MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Relationship between undetectable PSA nadir and outcomes for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in IRONMAN, the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer.

2025· article· en· W4407701365 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hannah D. McManus, Lauren E. Howard, Kerri‐Anne Crowell, Terry Hyslop, Karen A. Autio, Dana E. Rathkopf, Robert Dreicer, Kim N., Michael Ong, Joaquı́n Mateo, Deborah Enting, Emilio Esteban, Vincent Khoo, Amanda McMannis, Rebecca Green, Shannon Pileggi, Jake Vinson, Philip W. Kantoff, Lorelei A. Mucci, Daniel J. George

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMovember FoundationAmgenProstate Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerOncologyInternal medicineCancerProstateGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

65 Background: Intensified androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) and/or docetaxel has led to improved outcomes for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in multiple clinical trials. Achievement of an undetectable PSA nadir has been associated with improved clinical outcomes, but real-world data across treatment regimens are limited. Methods: We evaluated PSA response and outcomes for patients with mHSPC treated with ADT monotherapy (mono), ADT + ARPI, and ADT + docetaxel in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer (IRONMAN). All patients with mHSPC enrolled in IRONMAN between 2017 and August 2023 in the United States, Canada, Spain, and England were included. Patients treated with triplet therapy were excluded due to small numbers. Undetectable PSA nadir, defined as PSA <0.2 ng/mL, was evaluated at 6 and 12 months after treatment start. In this real-world study, relapse was defined as meeting one of the following criteria: PSA progression (≥25% PSA increase from nadir and absolute increase >2 ng/mL), treatment change preceded by new metastasis location, or change to a neuroendocrine prostate cancer regimen. Rates of relapse were calculated using Kaplan Meier estimates, with confidence intervals based on standard errors calculated using the Greenwood formula. Results: Among 1,377 eligible patients, treatment was most commonly ADT + ARPI (n=775) followed by ADT mono (n=375) and ADT + docetaxel (n=227). In the overall population, PSA nadir <0.2 ng/mL was achieved in 40% (n=554) at 6 months and 51% (n=702) at 12 months. Rates of PSA nadir <0.2 ng/mL at 6 months were: 51% for ADT + ARPI, 27% for ADT mono, and 26% for ADT + docetaxel. At 12 months, rates of PSA nadir <0.2 ng/mL increased to: 63% for ADT + ARPI, 38% for ADT mono, and 32% for ADT + docetaxel. During a median follow-up of 18 months, 291 patients (21%) experienced disease relapse; 19% experienced PSA progression. The percentage of patients in each treatment group with disease relapse at months 12, 24, and 36 of treatment are shown (Table); treatment groups are divided by whether patients had achieved PSA nadir <0.2 ng/mL in 6 months. Conclusions: In this non-randomized, real-world registry, patients with mHSPC who achieved a PSA nadir <0.2 ng/mL had a lower relapse rate than patients who did not, regardless of treatment. Percentage (95% CI), [number at risk] of patients with relapse at timepoint. Treatment Month 6 Month 12 Month 24 Month 36 ADT Monotherapyn=375 PSA <0.2 ng/mL 0%(0, 0)[60] 1.7%(0, 5.0)[31] 11%(0, 24)[15] PSA ≥0.2 ng/mL 18%(11, 24)[80] 41%(30, 51)[38] 45%(33, 55)[19] ADT + ARPIn=775 PSA <0.2 ng/mL 2.2%(0.6, 3.8)[288] 9.7%(5.9, 13)[166] 18%(12, 24)[76] PSA ≥0.2 ng/mL 21%(16, 26)[178] 42%(35, 49)[81] 50%(42, 58)[37] ADT + Docetaxeln=227 PSA <0.2 ng/mL 8.2%(0.2, 16)[44] 22%(8.9, 33)[29] 36%(18, 50)[14] PSA ≥0.2 ng/mL 34%(25, 43)[69] 62%(50, 72)[21] 73%(59, 82)[12]

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)0.003
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→