MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413416608 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103429

Impact of treatment suspension on health-related quality of life in the EMBARK trial: a post hoc analysis

2025· article· en· W4413416608 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen J. Freedland, Ugo De Giorgi, Antti Rannikko, Fred Saad, M. Backhaus, Anchen F. Nasr, Jasmina Ivanova, Arijit Ganguli, Pavol Kral, Arlene Reisman, Neal D. Shore

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersAstellas PharmaPfizer
KeywordsMedicinePost-hoc analysisPost hocHealth related quality of lifeSuspension (topology)Quality of life (healthcare)PathologyInternal medicineDiseaseNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Enzalutamide was approved for high-risk biochemically recurrent (hrBCR) prostate cancer based on the EMBARK trial (NCT02319837; 17 December 2014-31 January 2023). In EMBARK, treatment was suspended at week 37 if prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was <0.2 ng/mL and reinstated if PSA rose to ≥2.0 ng/mL with radical prostatectomy or ≥5.0 ng/mL without. This post hoc analysis assessed the impact of treatment suspension on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) to address overtreatment concerns. Methods: Longitudinal change in HRQoL from treatment suspension at week 37 to subsequent assessments until week 109 was analyzed with mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) and descriptively among these patients. Separate models were used to assess four patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments-Brief Pain Inventory - short form, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Prostate, QoL Questionnaire - Prostate 25, and European QoL 5-Dimensions 5-Levels health questionnaire-with predefined clinically meaningful thresholds. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. Findings: Treatment was suspended in 90% (321/355), 86% (304/355), and 67% (240/358) of participants treated with enzalutamide + leuprolide, enzalutamide monotherapy, and leuprolide alone, respectively. MMRM showed no meaningful change in any treatment arm after treatment suspension across all assessed PRO measures, except hormonal treatment-related symptoms, for which clinically meaningful improvement was observed after treatment suspension at week 61 for enzalutamide monotherapy, week 73 for leuprolide alone, and week 85 for enzalutamide + leuprolide. The descriptive analysis showed similar findings. Interpretation: Enzalutamide ± leuprolide in patients with hrBCR improves metastasis-free survival versus leuprolide alone with no clinically meaningful changes in the measured HRQoL domains during treatment or after treatment suspension, with gradual improvement in hormonal treatment-related symptoms after treatment suspension in this selective clinical trial population. Further real-world studies are warranted to better explore the benefits of treatment suspension. Funding: This study was funded by Pfizer Inc. and Astellas Pharma Inc.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207