MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092523695 · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2020.7576

Contemporary Population-Based Analysis of Bone Mineral Density Testing in Men Initiating Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

2020· article· en· W3092523695 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jason Hu, Armen Aprikian, Marie Vanhuyse, Alice Dragomir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAndrogen deprivation therapyProstate cancerInternal medicineOsteoporosisBone mineralOdds ratioCohortPopulationOncologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a cornerstone of treatment for advanced prostate cancer (PCa); however, it accelerates the loss of bone mineral density (BMD), which increases fracture risk. Guidelines recommend BMD testing when initiating ADT to assess baseline fracture risk properly. The objective of this study was to examine the proportion of BMD testing in men initiating ADT in Quebec and to identify factors associated with receipt of this testing. METHODS: The study cohort consisted of men extracted from Quebec public healthcare insurance administrative databases who initiated continuous ADT from 2000 to 2015 for >12 months. The primary study outcome was receipt of BMD testing in the period from 6 months before through 12 months after ADT initiation. Multivariable generalized linear mixed regression modeling with a logit link was performed to identify variables associated with BMD testing. RESULTS: We identified 22,033 patients, of whom 3,910 (17.8%) underwent BMD testing. Rates of BMD testing increased from 4.1% in 2000 to 23.4% in 2015. After multivariable analyses, prior history of osteoporosis (odds ratio [OR], 1.84; 95% CI, 1.32-2.57; P<.001), rheumatoid arthritis (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.15-2.34; P=.006), use of bisphosphonates (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.25-1.73; P<.001), and long-term corticosteroid use (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.15-2.31; P=.006) were associated with higher odds of BMD testing. Patient age >80 years (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.59-0.76; P<.001), metastases (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89; P<.001), higher Charlson comorbidity score (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.81; P<.001), and rural residence (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68-0.87; P<.001) were associated with lower odds of BMD testing. CONCLUSIONS: In our study population, BMD testing rates in men initiating ADT were low, although they increased over the years especially in the years after the publication of recommendations for BMD testing in these patients. Potential gaps identified include being older, more comorbid, and rural areas. Overall, additional efforts emphasizing the importance of BMD testing in PCa guidelines may be needed.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer NetworkSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207