MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976887636 · doi:10.1002/cncr.21989

Final results of the Canadian prospective phase II trial of intermittent androgen suppression for men in biochemical recurrence after radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer

2006· article· en· W1976887636 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicholas Bruchovsky, Laurence Klotz, Juanita Crook, Shawn Malone, Charles Ludgate, William Morris, Martin Gleave, S. Larry Goldenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyOttawa HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCyproterone acetateProstate cancerUrologyAndrogen suppressionRadiation therapyCyproteroneProspective cohort studyProstate-specific antigenAndrogen deprivation therapyInternal medicineProstateCancerAntiandrogenAndrogenHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This prospective Phase II study was undertaken to evaluate intermittent androgen suppression as a form of therapy in men with localized prostate cancer who failed after they received external beam irradiation. METHODS: Patients who demonstrated a rising serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level after they received radiotherapy and who were without evidence of distant metastasis were accepted into the study. Treatment in each cycle consisted of cyproterone acetate given as lead-in therapy for 4 weeks, followed by a combination of leuprolide acetate and cyproterone acetate, which ended after a total of 36 weeks. RESULTS: Of 109 patients registered, 103 patients were eligible for interruption of treatment, yielding a PSA response rate of 95%. The study continued for 6 years with a mean follow-up of 3.7 years (median follow-up, 4.2 years). The time off treatment averaged 53% of the total cycle time but, in absolute terms, decreased with each succeeding cycle, ranging from 63.7 weeks in Cycle 1 to 25.6 weeks in Cycle 5. Prostate volume was reduced by 40% in Cycle 1 and by 34% in Cycle 2, and there were no decreases in Cycle 3 or Cycle 4. At the end of the trial, 38.5% of patients still were receiving treatment, 23.9% of patients had failed, and 15.6% of patients had died. Only 2% of deaths were cancer-specific. CONCLUSIONS: Biochemical recurrence after irradiation for localized prostate cancer was amenable to cyclic androgen withdrawal therapy and showed a high response rate. Despite progressively shorter treatment cycles, the off-treatment interval remained appreciable, ranging from 65% in Cycle 1 to 46% in Cycle 5.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations113
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207