Captopril may reduce biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) failure following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer

Abstract

A lower rate of biochemical recurrence was observed in men subjected to radical prostatectomy treated with captopril postoperatively than in those not receiving captopril. These results were based on only 32 observations; a larger study may show no evidence of an association.

The association between antihypertensive drug use and incidence of prostate cancer in Finland: a population-based case–control study

“…One clinical study has suggested that use of ACE inhibitor captopril might delay PSA relapse following radical prostatectomy [14]. We observed a decreasing trend in overall prostate cancer risk among men using beta-blockers, but not among ACE inhibitor users.…”

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in cancer progression and survival: a systematic review

“…Two studies reported a better progression-free survival among users of ACEIs or ARBs with renal cell carcinoma and pancreatic cancer [25,27]. One study found a significantly reduced risk of PSA failure in prostate cancer patients who received ACEIs [32] while another study observed a 78% reduction in the risk of distant metastasis among colorectal cancer patients [29]. One study reported a worse prognosis in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival among ACEI users with multiple myeloma [30] while another observed an increase in the risk of tumour recurrence among early stage breast cancer patients [24].…”

“…Three studies investigated progression-free survival [25,27,30]; two studies assessed relapse/disease-free survival [23,26] while two studies additionally examined tumour recurrence as an outcome [23,24,31]. One study assessed biochemical recurrence (defined as persistent or rising serum PSA of 0.10 lg/l or more measured on at least two occasions) among prostate cancer patients [32]. A meta-analysis of the results from this review was not possible as too few relevant reports were identified, and there was substantial heterogeneity between the studies in terms of cancers studied and study outcomes.…”

“…The authors initially compared outcomes between the patients in the combined treatment group and the control group, while a year later, they compared outcomes between the single treatment groups and the historical control group. Ronquist et al [32] used a quasi-randomized design to allocate patients into an intervention (12.5 mg of captopril twice daily) or control group (no ACEI) according to their date of birth. Nine studies assessed overall survival [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31]; one of these also assessed cancer-specific mortality [24].…”

“…Study characteristics are outlined in Table 1. Eight of the studies were hospital-based retrospective cohort studies [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30], and two were hospitalbased prospective trials [31,32]. Three of the studies were European based [28,30,32]; two were based in Japan [27,31] and five in North America [23][24][25][26]29].…”