MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403362013 · doi:10.1002/cncr.35606

Metabolic, cardiac, and bone health testing in patients with prostate cancer on androgen‐deprivation therapy: A population‐based assessment of adherence to therapeutic monitoring guidelines

2024· article· en· W4403362013 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ahmad Mousa, David‐Dan Nguyen, Aly‐Khan A. Lalani, Raj Satkunasivam, Khatereh Aminoltejari, Amanda Hird, Soumyajit Roy, Scott C. Morgan, Shawn Malone, Andrea Kokorovic, Luke T. Lavallée, Melissa Huynh, Bobby Shayegan, Di Jiang, Geoffrey Gotto, Rodney H. Breau, Girish S. Kulkarni, Alexandre R. Zlotta, Christopher J.D. Wallis

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityUniversité de MontréalSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonJuravinski Cancer CentreVictoria HospitalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of CalgaryPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAndrogen deprivation therapyProstate cancerCohortGuidelineInternal medicineOsteoporosisCancerPopulationRetrospective cohort studyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) remains a cornerstone in treatment for patients with advanced prostate cancer. ADT is associated with several adverse effects, including osteoporosis, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular events, leading to guidelines recommending routine testing to monitor for these toxicities. There is a lack of data assessing adherence to these recommendations. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study using administrative data from Ontario, Canada between 2008 and 2021. They identified all older men (aged 65 years and older) who received ADT for prostate cancer using comprehensive provincial health databases. The primary outcomes were the use of testing for lipids, dysglycemia (glucose), bone health serum, and bone density between 6 weeks before and 1 year after the initiation of ADT. RESULTS: In total, 29,097 patients were examined, of whom 52.8% were prescribed ADT by urologists, 37.9% were prescribed ADT by radiation oncologists, 2.8% were prescribed ADT by medical oncologists, and 2.4% were prescribed ADT by other physicians. Adherence to guidelines was low: only 21.3% of patients received a bone density scan, 41.2% underwent bone health-related serum tests, 51.3% completed a lipid profile, and 65.9% underwent dysglycemia testing within 1 year of diagnosis. Overall, only 11.9% of patients received all of the recommended investigations. Adherence to testing did not appear to improve over time (2008-2021) or with guideline publication. Patient (age) and physician (specialty) factors had important associations with adherence to testing. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients receiving ADT for prostate cancer do not receive recommended testing to monitor for treatment-related toxicity. Further study is required to address barriers to therapeutic monitoring of men on ADT and to reduce treatment-associated adverse events.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207