| Literature DB >> 27330919 |
Siebren Dijkstra1, Wim P J Witjes1, Erik P M Roos2, Peter L M Vijverberg3, Arno D H Geboers4, Jos L Bruins5, Geert A H J Smits6, Henk Vergunst7, Peter F A Mulders1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Compare the efficacy and tolerability of dutasteride in combination with bicalutamide to bicalutamide monotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa).Entities:
Keywords: 5α-Reductase inhibitor; Bicalutamide; Dutasteride; Overall survival; PSA progression; Prostate cancer
Year: 2016 PMID: 27330919 PMCID: PMC4870485 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2280-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Baseline characteristics of eligible randomised patients
| Bicalutamide | Bicalutamide + dutasteride | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 71 (54.2–86.1) | 73 (54.9–90.7) | 0.307† |
| Baseline PSA (ng/mL) | 43.4 (11.6–15,000) | 46.3 (11.3–660) | 0.397† |
|
| 0.561* | ||
| T1 | 2 (2.5) | 5 (7.0) | |
| T2 | 12 (15.2) | 7 (9.9) | |
| T3 | 49 (62.0) | 47 (66.2) | |
| T4 | 8 (10.1) | 7 (9.9) | |
| Tx | 8 (10.1) | 5 (7.0) | |
|
| 0.746* | ||
| M0 | 45 (57.0) | 39 (54.9) | |
| M1 | 24 (30.4) | 26 (36.6) | |
| Mx | 10 (12.6) | 6 (8.5) | |
|
| 0.767* | ||
| ≤6 | 16 (20.3) | 12 (16.9) | |
| 7 | 25 (31.6) | 28 (39.4) | |
| 8 | 13 (16.5) | 12 (16.9) | |
| 9 | 10 (12.7) | 7 (9.9) | |
| 10 | 2 (2.5) | 0 (0) | |
| Missing | 13 (16.5) | 12 (16.9) | |
|
| 0.010* | ||
| Radical prostatectomy | 6 (7.6) | 3 (4.2) | |
| Radiotherapy treatment | 12 (15.2) | 27 (38.0) | |
| None | 49 (62.0) | 36 (50.7) | |
| Missing | 12 (15.2) | 5 (7.0) | |
* Pearson Chi square test; †Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test
Fig. 1Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival (a) and biochemical progression-free survival (b) in the bicalutamide group and the bicalutamide plus dutasteride group
Fig. 2Quality of life outcome in both groups on five functional scales (physical, emotional, social, sexual functioning and general quality of life) and six symptom scales (nausea, pain, urinary, bowel and treatment related symptoms) at screening, 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment. A high score for general quality of life or a functional scale reflects a high QoL or a high level of functioning, whereas a high score for a symptoms scale implies a high level of symptoms