Group receiving research intervention.
1A median time to recurrence was not reached in either treatment arm.
2Results: A total of 137 children were enrolled in each treatment arm.
3Results: Sixty-four patients were enrolled with 32 in the treatment arm.
4Sample: The 32 patients in the IPT treatment arm were analyzed.
5Design: Nested case-control study of all subjects randomized to the STH treatment arm.
6Controls were frequency-matched to cases by age, treatment arm, and family history of PCa.
7Efficacy results within each treatment arm appeared better for patients with a metabolic response.
8QoL compliance and baseline PF and GHS scores did not differ by treatment arm.
9SNPs associated with prostate cancer risk differed by treatment arm.
10Multivariate Cox regression analysis was done to account for established prognostic factors and treatment arm.
11However, there was toxicity in the combined treatment arm.
12Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between treatment arm and cardiovascular mortality.
13Controls were frequency matched to cases by age, treatment arm, and family history of prostate cancer.
14Approximately one third of the patients in each treatment arm were stable at the nine-week evaluation.
15This relationship was not influenced by treatment arm.
16Fifty-one patients were entered into each treatment arm.