PD50-03 CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS AND PROSTATE CANCER DIAGNOSES IN MEN TREATED WITH TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Medical, Hormonal & Non-surgical Therapy II1 Apr 2016PD50-03 CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS AND PROSTATE CANCER DIAGNOSES IN MEN TREATED WITH TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY Christopher Wallis, Kirk Lo, Yuna Lee, Yonah Krakowsky, Alaina Garbens, Raj Satkunasivam, Sender Herschorn, Ronald Kodama, Patrick Cheung, Steven Narod, and Robert Nam Christopher WallisChristopher Wallis More articles by this author , Kirk LoKirk Lo More articles by this author , Yuna LeeYuna Lee More articles by this author , Yonah KrakowskyYonah Krakowsky More articles by this author , Alaina GarbensAlaina Garbens More articles by this author , Raj SatkunasivamRaj Satkunasivam More articles by this author , Sender HerschornSender Herschorn More articles by this author , Ronald KodamaRonald Kodama More articles by this author , Patrick CheungPatrick Cheung More articles by this author , Steven NarodSteven Narod More articles by this author , and Robert NamRobert Nam More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.2793AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently issued a caution that testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) may increase the risk of heart attack and stroke. This was based primarily on studies that had short follow-up and limited duration of treatment. We sought to determine the association of the long-term use of TRT and rates of cardiovascular events, prostate cancer, and overall mortality. METHODS We conducted a population-based, retrospective matched cohort study of patients treated from 2007-2012 in Ontario, Canada. We examined men aged 66 years and older treated with TRT and matched controls. Testosterone replacement therapy, measured as a cumulative dose exposure. We examined the following outcomes: 1) cardiovascular events (defined as myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and venous thromboembolism); 2) prostate cancer; and 3) overall mortality. RESULTS We examined 10,311 patients treated with TRT and 28,029 matched controls. Over a median follow-up of 5.1 years, patients who had the lowest tertile of cumulative testosterone dose exposure had an increased risk of cardiovascular events (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09-1.46) and overall mortality (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.14-1.33), but not prostate cancer, compared to their matched-controls. In contrast, patients who had the highest tertile of cumulative testosterone dose exposure had a decreased risk for cardiovascular events (HR 0.84, 95% 0.72-0.98), prostate cancer (HR 0.60, 95% 0.45-0.80), and overall mortality (HR 0.56, 95% 0.52-0.61), compared to their matched controls. For each endpoint, there was a statistically significant trend for decreasing risk with increasing cumulative dose exposure to testosterone (p-value for trend from <0.0001 to 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Testosterone replacement therapy appears to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events, prostate cancer diagnoses and overall mortality in a dose-responsive manner. Due to the observational nature of the data, selection bias and the health user effect must be considered. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e1186-e1187 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Christopher Wallis More articles by this author Kirk Lo More articles by this author Yuna Lee More articles by this author Yonah Krakowsky More articles by this author Alaina Garbens More articles by this author Raj Satkunasivam More articles by this author Sender Herschorn More articles by this author Ronald Kodama More articles by this author Patrick Cheung More articles by this author Steven Narod More articles by this author Robert Nam More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,074 | 0,010 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».