MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399385857 · doi:10.1080/14728214.2024.2363213

Emerging drugs for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a 2023 update

2024· review· en· W4399385857 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua Winograd, Nikit Venishetty, Alia Codelia‐Anjum, Naeem Bhojani, Dean Elterman, Kevin C. Zorn, Alexis E. Te, Bilal Chughtai

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Emerging Drugs · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLower urinary tract symptomsHyperplasiacGMP-specific phosphodiesterase type 5Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)Intensive care medicinePrimary carePrimary treatmentModalities5 Alpha-Reductase InhibitorUrologyProstateInternal medicineGynecologyErectile dysfunctionFinasterideCancerFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a condition that affects over 50% of men as they enter their fifth decade of life, often leading to lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Primary treatment options include alpha blockers, 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors. However, these medications can have some side effects, and there is a noticeable dearth of information addressing the long-term use of these medications. Thus, the exploration of all treatment modalities helps ensure patients receive personalized and effective care. Consequently, the primary objective of this review is to identify potential emerging medications for the treatment of BPH. AREAS COVERED: We conducted an extensive review of articles discussing pharmacotherapy for BPH spanning the last 15 years. Our information gathering process involved Scopus, PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane, Wiley Online Library Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the PharmaProjects database. This approach ensures that readers gain an in-depth knowledge of the existing therapeutic agents as well as promising avenues for managing BPH. EXPERT OPINION: BPH treatment targets a patient's specific constellation of symptoms. Therefore, a broad knowledge base encompassing various treatment options is paramount in ensuring optimal treatment. Looking forward, the emphasis on personalization promises to reshape the landscape of BPH treatment and improve patient outcomes.

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)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.362 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Emerging DrugsSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207