Androgen-deprivation therapy and bone loss in prostate cancer patients: a clinical review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has become a standard of care in the management of advanced prostate cancer or as an adjunct therapy. However, ADT is associated with a well-known deleterious effect on bone health, resulting in a decrease in bone-mass density (BMD) and increased risk for fracture. With the longer life expectancy of prostate cancer patients, improvement of the quality of life has become increasingly important. Therefore, adequate screening, prevention and treatment of BMD loss is paramount. Zoledronic acid and denosumab have shown promising results in recent studies, which has led to the Food and Drug Administration approval of these treatment options in various settings throughout the course of the disease, including the prevention of ADT-associated bone loss. This review focuses on the various parameters that impact BMD loss in men initiating ADT, on the specific effect of ADT on bone health and on various lifestyle modifications and treatment options such as bisphosphonates, osteoclast-targeted therapy and selective estrogen-receptor modulators that have shown promising results in recent studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".