The impact of second-generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors on skeletal muscle morphology and strategies to mitigate their effects in prostate cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The standard of care for metastatic castrate sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) involves the use of doublet therapies, which prolong survival and delay disease progression. Doublet therapies include the addition of second-generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). ADT monotherapy has been associated with adverse effects on skeletal muscle morphology, muscle strength, and physical function. Our findings suggest that the addition of ARPIs to ADT may further exacerbate these adverse effects. This review provides an overview of the current evidence to initiate exercise during treatment as an intervention to mitigate these adverse effects. Despite growing research in exercise oncology, research on the effects of exercise in men with mCSPC treated with doublet therapy is lacking. Much of the current supporting evidence is based on men with metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer. Nonetheless, this review examines the available research on the efficacy and benefits of participating in a regimented exercise program in men with metastatic prostate cancer. We highlight the emerging evidence that exercising during treatment has the potential to protect against the adverse effects of doublet therapy. Future research to uncover the effects of different doublet therapies on muscle health in mCSPC is needed. Moreover, an improved understanding of the optimal training dose and timing that would elicit the most optimal benefits on muscle health in men with mCSPC is required.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".