MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A phase II study of enzalutamide (Enz) with dutasteride (Dut) or finasteride (Fin) in men ≥ 65 years with hormone-naive systemic prostate cancer (HNSPCa): Tolerability and geriatric asssessment (GA) results.

2019· article· en· W2947696102 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jason Zittel, Chunkit Fung, Dilip Babu, Elizabeth A. Guancial, Deepak M. Sahasrabudhe, Kathryn Bylow, John Burfeind, Kaylinn Musto, Bokai Wang, Amita Patil, Edward M. Messing, Supriya G. Mohile, Deepak Kilari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityProstate cancerAndrogen deprivation therapyInternal medicineAndrogen deficiencyGeriatric Depression ScaleAdverse effectUrologyCancerAndrogenEndocrinologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e16518 Background: Older men are at a high risk for adverse events (AEs) from androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In this phase II study, we evaluated Enz and Dut/Fin in lieu of ADT for at-risk older patients with HNSPCa. Methods: Eligible patients were ≥65 years (y); at high risk of AEs from ADT by GA or treating physicians; metastatic (M1) or non-metastatic (M0) HNSPCa with a PSA doubling time ≤ 9 months and testosterone > 50ng/dl. They received Enz 160 mg/day and Dut 0.5 mg/day or Fin 5 mg/day until disease progression. GA was performed at baseline and week (wk) 61 and/or at the time of progression. GA included validated tests: Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), fall history, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA). The prevalence of impairment for each assessment was calculated; change in prevalence from baseline to wk 61 was analyzed using paired sample t-test. Results: 43 patients were enrolled in the study. Median age at enrollment was 78 y (range 66-94) and 93% were ECOG 0-1; 37% (n = 16) had M0 and 63% (n = 27) had M1 HNSPCa, with the majority (67%) having Gleason 6 or 7 disease. At baseline, 18.6% met the cutoff for impairment for IADLs, 53.7% for SPPB, 7.9% for GDS and 64.3% for MOCA; 9.8% had a recent fall. Median baseline PSA was 11.38 ng/ml (range: 2-145). At the time of analysis, 29 men (67.4%) remain on study treatment. 95.3%, 74.4% and 46.5% of patients reported at least one Grade 1, 2 or 3 AE respectively. No patient had a Grade 4 AE and one Grade 5 AE was reported but was an unrelated event. The most common Grade 3 AEs were hypertension (27.8%), GI (19.4%), and cardiac (8.3%); all Grade 3 GI AEs reported were deemed unrelated to the study drugs. Only impairment in ≥ 1 IADL showed a statistically significant increase in prevalence at wk 61 of treatment (40.6%) compared to baseline (18.6%, p = 0.036). Conclusions: For older men with HNSPCa, Enz with Dut/Fin demonstrated efficacy with reasonable toxicity profile, and no significant impact on the majority of GA domains. Clinical trial information: NCT02213107.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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