun, Steven A. Narod

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuartileInternal medicineHazard ratioProportional hazards modelCancerGastroenterologyProspective cohort studyCause of deathBreast cancerConfidence intervalDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a prospective study, we measured the associations between three serum elements (Se, Zn and Cu) and the prognosis of 1475 patients with four different types of cancer (breast, prostate, lung and larynx) from University Hospitals in Szczecin, Poland. The elements were measured in serum taken after diagnosis and prior to treatment. Patients were followed from the date of diagnosis until death from any cause or until the last follow-up date (mean years of follow-up: 6.0–9.8 years, according to site). Kaplan–Meier curves were constructed for all cancers combined and for each cancer separately. Age-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression. The outcome was all-cause mortality. A Se level in the highest quartile was also associated with a reduced mortality (HR = 0.66; 95%CI 0.49–0.88; p = 0.005) in all-cause mortality for all cancers combined. Zn level in the highest quartile was also associated with reduced mortality (HR = 0.55; 95%CI 0.41–0.75; p = 0.0001). In contrast, a Cu level in the highest quartile was associated with an increase in mortality (HR = 1.91; 95%CI 1.56–2.08; p = 0.0001). Three serum elements—selenium, zinc and copper—are associated with the prognosis of different types of cancer.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.317 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations36
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207