Literature DB >> 24440304

Disease control outcomes from analysis of pooled individual patient data from five comparative randomised clinical trials of degarelix versus luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists.

Laurence Klotz1, Kurt Miller2, E David Crawford3, Neal Shore4, Bertrand Tombal5, Cathrina Karup6, Anders Malmberg6, Bo-Eric Persson7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, degarelix, with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists indicate differences in outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in efficacy and safety outcomes in a pooled analysis of trials comparing degarelix with LHRH agonists. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were pooled from five prospective, phase 3 or 3b randomised trials (n=1925) of degarelix and leuprolide or goserelin in men requiring androgen deprivation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer. Patients received either 3 mo (n=467) or 12 mo (n=1458) of treatment. INTERVENTION: Men were randomised to receive degarelix (n=1266), leuprolide (n=201), or goserelin (n=458). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analyses were supported by the Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for disease-related baseline factors, to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of efficacy and safety outcomes. The Fisher exact test compared crude incidences of adverse events. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (PFS) was improved in the degarelix group (HR: 0.71; p=0.017). For patients with baseline PSA levels >20 ng/ml, the HR for PSA PFS was 0.74 (p=0.052). Overall survival (OS) was higher in the degarelix group (HR: 0.47; p=0.023). OS was particularly improved with degarelix in patients with baseline testosterone levels >2 ng/ml (HR: 0.36; p=0.006). In terms of disease-related adverse events, there were, overall, fewer joint-related signs and symptoms, musculoskeletal events, and urinary tract events in the degarelix group.
CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate clinical benefits with degarelix, including a significant improvement in PSA PFS and OS, as well as reduced incidence of joint, musculoskeletal, and urinary tract adverse events, compared with LHRH agonists.
Copyright © 2014 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Androgen deprivation therapy; Degarelix; Goserelin; Leuprolide; Prostate cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24440304     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  37 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacotherapeutic Targeting of G Protein-Coupled Receptors in Oncology: Examples of Approved Therapies and Emerging Concepts.

Authors:  Rosamaria Lappano; Marcello Maggiolini
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  Binding site of activators of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator in the nucleotide binding domains.

Authors:  O Moran; L J V Galietta; O Zegarra-Moran
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 9.261

Review 3.  Degarelix: a review of its use in patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Natalie J Carter; Susan J Keam
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Tipping the balance in favour of degarelix for ADT.

Authors:  Melanie Clyne
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  [Docetaxel or abiraterone in combination with androgen deprivation therapy for metastatic prostate cancer].

Authors:  P Hammerer; L Manka
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 6.  Degarelix versus luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists for the treatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy N Clinton; Solomon L Woldu; Ganesh V Raj
Journal:  Expert Opin Pharmacother       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 3.889

Review 7.  [Cardiovascular risk of androgen deprivation therapy for treatment of hormone-dependent prostate cancer : Differences between GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists].

Authors:  C Tschöpe; B Kherad; F Spillmann; C A Schneider; B Pieske; F Krackhardt
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 1.443

8.  Switching from a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to a GnRH antagonist in prostate cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kaleem S Atchia; Christopher J D Wallis; Neil Fleshner; Paul Toren
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Degarelix monotherapy compared with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists plus anti-androgen flare protection in advanced prostate cancer: an analysis of two randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Peter Iversen; Jan-Erik Damber; Anders Malmberg; Bo-Eric Persson; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2015-12-16

Review 10.  [Cardiovascular risk patients under androgen deprivation therapy: Lower risk with GnRH antagonists compared to LHRH agonists?].

Authors:  Axel S Merseburger; Daniel Sedding; Kai Hüter
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.