Immediate or Deferred Androgen Deprivation for Patients With Prostate Cancer Not Suitable for Local Treatment With Curative Intent: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Trial 30891

2007 ◽  
Vol 2007 ◽  
pp. 188-189
Author(s):  
A.S. Kibel ◽  
G.L. Andriole
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 24-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Gunner ◽  
Aziz Gulamhusein ◽  
Derek J Rosario

Introduction: Approximately 50% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer will be exposed to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) at some stage. The role of ADT in the management of metastatic disease has long been recognised, and its place in the management of localised and locally advanced disease has become clearer in the past few years. Nevertheless, concerns remain that some men might not benefit from ADT in earlier-stage disease. The purpose of the current article is to provide a brief narrative review of the role of ADT as part of a strategy of treatment with curative intent, concentrating mainly on key recent developments in the area. Methods: Narrative literature review of key publications in the English language relating to ADT in the management of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. Results: In locally advanced and high-risk localised prostate cancer, the use of ADT in combination with radiotherapy improves disease-specific and overall survival. There is no evidence to support the use of ADT in the treatment of low-risk localised prostate cancer. There appears to be an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality associated with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists, particularly in men with pre-existing cardiovascular disease, but the relevance of this in the adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting is currently unclear. Conclusions: Future studies should focus on identification of men who are at risk from cardiovascular complications associated with ADT and on the comparison of radiotherapy with ADT versus surgery in the management of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer, particularly with regards to men with pre-existing comorbidities.


2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 1868-1876 ◽  
Author(s):  
Urs E. Studer ◽  
Peter Whelan ◽  
Walter Albrecht ◽  
Jacques Casselman ◽  
Theo de Reijke ◽  
...  

Purpose This study (EORTC 30891) attempted to demonstrate equivalent overall survival in patients with localized prostate cancer not suitable for local curative treatment treated with immediate or deferred androgen ablation. Patients and Methods We randomly assigned 985 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer T0-4 N0-2 M0 to receive androgen deprivation either immediately (n = 493) or on symptomatic disease progression or occurrence of serious complications (n = 492). Results Baseline characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. Median age was 73 years (range, 52 to 81). At a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 541 of 985 patients had died, mostly of prostate cancer (n = 193) or cardiovascular disease (n = 185). The overall survival hazard ratio was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.48; noninferiority P > .1) favoring immediate treatment, seemingly due to fewer deaths of nonprostatic cancer causes (P = .06). The time from randomization to progression of hormone refractory disease did not differ significantly, nor did prostate-cancer specific survival. The median time to the start of deferred treatment after study entry was 7 years. In this group 126 patients (25.6%) died without ever needing treatment (44% of the deaths in this arm). Conclusion Immediate androgen deprivation resulted in a modest but statistically significant increase in overall survival but no significant difference in prostate cancer mortality or symptom-free survival. This must be weighed on an individual basis against the adverse effects of life-long androgen deprivation, which may be avoided in a substantial number of patients with a deferred treatment policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document