Use of combined androgen blockade for advanced prostate cancer in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Initial androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for metastatic prostate cancer with combined androgen blockade (luteinizing-hormone releasing hormone agonist [LHRH agonist] plus antiandrogen) is not recommended in British Columbia (BC). However, this is difficult to monitor since ADT includes concurrent antiandrogen for the first month of LHRH agonist to prevent disease flare. We describe the prevalence of CAB use in BC and its financial impact. METHODS: This was a population-based, retrospective analysis. Patients started on LHRH agonist in January 2005 to December 2006 were identified from the BC Cancer Agency database. CAB was defined as greater than 1 month of antiandrogen concurrently with LHRH agonist. Incremental cost of CAB was based on an average 18 months of therapy from the pivotal CAB study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was based on life-year gained (LYG) from the Prostate Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group meta-analysis. Estimated financial impact for 2007-2008 was based on an annual increase by 5.5% in prevalence of prostate cancer in BC. RESULTS: A total of 2751 patients were identified. CAB was used in 607 patients (22%), associated with an incremental cost of CDN$1768 and ICER of CDN$11,220/LYG per patient. Total incremental cost was CDN$1,073,176 and estimated to be CDN$1,398,644 for January 2007 to December 2008. CONCLUSION: Nearly one-quarter of patients were treated with CAB for metastatic prostate cancer even though it was not recommended in BC. Additional cost of CAB use was considerable, at CDN$1768 per patient. With increased prevalence of prostate cancer, this has important budget implication for funding agencies which do to recommend CAB.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".