↓ Skip to main content

The AVOCAT study: Bicalutamide monotherapy versus combined bicalutamide plus dutasteride therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the prostate—a long-term follow-up…

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
The AVOCAT study: Bicalutamide monotherapy versus combined bicalutamide plus dutasteride therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the prostate—a long-term follow-up comparison and quality of life analysis
Published in
SpringerPlus, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2280-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Siebren Dijkstra, Wim P. J. Witjes, Erik P. M. Roos, Peter L. M. Vijverberg, Arno D. H. Geboers, Jos L. Bruins, Geert A. H. J. Smits, Henk Vergunst, Peter F. A. Mulders

Abstract

Compare the efficacy and tolerability of dutasteride in combination with bicalutamide to bicalutamide monotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). One-hundred-fifty PCa patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg once daily (79 patients) or bicalutamide 150 mg plus dutasteride 0.5 mg once daily (71 patients). Treatment response was assessed by serum PSA level measurement, and standard procedures for diagnosis of clinical progression were used during follow-up. Patient-reported quality of life (QoL) was assessed using validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25). At 3 years follow-up, PSA progression was found in 52 patients [65.8 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 55.4-76.3] in the monotherapy group compared to 38 patients (53.5 %; 95 % CI 41.9-65.1) in the combined therapy group (p = 0.134). At the time of analysis 37 men (46.8 %; 95 % CI 35.8-57.8) in the monotherapy group had died versus 30 men (42.3 %; 95 % CI 30.8-53.7) in the combined therapy group. Median survival time was 5.4 and 5.8 years, respectively (p = 0.694). There was no statistically significant difference in the presentation frequency of adverse events between groups (p = 0.683). QoL was good and comparable between the two groups. Both therapies were well tolerated with a good QoL. However, despite a trend toward higher efficacy of the combined therapy, progression-free survival and overall survival was not significantly different between the groups. Further research on this therapy should be performed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 26%
Other 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Sports and Recreations 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2019.
All research outputs
#7,487,068
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#495
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,800
of 326,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#56
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,835 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.