scholarly journals Is Primary Androgen Deprivation Therapy a Suitable Option for Asian Patients With Prostate Cancer Compared With Radical Prostatectomy?

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 441-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
U-Syn Ha ◽  
Jin Bong Choi ◽  
Jung Im Shim ◽  
Minjoo Kang ◽  
Eunjung Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Primary Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Primary Androgen Deprivation

Background: We conducted a comparative survival analysis between primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) and radical prostatectomy (RP) based on nationwide Korean population data that included all patients with prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 4,538 patients with prostate cancer from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database linked with Korean Central Cancer Registry data who were treated with PADT or RP between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2014. Kaplan-Meier and multivariate survival analyses stratified by stage (localized and locally advanced) and age (<75 and ≥75 years) were performed using a Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate treatment effects. Results: Among 18,403 patients from the NHIS database diagnosed with prostate cancer during the study period, 4,538 satisfied inclusion criteria and were included in the analyses. Of these, 3,136 and 1,402 patients underwent RP or received PADT, respectively. Risk of death was significantly increased for patients who received PADT compared with those who underwent RP in the propensity score–matched cohort. In subgroup analyses stratified by stage and age, in every subgroup, patients who received PADT had a significantly increased risk of death compared with those who underwent RP. In particular, a much greater risk was observed for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Conclusions: Based on a nationwide survival analysis of nonmetastatic prostate cancer, this study provides valuable clinical implications that favor RP over PDAT for treatment of Asian populations. However, the possibility that survival differences have been overestimated due to not accounting for potential confounding characteristics must be considered.

scholarly journals The modern role of androgen deprivation therapy in the management of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 24-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Gunner ◽  
Aziz Gulamhusein ◽  
Derek J Rosario
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Cardiovascular Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document