Effects of omega‐3 supplementation on psychological symptoms in men with prostate cancer: Secondary analysis of a double‐blind placebo‐controlled randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the general population, a higher omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids intake is associated with lower levels of several psychological symptoms, especially depression. However, the existing evidence in cancer is equivocal. METHODS: This phase IIB double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was aimed at comparing the effects of eicosapentaenoic acid monoacylglyceride (MAG-EPA) supplementation and high oleic acid sunflower oil (HOSO; placebo) on depression levels (primary outcome) and other symptoms (anxiety, fear of cancer recurrence, fatigue, insomnia, perceived cognitive impairments; secondary outcomes). Participants, recruited in a prostate cancer clinic, were randomized to MAG-EPA (3.75 g daily; n = 65) or HOSO (3.75 g daily; n = 65) for 1 year post-radical prostatectomy (RP), starting 4-10 weeks before surgery. Patients completed self-report scales at baseline (before RP) and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Fatigue Symptom Inventory (FSI), and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function (FACT-Cog). RESULTS: Analyses showed significant reductions in HADS-depression, HADS-anxiety, FCRI, ISI, FSI-number of days, and FACT-Cog-impact scores over time. A significant group-by-time interaction was obtained on FACT-Cog-Impact scores only; yet, the temporal change was significant in HOSO patients only. CONCLUSIONS: Several symptoms significantly decreased over time, mainly within the first months of the study. However, MAG-EPA did not produce greater reductions than HOSO. Omega-3 supplementation does not seem to improve psychological symptoms of men treated with RP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".