PSA, an outdated biomarker for prostate cancer: In search of a more specific biomarker, citrate takes the spotlight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevailing biomarker employed for prostate cancer (PCa) screening and diagnosis is the prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Despite excellent sensitivity, PSA lacks specificity, leading to false positives, unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis. Consequently, PSA is increasingly less used by clinicians, thus underscoring the imperative for the identification of new biomarkers. An emerging biomarker in this context is citrate, a molecule secreted by the normal prostate, which has been shown to be inversely correlated with PCa. Here, we discuss about PSA and its usage for PCa diagnosis, its lack of specificity, and the various conditions that can affect its levels. We then provide our vision about what we think would be a valuable addition to our PCa diagnosis toolkit, citrate. We describe the unique citrate metabolic program in the prostate and how this profile is reprogrammed during carcinogenesis. Finally, we summarize the evidence that supports the usage of citrate as a biomarker for PCa diagnosis, as it can be measured in various patient samples and be analyzed by several methods. The unique relationship between citrate and PCa, combined with the stability of citrate levels in other prostate-related conditions and the simplicity of its detection, further accentuates its potential as a biomarker.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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.
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".