The FinnProstate Study VII: Intermittent Versus Continuous Androgen Deprivation in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer

Salonen, Arto J.; Taari, Kimmo; Ala‐Opas, Martti; Viitanen, Jouko; Lundstedt, Seppo; Tammela, Teuvo L.J.

doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.122

Cited by 72 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The FinnProstate Group had undertaken a randomized trial to compare IAD and CAD in 852 patients with advanced prostate cancer. The group reported that IAD appeared to be a feasible, efficient and safe method to treat advanced prostate cancer compared with CAD (18).…”

Section: Presentation 3: How Should the Results Of The Swog 9346 (Intmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sixth Joint Meeting of J-CaP and CaPSURE--A Multinational Perspective on Prostate Cancer Management and Patient Outcomes

Akaza¹,

Hinotsu²,

Cooperberg³

et al. 2013

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report summarizes the presentations and discussions that took place at the Sixth Joint Meeting of J-CaP and CaPSURE held in San Francisco, USA, in August 2012. The J-CaP and CaPSURE Joint Initiative was established in 2007 with the objective of analyzing, reviewing, comparing and contrasting data for prostate cancer patients from Japan and the USA within the two important large-scale, longitudinal, observational databases-J-CaP and CaPSURE. Since this initial collaboration between teams in the USA and Japan, the initiative has now expanded to include representatives of other Asian countries, several of whom have either established or are planning their own national prostate cancer databases. Several key topics were considered at this Sixth Joint Meeting including the current status of the J-CaP and CaPSURE databases and opportunities for collaboration with the more recently developed Asian prostate cancer databases. The latest comparative data from J-CaP and CaPSURE regarding outcomes following androgen deprivation therapy and combined androgen blockade were also reviewed. The possibility of a global chemoprevention trial to investigate the influence of soy isoflavones on prostate cancer incidence was considered. In addition, the ongoing debate regarding the role of screening and the use of active surveillance as a treatment option in the USA was discussed. The collaborators agreed that sharing of data and treatment practices on a global scale would undoubtedly benefit the clinical management of prostate cancer patients worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Presentation 3: How Should the Results Of The Swog 9346 (Intmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sixth Joint Meeting of J-CaP and CaPSURE--A Multinational Perspective on Prostate Cancer Management and Patient Outcomes

Akaza¹,

Hinotsu²,

Cooperberg³

et al. 2013

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From them, 44 were selected and full-article was retrieved for evaluation. Seven randomized multicenter phase III trials were identified and included (18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24) in the review. These seven studies enrolled and randomized 4675 patients to continuous versus intermittent androgen deprivation therapy, publishing extensive data and results.…”

Section: Assessment Of Selected Studies and Data Collection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the FinnProstate VII trial (19), 554 patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer were enrolled in the study. The induction period of treatment was 6 months.…”

Section: Mixed Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of continuous vs intermittent androgen deprivation therapy: Redefining the gold standard in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Myths, facts and new data on a perpetual dispute

Kratiras

Konstantinidis²,

Skriapas

2014

Int. braz j urol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ARTICLE INFO ______________________________________________________________ ______________________Objectives: To review the literature and present new data of continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) vs intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) as therapies for prostate cancer in terms of survival and quality of life and clarify practical issues in the use of IAD. Materials and Methods:We conducted a systematic search on Medline and Embase databases using "prostatic neoplasm" and "intermittent androgen deprivation" as search terms. We reviewed meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, reviews, clinical trials and practise guidelines written in English from 2000 and onwards until 01/04/2013. Ten randomized controlled trials were identified. Seven of them published extensive data and results randomizing 4675 patients to IAD versus CAD. Data from the other three randomized trials were limited. Results: Over the last years studies confirmed that IAD is an effective alternative approach to hormonal deprivation providing simultaneously several potential benefits in terms of quality of life and cost effectiveness. Thus, in patients with non metastatic, advanced prostate cancer IAD could be used as standard treatment, while in metastatic prostate cancer IAD role still remains ambiguous. Conclusions: Nowadays, revaluation of the gold standard of ADT in advanced prostate cancer appears essential. Recent data established that IAD should no longer be considered as investigational, since its effectiveness has been proven, especially in patients suffering from non-metastatic advanced prostate cancer.

show abstract

“…Despite the initial positive response, a number of patients may experience significant adverse effects (4)(5)(6). Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is inevitable following a variable period of response to ADT (7)(8)(9)(10).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversion to monotherapy with luteinizing-hormone releasing hormone agonist or orchiectomy after reaching PSA nadir following maximal androgen blockade is able to prolong progression-free survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer: A propensity score matching analysis

Min

Ahn

2017

Oncology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The present study evaluated androgen deprivation methods to determine the approach that most improves the progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Patients had received continuous maximal androgen blockade (MAB) or monotherapy [luteinizing-hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist or orchiectomy] following the reaching of the prostate specific antigen (PSA) nadir. The medical records of 293 patients who received MAB following a diagnosis of metastatic prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Following attainment of the PSA nadir and treatment with MAB, patients were maintained on continuous MAB (group CMAB) or converted to monotherapy (group MONO). Disease progression, defined as progression to castration-resistant prostate cancer, was evaluated and compared between the treatment modalities. PFS was compared between patients who received CMAB vs. MONO using 2:1 (102:53) propensity score matching; the basic clinicopathological characteristics (age, Gleason score, PSA and extent of bone metastasis) were similar between the groups. Disease progression was observed in 70.9% of all patients, with a median treatment period of 22.7 months. The median PFS time was 19.5 months in the CMAB group and 28.8 months in the MONO group (P=0.008). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that PFS was significantly associated with the type of maintenance androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; log rank <0.005). Multivariate analysis revealed that the type of maintenance ADT and the pretreatment extent of bone metastasis were independent predictors of prolonged PFS. In this propensity score matched-analysis, conversion to monotherapy with a LHRH agonist or orchiectomy following attainment of the PSA nadir with initial MAB, prolonged the PFS, suggesting that monotherapy maintenance following initial MAB may benefit patients by reducing side effects without decreasing treatment efficacy.

show abstract

The FinnProstate Study VII: Intermittent Versus Continuous Androgen Deprivation in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer

Abstract: Intermittent androgen deprivation is a feasible, efficient and safe method to treat advanced prostate cancer compared with continuous androgen deprivation.

Cited by 72 publications

References 21 publications

Sixth Joint Meeting of J-CaP and CaPSURE--A Multinational Perspective on Prostate Cancer Management and Patient Outcomes

Sixth Joint Meeting of J-CaP and CaPSURE--A Multinational Perspective on Prostate Cancer Management and Patient Outcomes

A review of continuous vs intermittent androgen deprivation therapy: Redefining the gold standard in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Myths, facts and new data on a perpetual dispute

Conversion to monotherapy with luteinizing-hormone releasing hormone agonist or orchiectomy after reaching PSA nadir following maximal androgen blockade is able to prolong progression-free survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer: A propensity score matching analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About