MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131625900 · doi:10.1016/j.euf.2021.02.003

Liproca Depot: A New Antiandrogen Treatment for Active Surveillance Patients

2021· article· en· W3131625900 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence Klotz, Stefan Grudén, N. Axén, Charlotta Gauffin, Cecilia Wassberg, Anders Bjartell, Jonathan Giddens, Peter Incze, Kenneth Jansz, Mindaugas Jievaltas, Ricardo Rendon, Patrick O. Richard, Albertas Ulys, Teuvo L.J. Tammela

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology Focus · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeOakville-Trafalgar Memorial HospitalHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityProstate cancerUrologyProstateAntiandrogenProstate-specific antigenRadiation therapyAdverse effectSurgeryInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in nonmorbid treatments for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer with fewer side effects than surgery or radiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the tolerability, safety, and antitumor effects of the intraprostatic NanoZolid depot formulation Liproca Depot (LIDDS AB, Uppsala, Sweden) with antiandrogen 2-hydroxyflutamide (2-HOF) in men with low- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer managed with active surveillance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This clinical phase 2b trial, LPC-004, involved 61 patients. The 2-HOF-containing formulation Liproca Depot was injected transrectally into the prostate under ultrasound guidance. A single dose of 35% or 45% of the prostate volume (study part 1) and a fixed dose of 16 or 20 ml (study part 2) of the formulation were evaluated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: The primary endpoints were tolerability and the reduction in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 5 mo after injection. Antitumor effects were evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate biopsies. Quality of life was assessed using a validated questionnaire (International Prostate Symptom Score). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: All doses were safe and well tolerated, without hormonal side effects. In part 2 of the study, the PSA reduction was greatest for the group receiving 16 ml, with an average decrease of 14%, and 95% of patients had a PSA reduction. Some 78% of patients showed a prostate volume decrease compared to baseline. Prostate MRI and biopsies confirmed stable or reduced lesion size. However, post treatment biopsies were performed at the discretion of the investigator, and not routinely. Most patients were amenable to a second injection. CONCLUSIONS: PSA and prostate volume decreased in most patients. Indications of efficacy were shown by post-treatment MRI and biopsies demonstrating stabilization or regression in the majority of cases. PATIENT SUMMARY: Liproca Depot is a safe, minimally invasive treatment that offers the potential for cancer control in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Further clinical evaluation is warranted.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Urology FocusSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207