MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412102766 · doi:10.4103/aja202536

The importance of the season of biopsy on the Gleason score on biopsy: does exposure to sunshine have an influence?

2025· article· en· W4412102766 on OpenAlexaffabout
Guila Delouya, Daniel Taussky

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Andrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopsyMedicineLogistic regressionConfidence intervalOdds ratioProstate biopsyProstate cancerMultivariate analysisInternal medicineCancerUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The circadian clock is strongly influenced by the sun exposure and prostate cancer has been shown to be inversely proportional to it. We investigated whether PCa aggressiveness in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, differs over the months during or following potentially longer exposure to sunlight. We analyzed 3447 patients treated between January 1995 and December 2023 with primary radiotherapy for localized PCa. We investigated whether the month when diagnostic biopsy was performed was associated with a more frequent diagnosis of a primary Gleason score (pGS) of 4 or 5. We grouped the months of biopsy into the four quarters (Q1-4) of the year. Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict a pGS of 4 or 5, adjusted for age and year of biopsy. There were significantly fewer biopsies ( P = 0.027) with pGS 4 or 5 in the last 3 months of the year (Q4; 19.0%) than those in Q1-3 (22.9%). Age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and the number of positive biopsies were not significantly different between Q4 versus Q1-3. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, a biopsy in Q4 was significantly predictive of a lower risk of pGS 4 or 5 (odds ratio [OR]: 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-0.93, P = 0.007), as was older age (P < 0.001), but not the year of biopsy ( P = 0.76). In conclusion, patients biopsied during Q4 had a 23% lower risk of a pGS 4 or 5 on diagnostic biopsy than those biopsied during the previous 9 months. Our results are not a proof of causality.

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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of AndrologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207