Acute myeloid leukaemia cells express high levels of androgen receptor but do not depend on androgen signaling for survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male sex is associated with worse outcome in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in many studies. We analyzed the survival of 4281 patients treated with intensive chemotherapy in the AML17 and AML19 trials based on sex. Men had a significantly lower remission rate than women. Men had a higher incidence of adverse cytogenetic features and a lower incidence of the relatively favorable NPM1 mutation. However, male sex was an independent risk factor for survival in multi-variate analysis. We hypothesized that androgen signaling in men could worsen outcomes by protecting AML cells from chemotherapy. We demonstrated high levels of androgen receptor (AR) expression in AML across cytogenetic risk groups. We showed the AR expression was induced by IL-6 signaling in vitro and correlates with poor overall survival. Androgens had no effect on survival of primary AML cells in vitro, nor did they impact gene expression. Androgens did not protect AML cells against chemotherapy either in vitro or in vivo. Similar results were observed with estrogen signaling through estrogen receptor in vitro in AML cells. In conclusion, targeting the androgen pathway may not be a promising clinical strategy and sex hormone signaling in AML cells does not explain the poorer outcomes of men.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".