MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cognitive changes in men undergoing complete androgen blockade for non-metastatic prostate cancer

2014· article· en· W3030360390 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhiqiang Zhang, Dexin Yu, Dongdong Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueZhonghua miniao waike zazhi · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAndrogenBlockadeProstatectomyUrologyTestosterone (patch)Significant differenceProspective cohort studyCognitionInternal medicineCancerCognitive impairmentHormoneReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To observe and assess the cognitive changes in older men undergoing complete androgen blockade for non-metastatic prostate cancer.Methods A prospective study was conducted among 38 patients (74.5 ± 4.3) years with non-metastatic prostate cancer undergoing complete androgen blockade and 37 controls (71.9±5.1) years with non-metastatic prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy.Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) were performed in all subjects at tbe beginning and 6,12months after the study,and the differences were analyzed statistically.There was no statistically significant difference between CAB group and control (27.92±1.05 vs 27.97±0.80,P=0.81) in the overall scores of MoCA at the onset of the study.Results There were no significant differences between two groups in the baseline of testosterone [(12.07±3.68 nmol/L) vs (12.51±3.91 nmolL),P=0.62].Six months later,the scores of visuospatial and executive function,attention,memories in the items of MoCA and total MoCA scores between CAB group and control were (4.26±0.59 vs 4.70±0.46,P=0.001),(4.87±0.66 vs 5.38±0.56,P=0.001),(4.08±0.70 vs 4.62±0.64,P=0.001) and (26.63±0.91 vs 27.78±0.82,P<0.001),and there were significant differences between two groups.There were no significant differences between CAB group and control in the items of MoCA score,including language (2.81±0.39 vs 2.78±0.42,P=0.73),abstract thinking (1.92±0.27 vs 1.92±0.28,P =0.97),orientation (5.84± 0.36 vs 5.65± 0.36,P =0.18)and naming (2.89±0.30 vs 2.73±0.44,P=0.07).Twelve months later,the scores of visuospatial and executive function,attention,memories and total MoCA scores between CAB group and control were (4.29±0.61vs4.70±0.46,P=0.002),(5.02±0.67 vs 5.49±0.56,P=0.002),(3.84±0.64 vs4.68±0.53,P<0.001)and (26.31±0.94 vs 27.87±0.84,P<0.001),and tbere were significant differences between two groups.There were no significant differences between CAB group and control in the items of MoCA score,including language (2.87±0.33 vs 2.78±0.42,P=0.34),abstract thinking (1.92±0.27 vs 1.84±0.38,P=0.27),orientation (5.68±0.47 vs 5.54±0.50,P=0.31).In CAB patients,the MoCA score was positively correlated with serum testosterone level 6(r=0.272,P=0.01) and 12 (r=0.218,P=0.009) months later.The prevalence of cognitive impairment in CAB (7/38,18.4%) was higher than the control (1/37,2.7%),and there were significant differences (x2 =4.79,P =0.029).Conclusions Non-metastatic prostate cancer undergoing complete androgen blockade have serious cognitive dysfunction,which is correlated with serum testosterone decrease.Visuospatial and executive function,memories,attention may be predictors of cognitive dvsfunction. Key words: Prostate cancer;  Complete androgen blockade;  Cognition;  Cognitive dysfunction

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhonghua miniao waike zazhiSame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207