Leonardo Oliveira Reis1, Emerson Luis Zani2, Herney Andrés García-Perdomo3. 1. UroScience and Urology Department, Pontifical Catholic University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. reisleo.l@gmail.com. 2. UroScience and Urology Department, Pontifical Catholic University of Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. UROGIV Research Group, School of Medicine, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness and harms of DES in treating prostate cancer compared to other forms of androgen deprivation therapy (orchiectomy, LHRH agonists, and anti-androgens). METHODS: We included clinical trials comparing DES with other forms of ADT (bicalutamide, flutamide, LHRH agonists, or orchiectomy) in PCa treatment. The primary outcomes were overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and progression-free survival, and secondary outcomes were cardiovascular effects. We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central, and Lilacs from inception to nowadays and saturated information for unpublished data in other sources. We performed a qualitative analysis of all included studies. It was not possible to perform meta-analysis due to low-quality trials and high heterogeneity. RESULTS: Overall, 1700 references were scanned and 14 prospective randomized trials with a total of 3986 patients were included in the final analysis. Although trials showed DES as similarly effective to another forms of ADT, evidences about cardiovascular toxicity in out of date high doses have discouraged its use. In doses of 1 mg, DES has been used as secondary line PCa treatment with safety. CONCLUSIONS: DES might be similarly effective to other forms of ADT on advanced PCa patients, with potential important roles. Intriguingly, the burden of severe cardiovascular toxicity is mainly related to old-fashioned doses of 5.0 and 3.0 mg. Modern PCa hormonal knowledge warrants stout high-quality prospective randomized trials in the low-dose 1 mg DES scenario.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness and harms of DES in treating prostate cancer compared to other forms of androgen deprivation therapy (orchiectomy, LHRH agonists, and anti-androgens). METHODS: We included clinical trials comparing DES with other forms of ADT (bicalutamide, flutamide, LHRH agonists, or orchiectomy) in PCa treatment. The primary outcomes were overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and progression-free survival, and secondary outcomes were cardiovascular effects. We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central, and Lilacs from inception to nowadays and saturated information for unpublished data in other sources. We performed a qualitative analysis of all included studies. It was not possible to perform meta-analysis due to low-quality trials and high heterogeneity. RESULTS: Overall, 1700 references were scanned and 14 prospective randomized trials with a total of 3986 patients were included in the final analysis. Although trials showed DES as similarly effective to another forms of ADT, evidences about cardiovascular toxicity in out of date high doses have discouraged its use. In doses of 1 mg, DES has been used as secondary line PCa treatment with safety. CONCLUSIONS:DES might be similarly effective to other forms of ADT on advanced PCa patients, with potential important roles. Intriguingly, the burden of severe cardiovascular toxicity is mainly related to old-fashioned doses of 5.0 and 3.0 mg. Modern PCa hormonal knowledge warrants stout high-quality prospective randomized trials in the low-dose 1 mg DES scenario.
Authors: L A Emtage; C Trethowan; K Kelly; D Arkell; D M Wallace; M Hughes; A Hay; R Blacklock; M Jones; A Rouse Journal: Prog Clin Biol Res Date: 1989
Authors: C N Robertson; K M Roberson; G M Padilla; E T O'Brien; J M Cook; C S Kim; R L Fine Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1996-07-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Kyle O Rove; E David Crawford; Massimo Perachino; Juan Morote; Laurence Klotz; Paul H Lange; Gerald L Andriole; Alvin M Matsumoto; Samir S Taneja; Mario A Eisenberger; Leonardo O Reis Journal: Urology Date: 2014-04-06 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: A Chang; B Yeap; T Davis; R Blum; R Hahn; O Khanna; H Fisher; J Rosenthal; R Witte; R Schinella; D Trump Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 44.544