MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406853924 · doi:10.1016/j.euros.2025.01.001

Incidence, Management, and Prevention of Gynecomastia and Breast Pain in Patients with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Antiandrogen Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2025· review· en· W4406853924 on OpenAlex
Ichiro Tsuboi, R. J. Schulz, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Koichiro Wada, Pierre I. Karakiewicz, Motoo Araki, Shahrokh F. Shariat

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology Open Science · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMale Breast Health Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisGynecomastiaRandomized controlled trialProstate cancerIncidence (geometry)Breast cancerOncologyRaloxifeneProstateSystematic reviewInternal medicineMEDLINECancerTamoxifen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) monotherapy increases gynecomastia and breast pain in prostate cancer patients compared with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), while ARPI plus ADT does not significantly differ from ADT alone. In patients with prostate cancer treated with antiandrogen monotherapy, gynecomastia and breast pain are relatively common. In the setting of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs), the incidence of these adverse events (AEs) remains unclear. In addition, the effect of prophylactic treatment on gynecomastia remains uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of gynecomastia and breast pain in prostate cancer patients treated with ARPIs compared with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and the effect of prophylactic treatment for these AEs due to antiandrogen therapy. In June 2024, we queried four databases—PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase—for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating prostate cancer treatments involving antiandrogen therapy. The endpoints of interest were the incidence of these AEs due to ARPIs and the effect of prophylactic treatment for these. Eighteen RCTs, comprising 5036 patients, were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. ARPIs included enzalutamide, darolutamide, and apalutamide. The results indicated that patients who received ARPI monotherapy had a significantly higher incidence of gynecomastia than those who received ADT monotherapy (risk ratio [RR]: 5.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.58–7.51, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of gynecomastia between ARPI plus ADT therapy and ADT monotherapy (RR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.84–1.93, p = 0.2). Prophylactic tamoxifen or radiotherapy reduced significantly the incidence of gynecomastia and breast pain caused by bicalutamide monotherapy. We found that ARPI monotherapy increases the incidence of these AEs significantly compared with ADT. In contrast, ARPI plus ADT therapy did not result in a higher incidence of AEs. The use of either tamoxifen or radiotherapy was effective in reducing the incidence of these AEs due to bicalutamide monotherapy. These prophylactic treatments could reduce the incidence of AEs due to ARPI monotherapy. However, further studies are needed to clarify their efficacy. Although androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves overall survival in patients with prostate cancer, it is associated with several complications. Androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) monotherapy has emerged as a promising strategy for improving oncological outcomes in these patients. However, ARPI monotherapy increases gynecomastia and breast pain in prostate cancer patients compared with ADT, while ARPI plus ADT did not result in a higher incidence of 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.

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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0240.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.330 · 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