Impact of abiraterone acetate with and without prior docetaxel chemotherapy on the survival of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background:</h3> Abiraterone acetate was introduced in Quebec in 2012 for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in patients who had received chemotherapy with docetaxel. This study describes abiraterone use in the early postapproval period and its clinical effectiveness in Quebec, for both patients who had received docetaxel chemotherapy and those who could not receive docetaxel therapy owing to medical reasons. <h3>Methods:</h3> A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Quebec public health care administrative databases. Our cohort consisted of patients with mCRPC who received abiraterone between January 2012 and June 2013. Treatment groups were defined as patients who received abiraterone following docetaxel chemotherapy and those who received abiraterone without having had chemotherapy, under the "exception patient" measure. Study outcomes included overall survival, duration of abiraterone therapy and number of hospital days. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the effectiveness of abiraterone adjusted for several covariates. <h3>Results:</h3> Our cohort consisted of 303 patients with mCRPC treated with abiraterone (99 after chemotherapy and 204 as exception patients). The median age at initiation of abiraterone therapy was 75.0 for the postchemotherapy group and 80.0 for the exception patient group. The corresponding median survival values were 12 and 14 months (log-rank test <i>p</i> = 0.8). Risk of death was similar in the 2 groups (adjusted hazard ratio 0.89 [95% confidence interval 0.57-1.38]). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> The effectiveness of abiraterone in older patients who were ineligible for chemotherapy was similar to that of patients with prior docetaxel exposure. Overall, the real-world survival benefits of abiraterone were similar to those in the COU-AA-301 trial.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".