MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415331985 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2510310

Improved Survival with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer

2025· article· en· W4415331985 on OpenAlexaff
Neal D. Shore, Murilo Luz, Ugo De Giorgi, Martin Gleave, Geoffrey Gotto, Christopher Pieczonka, Gabriel P. Haas, Choung‐Soo Kim, M. Backhaus, Antti Rannikko, Matko Kalac, Swetha Sridharan, Matt Rosales, Yiyun Tang, Ronald Tutrone, Balaji Venugopal, Arnauld Villers, Henry H. Woo, Fong Wang, Stephen J. Freedland

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgarySAIT PolytechnicUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAstellas PharmaPfizer
KeywordsEnzalutamideProstate cancerOverall survivalProstateCancerChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 EMBARK trial, enzalutamide plus leuprolide and enzalutamide monotherapy were associated with longer metastasis-free survival than leuprolide alone among patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. The final analysis of overall survival has not been reported. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with prostate cancer who had high-risk biochemical recurrence in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive enzalutamide plus leuprolide (the combination group), leuprolide alone (the leuprolide-alone group), or enzalutamide monotherapy (the monotherapy group). The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, assessed in the combination group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. Overall survival was an alpha-controlled, key secondary end point. Updated results for prespecified secondary end points, including the time to first use of new antineoplastic therapy and the time to the first symptomatic skeletal event, were summarized descriptively, as was progression-free survival with the first subsequent therapy, an exploratory end point. RESULTS: The 8-year overall survival was 78.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 73.9 to 83.1) in the combination group and 69.5% (95% CI, 64.0 to 74.3) in the leuprolide-alone group; the hazard ratio for death was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.44 to 0.80; P<0.001). The 8-year overall survival with monotherapy was 73.1% (95% CI, 67.6 to 77.9), which did not differ significantly from that with leuprolide alone (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.10; P = 0.19). In the descriptive updates for prespecified secondary end points, results were similar to those previously reported. Safety findings were consistent with those in the primary analysis of metastasis-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival was significantly longer with the combination of enzalutamide and leuprolide than with leuprolide alone among patients with prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence. Enzalutamide monotherapy was not superior to leuprolide alone in the analysis of overall survival. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; EMBARK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02319837.).

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)0.001
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations29
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207