Estrogen therapy in patients with prostate cancer: a contemporary systematic review
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).
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 We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central, and Lilacs from inception to nowadays and saturated information for unpublished data in other sources.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.
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 Although trials showed DES as similarly effective to another forms of ADT, evidences about cardiovascular toxicity in out of date high doses have discouraged its use.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.
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.
KeywordsProstate cancer Estrogen Endocrine therapy Treatment Androgen Systematic review
LOR contributed to protocol design, writing and mentoring. ELZ contributed to searching and assessing documents, and writing. HAGP contributed to searching and assessing documents, drafting the final document.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the review reported.
- 1.Huggins C, Hodges CV (1941) Studies on prostatic cancer: I. The effect of castration, of estrogen and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. Cancer Res 1(4):293–297Google Scholar
- 8.Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’ s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials 343:1–9Google Scholar
- 12.Lund F, Rasmussen F (1988) Flutamide versus stilboestrol in the management of advanced prostatic cancer: a controlled prospective study. Br J Urol 61(2):140–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1988.tb05062.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Waymont B, Lynch T, Dunn J, Emtage L, Arkell D, Wallace D et al (1992) Phase III randomised study of zoladex versus stilboestrol in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Br J Urol 69(6):614–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1992.tb15633.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Scherr D, Pitts WR, Vaughn ED (2005) Diethylstilbesterol revisited: androgen deprivation, osteoporosis and prostate cancer. J Urol 167(2 Pt 1):535–538Google Scholar
- 28.Reis LO, De Mendonça GB, Carneiro BD, Schneider E, Gewehr EV, Meirelles A et al (2011) Diethylstilbestrol 1 mg in the treatment of acute urinary retention due to prostatic obstruction in the elderly: a preliminary study. Adv Urol 984382. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24575128