MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383059223 · doi:10.1002/cncr.34910

Enzalutamide shows sustained overall survival improvement in patients with metastatic hormone‐sensitive prostate cancer

2023· article· en· W4383059223 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Beth Nierengarten

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnzalutamideMedicineProstate cancerBicalutamideFlutamideOncologyAntiandrogenTestosterone (patch)DocetaxelInternal medicineCancerInterim analysisRandomized controlled trialGynecologyAndrogen receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term follow-up of the ENZAMET (Enzalutamide in First Line Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Metastatic Prostate Cancer) trial shows sustained improved overall survival for men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with the addition of enzalutamide (ENZA) to testosterone suppression.1 The results confirm the short-term improved survival benefits seen in an interim analysis. “ENZAMET has the longest follow-up of all of the studies of direct potent androgen receptor inhibitors added to testosterone suppression and [is] the only study able to report the long-term follow-up for all the prognostic groups,” says the lead author of the study, Christopher Sweeney, MBBS, director of the South Australian immunoGENomics Cancer Institute at the University of Adelaide. The ENZAMET trial is an international, open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial in which 1125 patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer from 83 sites in six countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) were randomized to receive ENZA plus testosterone suppression (n = 563) or to a control group of testosterone suppression with nonsteroidal antiandrogen therapy with bicalutamide, nilutamide, or flutamide (n = 562). All patients were at least 18 years old with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0–2. Patients were stratified by disease volume, comorbidities, planned use of concurrent docetaxel (allowed for up to six cycles once every 3 weeks), and bone antiresorptive therapy. At a median follow-up of 68 months, the median overall survival was not reached by either the ENZA group or the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58–0.84; p < .001) with 5-year overall survival rates of 67% (95% CI, 63%–70%) and 57% (95% CI, 53%–61%) in the ENZA and control groups, respectively. The benefits to overall survival seen in the ENZA group compared to the control group were seen across prognostic groups. For low- and high-volume disease, the HRs were 0.54 and 0.79, respectively. For patients treated with planned docetaxel or no planned docetaxel, the HRs were 0.82 and 0.60, respectively. For patients treated with docetaxel, the HR was 0.73 for those with synchronous metastatic disease and 1.10 for those with metachronous metastatic disease.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207