Literature DB >> 9698663

Parenteral polyoestradiol phosphate vs orchidectomy in the treatment of advanced prostatic cancer. Efficacy and cardiovascular complications: a 2-year follow-up report of a national, prospective prostatic cancer study. Finnprostate Group.

A K Mikkola1, M L Ruutu, J L Aro, S A Rannikko, J O Salo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and cardiovascular complications of orchidectomy or polyoestradiol phosphate (PEP) in the treatment of advanced prostatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective, randomized study 444 patients (mean age 73 years, range 45-91) with T3-4 M0 or T1-4 M1 prostatic cancer were treated either by orchidectomy (group 1, n = 217) or parenteral PEP (group 2, n = 227; 240 mg/month). The patients were examined at 3 and 6 months after start of the therapy and thereafter every 6 months; they were also assessed whenever they had symptoms indicating progression. Possible cardiovascular complications included myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis.
RESULTS: After a follow-up of 2 years there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in progression-free time; 65 of 217 (30%) patients in group 1 showed evidence of progression, including seven (3%) who died from prostate cancer. In group 2, 64 of 227 (28%) patients showed progression and eight (3.5%) died from prostatic cancer. There were 10 (5%) cardiovascular complications in patients in group 1, including five (2%) cardiovascular deaths; in group 2 there were 24 (11%) and 14 (6%), respectively. During the first year of treatment there were three (1.4%) cardiovascular complications in group 1 and 14 (6%) in group 2 (P < 0.05), and during the second year, seven (4%) and 10 (6%), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Parenteral PEP (240 mg/month) seems to be as efficient as orchidectomy in inhibiting disease in patients with advanced prostatic cancer (T3-4 M0 and T1-4 M1). There were more cardiovascular complications in patients treated with PEP than after orchidectomy; the difference was statistically significant during the first year of treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9698663     DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00688.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Urol        ISSN: 0007-1331


  6 in total

1.  Risk factors associated with cardiovascular events during testosterone administration in older men with mobility limitation.

Authors:  Shehzad Basaria; Maithili N Davda; Thomas G Travison; Jagadish Ulloor; Ravinder Singh; Shalender Bhasin
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2012-05-04       Impact factor: 6.053

2.  The course of metastatic prostate cancer under treatment.

Authors:  Aslan Demir; Kursat Cecen; Mert Ali Karadag; Ramazan Kocaaslan; Levent Turkeri
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-12-10

Review 3.  Mortality, cardiovascular risk, and androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: A systematic review with direct and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

Authors:  Lucie-Marie Scailteux; Florian Naudet; Quentin Alimi; Sébastien Vincendeau; Emmanuel Oger
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 4.  Trials of testosterone replacement reporting cardiovascular adverse events.

Authors:  Thiago Gagliano-Jucá; Shehzad Basaria
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.285

5.  Parenteral oestrogen in the treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  G Norman; M E Dean; R E Langley; Z C Hodges; G Ritchie; M K B Parmar; M R Sydes; P Abel; A J Eastwood
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-02-12       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 6.  Cardiovascular effects of hormone therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jason F Lester; Malcolm D Mason
Journal:  Drug Healthc Patient Saf       Date:  2015-07-23
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.