Impact of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy on Physical Function and Quality of Life in Men With Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This prospective longitudinal study evaluated the effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on objective and self-reported physical function. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PC) starting continuous ADT were enrolled in this matched cohort study. Physical function was assessed with the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), grip strength, and the timed-up-and-go (TUG) test, representing endurance and upper and lower extremity strength, respectively. Quality of life (QOL) was measured with the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire. Subjects were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Two control groups (PC without ADT; no PC), matched on age, education, and baseline function were enrolled. Mixed effects regression models were fitted, adjusting for baseline covariates. RESULTS: We enrolled 87 patients on ADT, 86 PC controls, and 86 healthy controls; groups were similar in age (mean, 69.1 years; range, 50 to 87) and physical function. The 6MWT distance remained stable in the ADT group (P = .96) but improved in both control groups (P < .05). Grip strength declined in the ADT group (P = .04), remained stable in PC controls (P = .31), and improved in healthy controls (P = .008). TUG scores remained stable over time and across groups (P > .10). The SF-36 physical function summary score declined in the ADT group (P < .001), but increased in both control groups (P < .001). Negative effects on outcomes were observed within 3 months of starting ADT and were generally independent of age. CONCLUSION: Endurance, upper extremity strength, and physical components of QOL are affected within 3 months of starting ADT. Up-front exercise interventions to counteract these losses are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".