MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404711423 · doi:10.1093/oncolo/oyae321

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of health state utility values in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

2024· article· en· W4404711423 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Castro, Rhett Figliuzzi, Sarah N. Walsh, Samantha Craigie, Jonathan Nazari, Alexander Niyazov, Imtiaz A. Samjoo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsEVERSANA (Canada)
FundersPfizer
KeywordsMedicineEQ-5DMeta-analysisProstate cancerObservational studyInternal medicineSystematic reviewMEDLINEVisual analogue scaleOncologyPooled analysisCancerHealth related quality of lifeSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite being an important goal, the preservation of quality of life of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is poorly characterized across lines of therapy. In this review, a systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to synthesize EuroQoL 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) data among adult men with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic mCRPC in both first line (1L) and second line and later (2L+) therapy. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to October 2022 using Ovid. Supplemental searches of other data sources were also conducted (PROSPERO registration: CRD42021283512). Meta-analyses were conducted to estimate pooled EQ-5D index utility values and EQ visual analog scale (VAS) scores in both 1L and 2L+. Various sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Forty-five unique publications met the inclusion criteria. In primary studies, baseline EQ-5D index utility values ranged from 0.7 to 0.9 in 1L and 0.63 to 0.7 in 2L+. Twelve trials and observational studies were feasible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean baseline EQ-5D index utility value was estimated as 0.79 (95% CI, 0.70-0.84) and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.67-0.71) for 1L (n = 7 studies) and 2L + (n = 4 studies), respectively. The pooled mean baseline EQ VAS score was estimated as 74.63 (95% CI, 70.97-78.29) and 65.82 (95% CI, 64.53-67.11) in 1L and 2L+, respectively. Limitations include hampered comparability between studies due to heterogeneity in study design and geographical regions. This study provides a comprehensive synthesis of EQ-5D data presently available in adults with mCRPC in both 1L and 2L + therapy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.454
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207