MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008436256

CANFLAX: can flaxseed “milk” prevent broken hearts in women with breast cancer?

2023· dissertation· en· W7008436256 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytoestrogen effects and research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiotoxicityBreast cancerPlaceboAnthracyclineHeart failureBody mass indexRandomized controlled trialCancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cardiovascular disease and cancer are major public health concerns worldwide. Despite the beneficial effects of the anthracycline based anti-cancer agent Doxorubicin (DOX) in treating women with breast cancer, cardiotoxicity is a major challenge. Although recent basic science studies have demonstrated the cardioprotective role of flaxseed (FLX) in the prevention of DOX mediated cardiotoxicity, little is known about the effects of this nutraceutical in the clinical setting. The aim of the “Can flaxseed “milk” prevent broken hearts in women with breast cancer?” (CANFLAX) study is to investigate whether consumption of FLX “milk” can prevent heart failure in women with breast cancer treated with anthracyclines. Methods: In this double-blind prospective randomized controlled clinical trial, prior to initiation of DOX-based chemotherapy, women with breast cancer were randomized to either placebo oat fiber “milk” or FLX “milk” for a total of 4 months. Baseline demographic data, echocardiography, and blood work were measured at baseline, 4-months, 6-months and 12-months post-intervention. Baseline demographic data was collected using CancerCare Manitoba’s medical record database (ARIA) MedOncology Manager. Serial transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) was conducted to assess cardiovascular systolic and diastolic function, including strain parameters. Results: A total of 18 women with early-stage breast cancer (EBC) have been enrolled between September 2021 to December 2022 in the CANFLAX study. Out of the 18 participants, 15 women (mean age 4710 years) with average body mass index (BMI) of 295.2 kg/m2 have completed both the baseline and 4 month follow-up. Out of this cohort of 15 women, a total of 6 were randomized to group A and 9 were randomized to group B; the identity of the 2 study products is double-blinded. The prevalence of underlying cardiovascular risk factors was low in both groups. In total, 2 (13%) participants had hypertension, 1 (6%) participant had hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and past smoking history, and 5 (33%) participants had a family history of premature coronary artery disease (CAD). The overall “milk” adherence was rate was approximately 70% during the 16 week “milk” intake period. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the measured cardiovascular morphological or functional parameters. The baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) values were 683% and 694%, for groups A and B, respectively. At 4 months follow up, mean LVEF was 69±3% and 70±2% in group-A and group-B, respectively (p = NS). Additionally, at baseline, the mean global longitudinal strain (GLS) was -18.2±0.3% in group-A and -18.4±0.3% in group B (p=NS). At 4 months follow up, the GLS was lower in Group A at -14.9±0.2% in comparison to a GLS of -18.1±0.2% for Group B (p<0.05). Conclusion: The findings of the ongoing CANFLAX study highlight the feasibility of consuming either oat fibre “milk” or flax “milk” in women treated with anthracyclines for breast cancer. Whether the prophylactic administration of FLX “milk” is cardioprotective in the setting of anthracycline-mediated cardiotoxicity in the breast cancer setting remains to be determined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicPhytoestrogen effects and researchFrench-language works237,207