Bone health in men with prostate cancer: diagnostic and therapeutic considerations.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With current treatments, men usually survive many years after being diagnosed with prostate cancer. However, the systemic effects of prostate cancer and therapies such as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can undermine skeletal integrity, resulting in skeletal complications that may erode quality of life (QOL). Prostate cancer patients are at risk for fractures from cancer treatment-induced bone loss. In addition, they are also at risk for pathologic fractures, severe bone pain, and other sequelae from bone metastases, which almost invariably occur during the progression of prostate cancer. This review investigates the incidence and pathophysiology of bone loss and skeletal morbidity in prostate cancer patients and reviews available treatment options for maintaining skeletal health throughout the continuum of care for these patients. Several supportive interventions are available to prevent generalized and localized bone loss, including calcium and vitamin D supplements and bisphosphonates. Oral calcium and vitamin D supplementation alone, however, appears to be insufficient to prevent bone loss during ADT. New generation bisphosphonates such as zoledronic acid can prevent bone loss for patients on ADT and can reduce skeletal morbidity for those with bone metastases.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".