Persistent Testosterone Suppression After Cessation of Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Many men receiving temporary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for localized prostate cancer fail to achieve baseline testosterone levels after cessation. Testosterone recovery in men with localized prostate cancer receiving temporary ADT was assessed. Methods A global federated health research network (TriNetX) was used to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer undergoing temporary ADT. Two cohorts were identified: men receiving luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) antagonists or LHRH agonists, and men receiving combined ADT (LHRH agonist and antiandrogens). Further stratification was based on a treatment duration of six months (short-term) or 18 months (long-term) to compare testosterone (T) recovery profiles five years after ADT cessation. Results A total of 28,583 men received LHRH agonist or antagonist therapy alone, and 20,188 men received combination ADT. A total of 46.7% of men who received short-term LHRH agonists or antagonists and 40.6% of men who received short-term combined ADT, recovered to mean baseline T levels at five years. Only men who received short-term LHRH agonists/antagonists recovered to eugonadal levels at the five-year follow-up. Around 50% of men who received long-term LHRH agonist/antagonist therapy and 10.7% of men who received combined ADT, recovered to mean baseline T levels at five years. However, neither group recovered to eugonadal T levels. Conclusions At the five-year follow-up after ADT cessation, most patients failed to recover to their mean baseline and eugonadal T levels. Given that testosterone deficiency is associated with metabolically adverse changes in body composition, increased insulin resistance, impaired bone health, and hypogonadal symptoms, serum T levels must be closely monitored in men receiving ADT following treatment cessation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".