MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400775048 · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.2156

Neoadjuvant Exercise Therapy in Prostate Cancer

2024· letter· en· W4400775048 on OpenAlexaff
Lee W. Jones, Chaya S. Moskowitz, Catherine P. Lee, Gina A. Fickera, Su S. Chun, Meghan Michalski, Kurtis Stoeckel, Whitney P. Underwood, Jessica A. Lavery, Umesh Bhanot, Irina Linkov, Chau T. Dang, Behfar Ehdaie, Vincent P. Laudone, James A. Eastham, Anne T. Collins, P. Sheerin, Lydia Liu, Stefan E. Eng, Paul C. Boutros

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Oncology · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerNeoadjuvant therapyCancerInternal medicinePhysical therapyUrologyOncologyBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Observational data have shown that postdiagnosis exercise is associated with reduced risk of prostate cancer death. The feasibility and tumor biological activity of exercise therapy is not known. Objective: To identify recommended phase 2 dose of exercise therapy for patients with prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, phase 1a dose-finding trial was conducted at a tertiary cancer center using a patientcentric, decentralized platform and included 53 inactive men with treatment-naive localized prostate cancer scheduled to undergo surgical resection between June 2019 and January 2023. Data were analyzed in June 2024. Intervention: Six escalated exercise therapy dose levels ranging from 90 to 450 minutes per week of individualized, moderate-intensity treadmill walking, allocated using adaptive continual reassessment. All exercise therapy sessions were conducted remotely with real-time monitoring. Main Outcomes and Measures: Feasibility was evaluated by relative exercise dose intensity (REDI). A dose level was considered feasible if 70% or more of patients achieved an REDI of 75% or greater. Activity end points were changes in tumor cell proliferation (Ki67) and plasma prostate-specific antigen levels between pretreatment and postintervention. Safety and changes in patient physiology were also assessed. Results: A total of 53 men were enrolled (median [IQR] age, 61 [56-66] years). All dose levels were feasible (≥75% REDI). The mean (95% CI) changes in Ki67 were 5.0% (-4.3% to 14.0%) for 90 minutes per week, 2.4% (-1.3% to 6.2%) for 150 minutes per week, -1.3% (-5.8% to 3.3%) for 225 minutes per week, -0.2% (-4.0% to 3.7%) for 300 minutes per week, -2.6% (-9.2% to 4.1%) for 375 minutes per week, and 2.2% (-0.8% to 5.1%) for 450 minutes per week. Changes in prostate-specific antigen levels were 1.0 ng/mL (-1.8 to 3.8) for 90 minutes per week, 0.2 ng/mL (-1.1 to 1.5) for 150 minutes per week, -0.5 ng/mL (-1.2 to 0.3) for 225 minutes per week, -0.2 (-1.7 to 1.3) for 300 minutes per week, -0.7 ng/mL (-1.7 to 0.4) for 375 minutes per week, and -0.9 ng/mL (-2.4 to 0.7) for 450 minutes per week. No serious adverse events were observed. Overall, 225 minutes per week (approximately 45 minutes per treatment at 5 times weekly) was selected as the recommended phase 2 dose. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this nonrandomized clinical trial suggest that neoadjuvant exercise therapy is feasible and safe with promising activity in localized prostate cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03813615.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.306 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207