Incidence of testosterone escape with LHRH agonists in patients receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
24 Background: LHRH agonists (LHRHa) are commonly combined with radiotherapy in the neoadjuvant, concurrent, and adjuvant setting. Testosterone escape (TTE) (>1.74 nmol/L or >50 ng/dL) during therapy with LHRHa has been described, but the incidence and impact of TTE on outcome in this patient group needs to be characterized further. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of a database used for clinical outcomes and research ethics board approved studies, including chart audit of select patients (pts) where information was missing. To be included in the study, there had to be information on: 1) type of LHRHa, date of initiation, date of cessation, or duration of therapy and 2) radiotherapy information, with at least 6 months of follow-up after radiotherapy, 3) had to have radiotherapy to the prostate or prostate bed, and 4) had to have a least one testosterone- (TT) and prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) measurement. Results: 670 pts had a start date for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the database. 630 pts had received an LHRHa, 560 pts had a start date for radiotherapy. 375 pts had sufficient information on ADT, radiotherapy, TT, and PSA levels, and 361 of these patients had information regarding their LHRHa. Median follow-up of patients still alive is 4.7 years. The median duration of LHRHa was 2.02 years. The median number of testosterone measurements per patient was 6. The incidence of TTE per patient course of treatment was: buserelin 9.3%; goserelin 10.5%; leuprolide IM 11.5%; leuprolide sc 23.9%; triptorelin 6.7% (p=0.02). Biochemical failure was defined as per the "nadir +2" definition, or at a value > 0.2 in those patients having had previous radical prostatectomy. There was no significant difference in either biochemical failure-free survival or overall survival in patients who experienced TTE versus those who did not. The most common PSA level during a TTE was an undetectable PSA. Conclusions: Even though there appears to be no impact of TTE on either biochemical relapse-free survival or overall survival, this study demonstrates that a rising PSA does not rule out TTE. Longer-term follow-up is planned.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".