Androgen deprivation therapy and radiation for prostate cancer—cognitive impairment, sleep, symptom burden: a prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives This paper (1) sought to compare sleep, mood and physical symptom profiles of men with prostate cancer (PCa) who experienced subjective and objective cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) during the first year of treatment and (2) examine if fluctuations in mood and physical symptoms are associated with change in subjective or objective CRCI. Methods This prospective observational cohort study examined 24 new patients with PCa receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiation therapy (RT) during the first 12 months of treatment. Participants completed subjective and objective assessments of cognition, sleep continuity and self-report measures of insomnia, fatigue, depression and anxiety. Independent sample t-tests, correlations and hierarchical regressions were used to compare groups, explore associations, and assess change over time. Effects are reported as corrected Cohen’s d (d c ). Results Men with objective CRCI reported worse subjective time asleep (d c =0.47) and more depression (d c =0.55). Men with subjective CRCI reported worse insomnia (d c =0.99), hot flashes (d c =0.76), sleep quality (d c =0.54), subjective total sleep time (d c =0.41), wake after sleep onset (d c =0.71), sleep efficiency (d c =0.49), fatigue (d c =0.67) and objectively estimated sleep latency (d c =0.72) than men without subjective CRCI. Declines in perceived cognition was associated with higher anxiety (p=0.05), fatigue (p≤0.01) and symptoms of insomnia (p=0.01). Finally, subjective time awake during the night (p=0.03) and fatigue (p=0.02) were associated with subjective cognitive decline, controlling for objective change. Conclusions Subjective concerns of CRCI appear more critical to patient experience than objective measurements in men with PCa who have received RT and ADT. Interventions to improve sleep may result in an improved perception of cognition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".