MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415765070 · doi:10.1177/10732748251390022

Strategies for Improving Access to Effective Prostate Cancer Medications (Abiraterone and Enzalutamide) in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs): A Survey Among Nigerian Health Professionals

2025· article· en· W4415765070 on OpenAlexaff
Omolara Fatiregun, Onyeanunam Ngozi Ekeke, Egbuchilem Chisor-Wabali, John Raphael, Charles P Okpani, Kufre Udoh, Okigbeye Danagogo, Olusegun Abayomi Biyi-Olutunde, Nwamaka Lasebikan, Temitope Olatunji, Omisanjo Olufunmilade, Ikuerowo Odunayo, Basit Olatunji Balogun, Boluwatife Borisade, Nicholas D. James, I. Tannock

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Control · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreInstitute of Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnzalutamideProstate cancerAbirateroneHealth professionalsQuality of life (healthcare)MEDLINEHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionThe burden of prostate cancer (PCa) is disproportionately concentrated in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Abiraterone and enzalutamide have improved survival rates and quality of life for men with PCa. However, cost constraints limit access to these medications due to limited insurance coverage and out-of-pocket payments. The survey assessed the current practices and opinions of Nigerian clinical oncologists and urologists regarding the use of low dose abiraterone and enzalutamide for the management of metastatic PCa.MethodsThis survey consisted of twenty multiple-choice questions, distributed via Google Forms to urologists and oncologists in Nigeria from August to November 2024. It examined current practices, awareness of effective dose reduction strategies, and opinions on their cost-effectiveness. The collected data were entered into Microsoft Excel, and responses were presented using tables and charts.ResultsA total of 104 respondents completed the survey. Among them, 37 (36%) reported that 61%-80% of their patients initially presented with advanced PCa. Additionally, 55 respondents (53%) were unaware of studies and guidelines regarding low-dose abiraterone. Furthermore, 66% of clinicians indicated that fewer than 20% of their patients could afford abiraterone, and 91 (87.5%) noted that few could afford enzalutamide. Moreover, 92 (89%) respondents believed that low-dose abiraterone would improve compliance, while 76% felt that reducing the enzalutamide dose would also enhance compliance and decrease patient costs. Sixty percent (58%) of respondents were willing to switch to low-dose abiraterone.ConclusionThe survey revealed limited awareness of landmark studies on dose-reduction strategies for abiraterone and enzalutamide. These strategies have the potential to enhance affordability and compliance in the management of advanced PCa in Nigeria.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ControlSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207