MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366416287 · doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.03.013

Comparison of prostate-specific antigen response in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer initiated on apalutamide or abiraterone acetate: A retrospective cohort study

2023· article· en· W4366416287 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Lowentritt, Dominic Pilon, Dexter Waters, Carmine Rossi, Erik Muser, Siyana Kurteva, Aditi Shah, Ibrahim Khilfeh, Shawn Du, Lorie Ellis, Patrick Lefèbvre, Gordon Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueUrologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsAbiraterone acetateMedicineProstate cancerUrologyOncologyProportional hazards modelProstate-specific antigenInternal medicineHazard ratioEnzalutamideBiochemical recurrenceCohortAndrogen deprivation therapyCancerAndrogen receptorProstatectomyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Deep prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥90% reduction in PSA [PSA90]) is an important early response indicator of radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). This study compared PSA90 responses by 6 months between patients with mCSPC at first use of apalutamide or abiraterone acetate, both androgen receptor signaling inhibitors. METHODS: Clinical data from 77 community urology practices in the United States were analyzed. Patients with mCSPC were classified into treatment cohorts based on their first filled prescription (index date) for apalutamide or abiraterone acetate on or after September 17, 2019 (approval date of apalutamide for mCSPC). Patients were followed from the index date until the earliest of index treatment discontinuation, treatment switch, end of clinical activity, or end of data availability (September 17, 2021). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to ensure similarity in distribution of baseline characteristics between cohorts. PSA90 was defined as the earliest attainment of ≥90% reduction in PSA relative to baseline (most recent value within 13 weeks pre-index). Time to PSA90 between cohorts was compared by weighted Kaplan-Meier analysis and with Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients treated with apalutamide and 147 treated with abiraterone acetate met the study criteria. Patient characteristics were well balanced after IPTW. By 6 months post-index, patients initiated on apalutamide were 53% more likely to achieve PSA90 than those initiated on abiraterone acetate (P = 0.016). Similar results were observed by 9 and 12 months post-index (both P ≤ 0.019). The median time to PSA90 was 3.5 months for the apalutamide cohort and not reached for the abiraterone acetate cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world patients with mCSPC, significantly more patients achieved PSA90 with apalutamide than with abiraterone acetate, and this response was achieved earlier with apalutamide.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrologic Oncology Seminars and Original InvestigationsSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207