Screening and early hormonal treatment of prostate cancer are accumulating strong evidence and support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: I review the data published during the last 5 years on the effects of early treatment of prostate cancer on survival. METHODS: Data from prospective and randomized studies as well as from population-based studies are presented. RESULTS: Two studies (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group) in stage T3 disease have shown that long-term (3 years or indefinite, respectively) androgen blockade prolongs life in patients receiving androgen blockade in addition to radiotherapy compared to radiotherapy alone. In the UK Medical Research Council study, androgen blockade at diagnosis of locally advanced or asymptomatic patients decreased cancer-specific death by 21% compared to delayed treatment. A 69% decrease in prostate cancer death was observed in the Quebec Randomized Prostate Cancer Screening Study. Population-based studies in Sweden and Denmark have shown that 62% and 63%, respectively, of patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer will die from the disease if not treated immediately. Decreases in prostate cancer death rate of 6.3-23% have been found between 1991-1997 in the US and Canada, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of localized disease has been shown in all the available randomized studies to cause a marked decrease in prostate cancer death. Simple use of the available screening procedures and treatments for localized prostate cancer could cause a dramatic decrease in prostate cancer death.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".