SynthesisBMC cancer2026
Comparative fall risk of patients treated with novel androgen receptor antagonists in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAndrogen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) are cornerstone treatments for advanced prostate cancer; however, their potential to increase fall risk remains a significant clinical concern. This meta-analysis aims to provide a rigorous, drug-specific evaluation of the association between novel ARPIs and the risk of falls.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for Phase 2 or 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ARPIs (enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide) with control groups (placebo or non-steroidal antiandrogens [NSAA]). The primary outcomes were risk ratios (RRs) for all-grade and grade ≥ 3 falls. To account for multiplicity across correlated outcomes and the limited number of studies, pooled RRs were estimated using random-effects models with the restricted maximum-likelihood (REML) method. All analyses were performed on a logarithmically transformed scale, with 97.5% confidence intervals (CIs). Prediction intervals (PIs) were calculated to assess the dispersion of effects. Subgroup analyses were stratified by specific ARPI agents, control types, and clinical stages.
resultsEleven RCTs involving 12,239 patients were included. Overall, ARPIs were significantly associated with the increased risk of all-grade falls (RR 2.00, 97.5% CI 1.46-2.73, P < 0.0001, I
conclusionsCurrent evidence indicates that the increased risk of falls associated with ARPI therapy varies significantly among individual agents, rather than being a uniform class effect. While enzalutamide and apalutamide are statistically associated with elevated fall risk, darolutamide appears to maintain a more favorable safety profile. However, these drug-specific comparisons remain exploratory due to subgroup imbalances. Clinicians should consider proactive fall-risk assessments and individualized treatment selection, particularly for elderly or frail populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.