MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142629844 · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.57.7510

Final Report of the Intergroup Randomized Study of Combined Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Plus Radiotherapy Versus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Alone in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

2015· article· en· W2142629844 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Malcolm D. Mason, Wendy R. Parulekar, Matthew R. Sydes, Michael Brundage, Peter Kirkbride, Mary Gospodarowicz, Richard Cowan, Edmund Kostashuk, John Anderson, Gregory P. Swanson, Mahesh Parmar, Charles Hayter, Gordana Jovic, Andrea Hiltz, John Hetherington, Jinka Sathya, J. Barber, Michael McKenzie, Salah El‐Sharkawi, Luís Souhami, P.D.J. Hardman, Bingshu E. Chen, Padraig Warde

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Cancer InstituteMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityCardiff UniversityUniversity College LondonJames Cook UniversityCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerAndrogen deprivation therapyHazard ratioRandomized controlled trialRadiation therapyUrologyInternal medicineOncologyProstate-specific antigenCancerConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We have previously reported that radiotherapy (RT) added to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improves survival in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. Here, we report the prespecified final analysis of this randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NCIC Clinical Trials Group PR.3/Medical Research Council PR07/Intergroup T94-0110 was a randomized controlled trial of patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Patients with T3-4, N0/Nx, M0 prostate cancer or T1-2 disease with either prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of more than 40 μg/L or PSA of 20 to 40 μg/L plus Gleason score of 8 to 10 were randomly assigned to lifelong ADT alone or to ADT+RT. The RT dose was 64 to 69 Gy in 35 to 39 fractions to the prostate and pelvis or prostate alone. Overall survival was compared using a log-rank test stratified for prespecified variables. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred five patients were randomly assigned between 1995 and 2005, 602 to ADT alone and 603 to ADT+RT. At a median follow-up time of 8 years, 465 patients had died, including 199 patients from prostate cancer. Overall survival was significantly improved in the patients allocated to ADT+RT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.85; P < .001). Deaths from prostate cancer were significantly reduced by the addition of RT to ADT (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P < .001). Patients on ADT+RT reported a higher frequency of adverse events related to bowel toxicity, but only two of 589 patients had grade 3 or greater diarrhea at 24 months after RT. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates that the previously reported benefit in survival is maintained at a median follow-up of 8 years and firmly establishes the role of RT in the treatment of men with locally advanced prostate cancer.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.447
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

Citations259
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207