MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Causes of death in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy: Analysis from two phase III trials.

2016· article· en· W2591501973 on OpenAlexaff
Abdenour Nabid, Nathalie Carrier, Éric Vigneault, André‐Guy Martin, Luís Souhami, Marie Duclos, Jean-Paul Bahary, T.V. Nguyen-Huynh, Céline Lemaire, Marc-André Brassard, Sylvie Vass, Boris Bahoric, Robert Archambault, F. Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Mauricie-et-du-Centre-du-QuébecCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeMcGill University Health CentreCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de ChicoutimiCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerInternal medicinePopulationCancerRadiation therapyUrologyCause of deathAndrogen deprivation therapyProstateOncologyGastroenterologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

34 Background: The purpose of this analysis was to establish causes of death in a population of intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer treated on two phase III trials. Methods: From October 2000 to September 2010, 1,230 patients were randomized: 630 with HR (ClinicalTrials.gov, #NCT00223171) and 600 with IR (#NCT00223145). HR was defined as T3-4, PSA >20 g/ml, Gleason >7 (with at least one of these 3 factors). IR was defined as T1-T2, Gleason < 6 and PSA 10-20 ng/ml or T1-T2, Gleason 7 and PSA < 20 ng/ml. Causes of death were compiled until July 2015 and were established from data sent by the different investigators and centrally reviewed. Causes of death were mainly based on data from clinical records, then by family members, obituaries, death certificates and family physicians. Results: The median follow-up for the 1,230 patients was 7.5 years (HR 8 vs. IR 6.8 years, p<0.001). 30.2% (372/1,230) patients had died: (HR 37% vs. IR 23.2%, p<0.001). A total of 8% (99/1,230) patients developed local, regional, and metastatic prostate cancer recurrences: (HR 11.6% vs. IR 4.3%, p<0.001) and 4.4% (54/1,230) died from prostate cancer: (HR 7.3% vs. IR 1.3%, p<0.001). The most frequent cause of death was a second cancer (120/1,230, 9.8%): (HR 10.6% vs. IR 8.8%, p=NS). Cardiovascular deaths occurred in 6.3% (78/1,230) (HR 7.1% vs. IR 5.5%, p=NS) with no statistical difference between the different durations of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) 0, 6, 18, or 36 months. Other causes of death were pulmonary (3.7%), digestive (1.1%), others (3.3%), and unknown (1.7%). Majority of deaths occurred between 3 and 9 years after randomization (HR 70% and IR 73%). Prostate cancer deaths were distributed over all the follow-up period. The 5/10 year overall survival between HR and IR were 88.6%, 91.8%, and 61.6%, 69.8%, respectively with significant differences (p=0.045 and p=0.016). Conclusions: In patients with localized HR and IR prostate cancer, the first cause of death was a second cancer and prostate cancer came as the third one after cardiovascular disease. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of cardiovascular deaths in patients treated with different durations of ADT. Clinical trial information: Clinical Trials, gov. #NCT00223145 - Clinical Trials, gov. #NCT00223171.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.009
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→