Quality of life findings from a multicenter, multinational, observational study of patients with metatstatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8106 Background: Although Quality of Life (QoL) is often reported in randomized clinical trials, few data exist outside the setting of investigational treatment intervention. A multinational observational study of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer (M+HRPC) was conducted to study QoL as assayed by different instruments and to study resource utilization and clinical practices. This abstract focuses on the QoL aspect of this study. Methods: 280 patients were enrolled in the US, Canada (North America, n = 99), the UK, France, Germany, Italy (Europe, n = 141), and Australia (n = 40). QoL data were collected using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ C-30) and Euro-Qol (EQ-5D) surveys at baseline and at months 3, 6, and 9. Mean change from baseline to final visit was computed for each domain, and statistical testing was conducted using paired t-tests (baseline vs final). A trend test using mixed models was conducted to determine if the slope of change of QoL over time was different from zero. Results: The table below lists baseline mean, final visit mean, mean change results, and trend test parameter estimates for the QoL domains. With the exception of the EORTC Pain Domain, higher scores indicate better QoL. P <0.001 for each mean change and trend test result. Conclusions: Patients experienced a statistically significant and rapid decline in QoL. These data quantify the deterioration of QoL and illustrate the opportunity and need for palliative therapy in patients with M+HRPC. Author Disclosure Employment or Leadership Consultant or Advisory Role Stock Ownership Honoraria Research Funding Expert Testimony Other Remuneration Abbott Laboratories Abbott Laboratories Abbott Laboratories Abbott Laboratories, Chiron
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".