MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Impact of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on bone mineral density (BMD) over 3 years in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer.

2012· article· en· W2559827739 on OpenAlexaff
Shabbir M.H. Alibhai, Hassanabbas Z. Mohamedali, Abbas H. Panju, Narhari Timilshina, Henriette Breunis, S. Duff Canning, Neil Fleshner, Murray Krahn, Gary Naglie, Ian F. Tannock, George Tomlinson, Padraig Warde, Angela M. Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAndrogen deprivation therapyProstate cancerFemoral neckBone mineralOsteoporosisUrologyOsteopeniaVitamin D and neurologyInternal medicineCancerOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

193 Background: Decreased BMD is a common side effect of ADT, leading to increased fracture risk. Although loss of BMD appears to be greatest within the first 12 months of starting ADT, few data on BMD changes exist beyond 12 months, and other risk factors for bone loss in men on ADT are not well-characterized. Methods: Men age 50+ with non-metastatic prostate cancer and starting continuous ADT were enrolled in a prospective longitudinal study. BMD was determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and yearly for 3 years. A matched control group of men with prostate cancer but not on ADT was also enrolled. Medication use was recorded at each visit. Multivariable regression analyses were done to examine predictors of BMD loss. Results: 80 ADT users and 80 controls were enrolled (mean age 69.4 y); 49.7% had osteopenia and 4.6% had osteoporosis at baseline. ADT was associated with significant losses in lumbar spine BMD in year 1 compared to controls (p=0.004) and trends towards greater declines at femoral neck and total hip sites. Changes in year 2 and 3 were much smaller and not statistically different from controls (Table). Vitamin D use but not calcium use was associated with improved BMD at the lumbar spine in year 1 (+5.77%, p=0.006) with positive trends at other sites (+2.19% femoral neck, +1.76% total hip) primarily in year 1. Age was not associated with changes in BMD. Conclusions: Losses in BMD with ADT use are greatest at the lumbar spine and in the first year compared to years 2 and 3 and are independent of age. Vitamin D appears to be protective particularly in the first year of ADT use. [Table: see text]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.389 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBone health and treatments→French-language works237,207→