Duration of Short-Course Androgen Suppression Therapy and the Risk of Death As a Result of Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We evaluated whether the duration of androgen suppression therapy (AST) had an impact on the risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in men with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PC) within established Gleason score (GS) categories. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2, 1996, and December 27, 2001, 761 men with unfavorable-risk PC were treated in Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, or the United States in a randomized trial with radiotherapy and 3, 4, or 6 months of AST (the study cohort). Competing risks regression was used to evaluate whether the duration of AST interacted with GS and was significantly associated with the risk of PCSM, adjusting for age, trial site, and PC prognostic factors. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 10.9 years, 263 men died, 111 (42%) from PC. For all men, 6 versus 3 or 4 months of AST was associated with a reduced risk of PCSM (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.82; P = .004). AHRs evaluating the impact of the duration of AST on the risk of PCSM were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.29 to 1.56; P = .35), 0.47 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.85; P = .01), and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.30 to 1.19; P = .14) for men with GS ≤ 6, 7, and 8 to 10 PC, respectively. Therefore, the strongest evidence for this benefit was in men with GS 7 PC. CONCLUSION: AST durations of no less than 6 months should be considered when treating GS 7 PC with conventional dose RT.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".