Fracture risk in androgen deprivation therapy: a Canadian population based analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer is the most common noncutaneous malignancy diagnosed in men. The use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay of treatment for metastatic disease. The use of ADT has been reported to increase the risk of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer, with higher risk of fracture than age matched controls. We sought to confirm the higher fracture risk of men with prostate cancer on ADT in the Canadian population. METHODS: We used the Population Health Research Data Repository housed at Manitoba Centre for Health Policy to identify all cases of fractures of the hip, vertebra, or wrist in men aged 50 years and older occurring between 1996 and 2004. Each case was matched with up to three controls by age, sex, ethnicity and medical comorbidity. We calculated the odds ratios (OR) for fracture with prostate cancer, and with or without ADT, after adjusting for possible confounding variables. RESULTS: There were 4696 cases of fracture matched with 14080 controls. After controlling for confounding variables, there was no significant association between prostate cancer and fracture risk (adjusted OR = 0.97, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.83-1.15). We detected a significant association between ADT and fracture risk in men. The adjusted ORs for current and past ADT usage were 1.71 (95% CI: 1.13 - 2.58) and 2.42 (95% CI: 1.42-4.12) respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that prostate cancer itself does not increase the risk of fracture and corroborate published results demonstrating an association between ADT and fractures.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".