A review of the patterns of docetaxel use for hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) at the Princess Margaret Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e16161 Background: Docetaxel is standard of care for the treatment of HRPC, based on two large randomized clinical trials. The aim of this study was to determine if docetaxel use and effectiveness in routine clinical practice was similar to that seen in the TAX 327 randomized phase III clinical trial. Methods: A retrospective chart review was undertaken to assess patterns of docetaxel use for HRPC at our institution for the 2-year period since its approval for the first-line treatment of HRPC in 2005. Results: Eighty-eight patients, median age 71 and baseline PSA 107, received docetaxel in the first line setting. Main reasons for initiating docetaxel were rising PSA (90%) and progressive symptoms (71%). Eighteen percent of patients received docetaxel for rising PSA alone. A median of 7 cycles was administered. PSA response rates were 61%, time to response 1.5 months, and response duration 6.8 months. Disease progression was the most common reason for treatment discontinuation (36%). Main toxicities were fatigue (32%) and neuropathy (22%). Kaplan Meier survival analysis showed median duration of survival was 15.9 months (95% CI 12.4–20.5) from first drug use. 1-year survival was 0.63 (95% CI 0.52–0.72). Post-docetaxel, 36 patients received second-line treatment, mostly with mitoxantrone (89%). Second-line response rates were 22%, and median duration of response was 4 months. Conclusions: In routine clinical practice, docetaxel is a well-tolerated regimen for the treatment of HRPC. Response rates and toxicity profiles were comparable to the randomized trials. However, compared with the TAX 327 clinical trial, survival was slightly shorter than expected (15.9 vs. 18.9 months), possibly due to inclusion of patients with poorer performance status and comorbidities, who may be excluded from clinical trials. Second-line response rates were also comparable with previous reports. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".