PURPOSE: The potential association between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and cardiovascular mortality (CVM) remains controversial. This study assessed mortality outcomes in a large national registry to further elucidate the association between treatment selection and cause of mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 7,248 men in the CaPSURE registry were analyzed. Treatment was categorized as local only, primary ADT monotherapy, local treatment plus ADT, and watchful waiting/active surveillance (WW/AS). Competing hazards survival analysis was performed for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), CVM, and all-cause mortality. A propensity score-adjusted and a propensity-matched analysis were undertaken to adjust for imbalances in covariates among men receiving various treatments. RESULTS: Patients treated with ADT or WW/AS had a higher likelihood of PCSM than those treated with local therapy alone. Patients treated with primary ADT had an almost two-fold greater likelihood of CVM (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.97) than those treated with local therapy alone; however, patients treated with WW/AS had a greater than two-fold increased risk of CVM (HR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.53 to 3.95). A propensity-matching algorithm in a subset of 1,391 patients was unable to find a significant difference in CVM between those who did or did not receive ADT. CONCLUSION: Patients matched on propensity to receive ADT did not show an association between ADT and CVM. This suggests that potential unmeasured variables affecting treatment selection may confound the relationship between ADT use and cardiovascular risk. However, an association may yet exist, because the propensity score could not include all known risk factors for CVM.
PURPOSE: The potential association between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and cardiovascular mortality (CVM) remains controversial. This study assessed mortality outcomes in a large national registry to further elucidate the association between treatment selection and cause of mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 7,248 men in the CaPSURE registry were analyzed. Treatment was categorized as local only, primary ADT monotherapy, local treatment plus ADT, and watchful waiting/active surveillance (WW/AS). Competing hazards survival analysis was performed for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), CVM, and all-cause mortality. A propensity score-adjusted and a propensity-matched analysis were undertaken to adjust for imbalances in covariates among men receiving various treatments. RESULTS:Patients treated with ADT or WW/AS had a higher likelihood of PCSM than those treated with local therapy alone. Patients treated with primary ADT had an almost two-fold greater likelihood of CVM (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.97) than those treated with local therapy alone; however, patients treated with WW/AS had a greater than two-fold increased risk of CVM (HR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.53 to 3.95). A propensity-matching algorithm in a subset of 1,391 patients was unable to find a significant difference in CVM between those who did or did not receive ADT. CONCLUSION:Patients matched on propensity to receive ADT did not show an association between ADT and CVM. This suggests that potential unmeasured variables affecting treatment selection may confound the relationship between ADT use and cardiovascular risk. However, an association may yet exist, because the propensity score could not include all known risk factors for CVM.
Authors: Axel Heidenreich; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Steven Joniau; Malcolm Mason; Vsevolod Matveev; Nicolas Mottet; Hans-Peter Schmid; Theo van der Kwast; Thomas Wiegel; Filliberto Zattoni Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-10-28 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Michel Bolla; Laurence Collette; Léo Blank; Padraig Warde; Jean Bernard Dubois; René-Olivier Mirimanoff; Guy Storme; Jacques Bernier; Abraham Kuten; Cora Sternberg; Johan Mattelaer; José Lopez Torecilla; J Rafael Pfeffer; Carmel Lino Cutajar; Alfredo Zurlo; Marianne Pierart Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-07-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Matthew R Cooperberg; Jeanette M Broering; Mark S Litwin; Deborah P Lubeck; Shilpa S Mehta; James M Henning; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Anthony V D'Amico; James W Denham; Juanita Crook; Ming-Hui Chen; Samuel Z Goldhaber; David S Lamb; David Joseph; Keen-Hun Tai; Shawn Malone; Charles Ludgate; Allison Steigler; Philip W Kantoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-06-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jason A Efstathiou; Kyounghwa Bae; William U Shipley; Gerald E Hanks; Miljenko V Pilepich; Howard M Sandler; Matthew R Smith Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-01-15 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: B Castagneto; C Di Pietrantonj; I Stevani; A Anfossi; M Arzese; L Giorcelli; L Giaretto Journal: Med Oncol Date: 2013-08-31 Impact factor: 3.064
Authors: Tony Soeyonggo; Jennifer Locke; Maria Elizabeth Del Giudice; Shabbir Alibhai; Neil Eric Fleshner; Padraig Warde Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: A Kutikov; M R Cooperberg; A T Paciorek; R G Uzzo; P R Carroll; S A Boorjian Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Justin C Voog; Rebecca Paulus; William U Shipley; Matthew R Smith; David G McGowan; Christopher U Jones; Jean-Paul Bahary; Kenneth L Zeitzer; Luis Souhami; Mark H Leibenhaut; Marvin Rotman; Siraj M Husain; Elizabeth Gore; Adam Raben; Susan Chafe; Howard M Sandler; Jason A Efstathiou Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 20.096