Comparative efficacy of local versus systemic salvage therapies for recurrent prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
221 Background: We sought to compare two common salvage strategies for radio-recurrent prostate cancer: androgen deprivation therapy (ADT: PR7 RCT NCT00003653) or local salvage ablation using cryotherapy (CRYO: single institution study Williams, Eur Urol. 2011;60(3):405). Methods: Pre-salvage therapy prognostic variables common to the two datasets (Gleason score at initial treatment, time from original RT, use of ADT at time of original RT, PSA at time of salvage, patient age) were used for propensity matching between patients from previously published ADT (1) and CRYO (2) datasets. Progression free survival (PFS, defined as time from initial treatment to development of castrate resistance or death); Disease Specific Survival (DSS, defined as time from salvage to prostate cancer related death) and Overall Survival (OS, defined as time from salvage to death from any cause) were compared between the propensity matched cohorts using Log-Rank and Cox PH regression statistics. Raw linear propensity scores included in the PH model to account for residual variability. A planned subset analysis examined the effect of neoadjuvant ADT among the CRYO cohort (no CRYO patients had adjuvant ADT). Results: Overall, 1119/1386 (ADT) and 172/187 (CRYO) patients were included in the propensity matched analysis. Median follow up was 6.7 yrs (ADT) and 18.7 yrs (CRYO). Median PFS (95% CI) was 10.7 yrs (9.5, 12.3) for CRYO vs. 7.0 yrs (6.1, 10.0) for ADT (HR 0.63 (0.44, 0.89), p = 0.009). Median OS was also longer for CRYO vs. ADT: 12.3 (11.0, 13.8) vs. 10.2 (9.4, not reached) yrs (HR 0.69; p = 0.02). 10 year DSS event rate was 16.5% CRYO vs. 18.5% ADT but was not statistically different. Neoadjuvant ADT did not affect outcomes in CRYO. Conclusions: A 3-year PFS and 2-year OS benefit was noted for the CRYO vs. ADT cohorts while no difference was noted in DSS. Potential explanations include residual bias not corrected for in the propensity scoring, variable follow-up duration, adverse effects from differing cumulative exposure to ADT or a combination of these factors. Prospective comparisons are required to control for these potential biases and compare other important outcomes such as side effects and quality of life.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | medium |
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".