Dutasteride and bicalutamide in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer: the Therapy Assessed by Rising PSA (TARP) study rationale and design.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bicalutamide blocks androgen action in men with prostate cancer but has low affinity for the androgen receptor compared to dihydrotestosterone (DHT). Dutasteride, a dual 5-reductase inhibitor (5ARI), blocks the conversion of testosterone to DHT, reduces tumor volume and improves PSA in prostate cancer. Bicalutamide should be a more effective antiandrogen if it competes against intraprostatic testosterone, rather than DHT, for the androgen receptor. The Therapy Assessed by Rising PSA (TARP) study investigates dutasteride in combination with bicalutamide to prevent or delay disease progression in patients with castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) after initial androgen deprivation therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This ongoing US and Canada multicenter trial with patients with rising PSAs while on a GnRH analogue are randomized to double-blind treatment with dutasteride 3.5 mg and bicalutamide 50 mg or placebo and bicalutamide 50 mg once daily. Inclusion criteria include three rising PSA levels despite a GnRH analogue or surgical castration, and no radiographic evidence of metastases. The entry PSA values must be 2.0 ng/ml-20.0 ng/ml and serum testosterone level < 50 ng/dl. The primary endpoint is time to disease progression determined by PSA, or radiographic progression. CONCLUSIONS: TARP will be the first study to evaluate the effects of dutasteride and an antiandrogen in patients failing GnRH analogue and help elucidate the potential role of a dual 5ARI in reducing the rate of progression in non-metastatic CRPC.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".