Relationship of lipid profile and antioxidant enzymes in women with breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction- In breast cancer patients, we examined the byproducts of lipid profile and the antioxidant enzyme activity. Female’s levels of total cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL cholesterol, and HDL cholesterol are associated with the development of breast cancer, allowing us to investigate their potential significance in breast cancer prevention. Materials and methods - 44 breast cancer patients were included in the study. 44 healthy female as control and 44 female newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were involved in this study. Serum samples of Breast cancer patients were taken from women. Results - 44 breast cancer patients in total took part in this prospective research study. Compared to the healthy control patients, the breast cancer patients had decreased catalase activity, but higher levels of superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, and glutathione transferase. Patients with breast cancer had higher serum levels of lipid profile. Furthermore, neither the blood levels of HDL-C nor the LDL-C were significantly high between breast cancer patients and healthy people. Conclusion -This work supports the idea that the generation of lipid in contents in tumor associated patients itself is of main relevance in the carcinogenesis by showing that the antioxidant defense system is altered in malignant breast tissues
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) | 0.002 | 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".