OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (IADT) vs continuous androgen deprivation therapy (CADT) for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer; we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessing the risks of disease progression, all-cause, and disease-specific mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of several bibliographic systems to identify all RCTs of IADT in men with newly diagnosed metastatic or biochemical only prostate cancer. We abstracted outcome data, study characteristics, and participant demographics. We performed heterogeneity tests and calculated the summarized risk differences (RD) and risk ratios at 95% confidence intervals (CI), using inverse variance methods in random-effects approaches. RESULTS: We identified 8 RCTs (N = 4664) comparing mortality between IADT and CADT. For all men combined, we observed small but nonsignificant differences in all-cause mortality (RD = 0.02, 95% CI = -0.02, 0.06), disease-specific mortality (RD = 0.04, 95% CI = -0.01, 0.08), and disease progression (RD = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.09, 0.04). Among the prespecified subgroup with histologically confirmed, newly diagnosed metastatic disease, we found no difference in overall survival (RD = 0.00, 95% CI = -0.09, 0.09). CONCLUSION: We found no difference in overall survival, but a small increased risk in disease-specific survival for men treated with IADT relative to CADT was observed. IADT could be considered as an alternative to CADT because of better quality of life outcome. Patients should be informed of the possible risks and benefits of both therapies. More research confirming the benefits of IADT vs CADT is needed to inform treatment decisions.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (IADT) vs continuous androgen deprivation therapy (CADT) for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer; we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessing the risks of disease progression, all-cause, and disease-specific mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of several bibliographic systems to identify all RCTs of IADT in men with newly diagnosed metastatic or biochemical only prostate cancer. We abstracted outcome data, study characteristics, and participant demographics. We performed heterogeneity tests and calculated the summarized risk differences (RD) and risk ratios at 95% confidence intervals (CI), using inverse variance methods in random-effects approaches. RESULTS: We identified 8 RCTs (N = 4664) comparing mortality between IADT and CADT. For all men combined, we observed small but nonsignificant differences in all-cause mortality (RD = 0.02, 95% CI = -0.02, 0.06), disease-specific mortality (RD = 0.04, 95% CI = -0.01, 0.08), and disease progression (RD = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.09, 0.04). Among the prespecified subgroup with histologically confirmed, newly diagnosed metastatic disease, we found no difference in overall survival (RD = 0.00, 95% CI = -0.09, 0.09). CONCLUSION: We found no difference in overall survival, but a small increased risk in disease-specific survival for men treated with IADT relative to CADT was observed. IADT could be considered as an alternative to CADT because of better quality of life outcome. Patients should be informed of the possible risks and benefits of both therapies. More research confirming the benefits of IADT vs CADT is needed to inform treatment decisions.
Authors: Axel Heidenreich; Gunnar Aus; Michel Bolla; Steven Joniau; Vsevolod B Matveev; Hans Peter Schmid; Filliberto Zattoni Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2007-09-19 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Johan F Langenhuijsen; Dirk Badhauser; Berthold Schaaf; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; J Alfred Witjes; Peter F A Mulders Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2011-05-10 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Arto J Salonen; Kimmo Taari; Martti Ala-Opas; Jouko Viitanen; Seppo Lundstedt; Teuvo L J Tammela Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-04-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Glenn N Levine; Anthony V D'Amico; Peter Berger; Peter E Clark; Robert H Eckel; Nancy L Keating; Richard V Milani; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Matthew R Smith; Neil Zakai Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Fernando E C Calais da Silva; Aldo V Bono; Peter Whelan; Maurizio Brausi; Anton Marques Queimadelos; Jose A Portillo Martin; Ziya Kirkali; Fernando M V Calais da Silva; Chris Robertson Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2009-02-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: José López Torrecilla; Asunción Hervás; Almudena Zapatero; Antonio Gómez Caamaño; Victor Macías; Ismael Herruzo; Xavier Maldonado; Alfonso Gómez Iturriaga; Francesc Casas; Carmen González San Segundo Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2015-05-30
Authors: F Casas; I Henríquez; A Bejar; X Maldonado; A Alvarez; C González-Sansegundo; A Boladeras; F Ferrer; A Hervás; I Herruzo; M Caro; I Rodriguez; C Ferrer Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2016-10-21 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Huei-Ting Tsai; Ruth M Pfeiffer; George K Philips; Ana Barac; Alex Z Fu; David F Penson; Yingjun Zhou; Arnold L Potosky Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 7.450