Primary androgen deprivation therapy as monotherapy in unfavourable intermediate- and high-risk localised prostate cancer: a Singaporean single-centre perspective
- 30 Downloads
Primary ADT (pADT) monotherapy is used significantly for patients with clinically localised disease in Asia and is acceptable even by guidelines, especially in intermediate- and high-risk disease. This occurs despite controversy in the West and data suggesting association with adverse effects, notably cardiovascular events. We therefore sought to assess the impact of pADT on all-cause mortality and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in Asian men with high-risk and unfavourable intermediate-risk PCa.
With cancer registry data, men from a single centre in Singapore with clinically localised high-risk/unfavourable intermediate-risk PCa diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 and either treated conservatively with no therapy or started on pADT within 1 year of diagnosis were followed up through January 2017. Patients with non-localised PCa (clinical stage T4, regional/distant lymph node involvement, metastases), or receipt of local therapy (radical prostatectomy/radiotherapy) were excluded. The primary outcomes of all-cause mortality and PCSM were analysed with Cox proportional hazards regression models.
Three hundred and forty Asian men were analysed, and 177 (52.1%) were started on pADT, with mean age of 77 (49–98) years. There were 119 deaths in the cohort, and 68 (38.4%) occurred in patients treated with pADT (median follow-up, 4.4 years). After adjusting for comorbidities and clinical characteristics, pADT did not provide benefit to all-cause mortality, PCSM or cardiovascular mortality.
For clinically localised unfavourable intermediate-risk and high-risk PCa, starting pADT within 12 months of diagnosis is not associated with improved 5-year all-cause mortality or PCSM compared to patients treated conservatively with no therapy and should be discouraged due to lack of mortality benefit.
KeywordsAndrogen deprivation therapy Prostate cancer Intermediate risk High risk
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors involved in this study declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in this study.
- 3.Loblaw DA, Virgo KS, Nam R, Somerfield MR, Ben-Josef E et al (2007) Initial hormonal management of androgen-sensitive metastatic, recurrent, or progressive prostate cancer: 2006 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 25:1596–1605CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines Asia Consensus for Prostate Cancer. http://demo.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/prostate-asia.pdf
- 13.D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz S et al (1998) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy or, interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 280(11):969–974. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.11.969 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Lu-Yao GL, Albertsen PC, Moore DF et al (2014) Fifteen-year survival outcomes following primary androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. JAMA 174(9):1460–1467Google Scholar
- 19.Studer UE, Whelan P, Wimpissinger F et al (2014) Differences in time to disease progression do not predict for cancer-specific survival in patients receiving immediate or deferred androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: final results of EORTC randomized trial 30891 with 12 years of follow-up. Eur Urol 66:829–838CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar