The depressive effects of androgen deprivation therapy in locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer: a comparative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim To investigate association of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with depression and the effect of depression on cognitive functions in men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer.Methods A total of 144 patients were evaluated in a prospective, comparative study. Group1 consisted of 72 patients with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer who received complete ADT treatment continuously for 12 months and group2 (control group) consisted of 72 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy without any additional treatment. MoCA (The Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and HAM-D (Hamilton depression rating scale) tests were used to assess the effects of ADT on depression and cognitive functions.Results According to post-treatment results of MoCA test, patients had lower mean total scores in both the groups. The deficits were especially prominent in the areas of language ability and short-term memory capacity. In the comparison of two groups according to HAM-D tests, the scores were significantly higher in group1 at baseline-6 month, at baseline-12 month and at 6–12 month follow-up period (p = .003, p < .001, p = .023).There was a relationship between depression and deterioration of language and memory functions at 6th (p < .001, p = .002) and 12th months (p < .001, p = .046). Attention function was deteriorated in these patients at 6th (p < .001) and 12th months (p < .001).Conclusions ADT causes increase in depression and the deterioration of cognitive functions. ADT should be given carefully to these older group of patients with concomitant morbidities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".