1736 OBESITY IS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED PROSTATE GROWTH AND ATTENUATED PROSTATE VOLUME REDUCTION BY DUTASTERIDE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Epidemiology and Natural History/Evaluation and Markers1 Apr 20121736 OBESITY IS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED PROSTATE GROWTH AND ATTENUATED PROSTATE VOLUME REDUCTION BY DUTASTERIDE Roberto Muller, Leah Gerber, Daniel Moreira, Gerald Andriole, J. Kellogg Parsons, Neil Fleshner, and Stephen Freedland Roberto MullerRoberto Muller Durham, NC More articles by this author , Leah GerberLeah Gerber Durham, NC More articles by this author , Daniel MoreiraDaniel Moreira New Hyde Park, NY More articles by this author , Gerald AndrioleGerald Andriole Saint Louis, MO More articles by this author , J. Kellogg ParsonsJ. Kellogg Parsons San Diego, CA More articles by this author , Neil FleshnerNeil Fleshner Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , and Stephen FreedlandStephen Freedland Durham, NC More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1697AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Many recent studies focused on modifiable risk factors for BPH (i.e. obesity and others). Cross-sectional studies showed that obesity is associated with larger prostate volumes (PV). However, the effect of obesity on PV changes over time has been less studied, especially in men using 5α-reductase inhibitors. We tested if BMI is associated with changes in PV in a clinical trial of men at increased risk for prostate cancer. METHODS The Reduction by Dutasteride of Cancer Events (REDUCE) Trial was a 4-year randomized study of dutasteride vs. placebo for prevention of prostate cancer. Men were aged 50-75 years, had a pre-study PSA between 2.5-10 ng/mL, a prior negative biopsy for prostate cancer, and a pre-study PV <80cc. PV was obtained from TRUS during biopsies at 2 and 4 years and compared to baseline values for percent change. Of 8122 men in the efficacy population and after censoring any PV measurements after prostatic surgery, 4541 (55.9%) men had PV data at both baseline and 4-years. Of these, we excluded 112 men (2.5%) due to missing data or extreme changes in PV from baseline due to concerns about spurious values. BMI was tested continuously and in groups (<25, 25-29.9, 30-34.9, ≥35 kg/m2). We used multivariable linear regression to test if BMI was associated with PV changes at 4 years. Models were adjusted for confounders. RESULTS At baseline, men with higher BMI were younger (61.2 vs. 63.3 y for highest vs. lowest group, P-trend <0.001) and had larger PV (50.7 vs. 45.7 mL for highest vs. lowest group, P-trend<0.001). At 4-year, unadjusted analyses showed that higher baseline BMI was associated with increased PV growth in the placebo arm and attenuated PV reduction in the dutasteride arm (Fig). On multivariable analysis, relative to men with a BMI <25 kg/m2, men with a BMI >35 kg/m2 had 14.3% larger PV volume growth for men on the placebo arm (P=0.002) and 10.4% less PV reduction in men on dutasteride (P<0.001). There was no significant interaction between obesity and treatment arm (P=0.49). CONCLUSIONS In men with an elevated PSA and a negative biopsy, higher BMI was associated with increased PV growth and attenuation of PV reduction by dutasteride. Given obesity appears to be linked with PV growth, future studies are warranted to test if weight loss can slow prostate growth. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e700 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Roberto Muller Durham, NC More articles by this author Leah Gerber Durham, NC More articles by this author Daniel Moreira New Hyde Park, NY More articles by this author Gerald Andriole Saint Louis, MO More articles by this author J. Kellogg Parsons San Diego, CA More articles by this author Neil Fleshner Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Stephen Freedland Durham, NC 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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».