James A Eastham1, Glenn Heller1, David W Hillman2, Olwen M Hahn3, J Kellogg Parsons4, James L Mohler5, Eric J Small6, Michael Morris1. 1. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 2. Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Alliance Protocol Operations Office, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Moores Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California. 5. Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York. 6. Medical Center-Mount Zion, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Men with low serum testosterone at the time of prostate cancer diagnosis are frequently considered to have more aggressive disease. We examined treatment outcomes in men with clinically localized high-risk cancer to determine if baseline testosterone level identified men at higher risk for cancer progression after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Alliance/CALGB 90203 randomized men with clinically localized high-risk prostate cancer to radical prostatectomy alone or neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy and radical prostatectomy. Men with available baseline testosterone levels who had not received androgen deprivation prior to study enrollment were studied (656). Testosterone level was examined as a continuous variable, as quartiles, and separately in men with an absolute testosterone level above/below 150 ng/dl. Outcomes evaluated were overall survival and event-free survival with events defined by biochemical recurrence, secondary treatment, prostate cancer metastasis, and death. RESULTS: We were unable to demonstrate a difference between baseline serum testosterone level measured as a continuous variable, as quartiles, or as a dichotomous variable (above/below 150 ng/dl) with the outcomes measured. This finding was observed in both arms of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline serum testosterone level did not predict outcomes in men with clinically localized high-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy alone or neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy and radical prostatectomy.
PURPOSE: Men with low serum testosterone at the time of prostate cancer diagnosis are frequently considered to have more aggressive disease. We examined treatment outcomes in men with clinically localized high-risk cancer to determine if baseline testosterone level identified men at higher risk for cancer progression after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Alliance/CALGB 90203 randomized men with clinically localized high-risk prostate cancer to radical prostatectomy alone or neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy and radical prostatectomy. Men with available baseline testosterone levels who had not received androgen deprivation prior to study enrollment were studied (656). Testosterone level was examined as a continuous variable, as quartiles, and separately in men with an absolute testosterone level above/below 150 ng/dl. Outcomes evaluated were overall survival and event-free survival with events defined by biochemical recurrence, secondary treatment, prostate cancer metastasis, and death. RESULTS: We were unable to demonstrate a difference between baseline serum testosterone level measured as a continuous variable, as quartiles, or as a dichotomous variable (above/below 150 ng/dl) with the outcomes measured. This finding was observed in both arms of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline serum testosterone level did not predict outcomes in men with clinically localized high-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy alone or neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy and radical prostatectomy.
Authors: Jason C Massengill; Leon Sun; Judd W Moul; Hongyu Wu; David G McLeod; Christopher Amling; Raymond Lance; John Foley; Wade Sexton; Leo Kusuda; Andrew Chung; Douglas Soderdahl; Timothy Donahue Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Mack Roach; Kyounghwa Bae; Colleen Lawton; B J Donnelly; David Grignon; Gerald E Hanks; Arthur Porter; Herbert Lepor; Varagur Venketesan; Howard Sandler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 7.038