MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk of cardiovascular events with degarelix versus leuprolide after biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: Exploratory analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

2015· article· en· W1788564901 on OpenAlexaff
Celestia S. Higano, E. David Crawford, Neal D. Shore, Zsolt Bosnyák, Anders Malmberg, Anders Neijber, Laurence Klotz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerAndrogen deprivation therapyHazard ratioUrologyProportional hazards modelConfidence intervalInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

151 Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) risk in men. A pooled analysis of phase 3 trials comparing LHRH agonists with degarelix in PCa patients indicated a lower risk of CV events or death in those treated with degarelix. We now report the incidence of non-fatal CV events in men with PCa and pre-existing CV disease (CVD) treated with degarelix or leuprolide in the CS37 trial. Methods: CS37 was a prospective, randomized trial comparing intermittent (n=175) and continuous (n=50) degarelix with continuous leuprolide (n=178) in patients with biochemical relapse of PCa in the United States. CV events were retrospectively analyzed up to Month 12 (intermittent arm events censored at Month 7). Cox regression models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: 143 men (35%) had pre-existing CVD at baseline; 88 treated with degarelix and 55 treated with leuprolide. For degarelix and leuprolide treatment arms, median age (range) was 75 (51–88) and 73 (53–89) years and median BMI (range) 28.0 (17.7–40.7) and 30.1 (23.5–48.3) kg/m2, respectively. A slightly higher proportion of men treated with leuprolide than degarelix had a Gleason score of 7–10 (35 [64%] vs 46 [52%]) and slightly more men treated with degarelix vs leuprolide had hypertension (31 [35%] vs 15 [27%]), diabetes (70 [80%] vs 39 [71%]) and used statin medication (67 [76%] vs 36 [65%]) at baseline. The proportion of men who smoked or had hypercholesterolemia at baseline was similar between treatment arms. During the observation period, a subsequent CV event occurred in 3 (3.4%) men treated with degarelix and 8 (14.5%) treated with leuprolide (HR=0.22; 95% CI 0.05–1.03, p=0.054). Conclusions: Retrospective analysis of men with pre−existing CVD in CS37 identified a lower risk for subsequent CV events in men treated with degarelix vs leuprolide. The difference in CV event risk was seen within 12 months of treatment initiation. Our analysis adds to previous data on CV risk with ADT and supports consideration of CV risk factors when choosing a drug for androgen deprivation.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207