scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation and radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: 10-year data from the TROG 96.01 randomised trial

TL;DR: 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation combined radiotherapy is an effective treatment option for locally advanced prostate cancer, particularly in men without nodal metastases or pre-existing metabolic comorbidities.
Abstract: Summary Background The TROG 96.01 trial assessed whether 3-month and 6-month short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (NADT) decreases clinical progression and mortality after radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Here we report the 10-year results. Methods Between June, 1996, and February, 2000, 818 men with T2b, T2c, T3, and T4 N0 M0 prostate cancers were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy alone, 3 months of NADT plus radiotherapy, or 6 months of NADT plus radiotherapy. The radiotherapy dose for all groups was 66 Gy, delivered to the prostate and seminal vesicles (excluding pelvic nodes) in 33 fractions of 2 Gy per day (excluding weekends) over 6·5–7·0 weeks. NADT consisted of 3·6 mg goserelin given subcutaneously every month and 250 mg flutamide given orally three times a day. NADT began 2 months before radiotherapy for the 3-month NADT group and 5 months before radiotherapy for the 6-month NADT group. Primary endpoints were prostate-cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Treatment allocation was open label and randomisation was done with a minimisation technique according to age, clinical stage, tumour grade, and initial prostate-specific antigen concentration (PSA). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. The trial has been closed to follow-up and all main endpoint analyses are completed. The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12607000237482. Findings 802 men were eligible for analysis (270 in the radiotherapy alone group, 265 in the 3-month NADT group, and 267 in the 6-month NADT group) after a median follow-up of 10·6 years (IQR 6·9–11·6). Compared with radiotherapy alone, 3 months of NADT decreased the cumulative incidence of PSA progression (adjusted hazard ratio 0·72, 95% CI 0·57–0·90; p=0·003) and local progression (0·49, 0·33–0·73; p=0·0005), and improved event-free survival (0·63, 0·52–0·77; p Interpretation 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation combined radiotherapy is an effective treatment option for locally advanced prostate cancer, particularly in men without nodal metastases or pre-existing metabolic comorbidities that could be exacerbated by prolonged androgen deprivation. Funding Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council, Hunter Medical Research Institute, AstraZeneca, and Schering-Plough.
Citations
More filters
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: The introduction of an effective blood test, prostate specific antigen (PSA), has made it possible to diagnose more and more men in an earlier stage where they can be offered potentially curative treatments, and this is the subject of the EAU guidelines on prostate cancer.
Abstract: The introduction of an effective blood test, prostate specific antigen (PSA), has made it possible to diagnose more and more men in an earlier stage where they can be offered potentially curative treatments. The other side of the coin is that if effective diagnostic procedures are used unselectively in elderly men with a short life expectancy, a problem with over diagnosis and over treatment might occur. Thus the same stage of prostate cancer may need different treatment strategies, pending on the patient’s life expectancy. This, and many other issues regarding the disease, is the subject of the EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. G UI DE LI N ES O N P RO ST AT E CA N CE R 10

968 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: ADT is often a necessary component of the treatment of aggressive prostate cancer, yet it has known harms that can impair health and quality of life.

556 citations


Cites background from "Short-term neoadjuvant androgen dep..."

  • ...[3] Denham JW, Steigler A, Lamb DS, et al....

    [...]

  • ...Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a mainstay of prostate cancer treatment and has been shown in randomized trials to improve overall survival when used with radiation for intermediate- and high-risk localized disease [1,2], as well as locally advanced [3,4] and node-positive disease [5], and after surgery for node-positive disease [6]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
07 Dec 2011-JAMA
TL;DR: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials to determine whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with cardiovascular mortality, prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), and all-cause mortality in men with unfavorable-risk, nonmetastatic prostate cancer was performed in this article.
Abstract: Context Whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) causes excess cardiovascular deaths in men with prostate cancer is highly controversial and was the subject of a joint statement by multiple medical societies and a US Food and Drug Administration safety warning. Objective To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials to determine whether ADT is associated with cardiovascular mortality, prostate cancer–specific mortality (PCSM), and all-cause mortality in men with unfavorable-risk, nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Data Sources A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for relevant randomized controlled trials in English between January 1, 1966, and April 11, 2011. Study Selection Inclusion required nonmetastatic disease, intervention group with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist–based ADT, control group with no immediate ADT, complete information on cardiovascular deaths, and median follow-up of more than 1 year. Data Extraction Extraction was by 2 independent reviewers. Summary incidence, relative risk (RR), and CIs were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models. Results Among 4141 patients from 8 randomized trials, cardiovascular death in patients receiving ADT vs control was not significantly different (255/2200 vs 252/1941 events; incidence, 11.0%; 95% CI, 8.3%-14.5%; vs 11.2%; 95% CI, 8.3%-15.0%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.79-1.10; P = .41). ADT was not associated with excess cardiovascular death in trials of at least 3 years (long duration) of ADT (11.5%; 95% CI, 8.1%-16.0%; vs 11.5%; 95% CI, 7.5%-17.3%; RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75-1.10; P = .34) or in trials of 6 months or less (short duration) of ADT (10.5%; 95% CI, 6.3%-17.0%; vs 10.3%; 95% CI, 8.2%-13.0%; RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73-1.37; P = .99). Among 4805 patients from 11 trials with overall death data, ADT was associated with lower PCSM (443/2527 vs 552/2278 events; 13.5%; 95% CI, 8.8%-20.3%; vs 22.1%; 95% CI, 15.1%-31.1%; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.84; P Conclusion In a pooled analysis of randomized trials in unfavorable-risk prostate cancer, ADT use was not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death but was associated with a lower risk of PCSM and all-cause mortality.

404 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recommendation: population-based screening for prostate cancer reduces prostate cancer mortality at the expense of a high over-treatment rate.

404 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the European screening trial demonstrated a relative reduction in the risk of prostate cancer mortality of 21% (29% if adjusted for non-compliance), however, 781 men needed to be invited for screening and 27 patients required to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer.

366 citations


Cites methods from "Short-term neoadjuvant androgen dep..."

  • ...For example, in the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) 96-01 trial, 818 men with locally advanced prostate cancer were randomly assigned to RT alone, RT plus 3 months neoadjuvant and concurrent combined androgen blockade (CAB) or RT plus 6 months CAB [16]....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article proposes methods for combining estimates of the cause-specific hazard functions under the proportional hazards formulation, but these methods do not allow the analyst to directly assess the effect of a covariate on the marginal probability function.
Abstract: With explanatory covariates, the standard analysis for competing risks data involves modeling the cause-specific hazard functions via a proportional hazards assumption Unfortunately, the cause-specific hazard function does not have a direct interpretation in terms of survival probabilities for the particular failure type In recent years many clinicians have begun using the cumulative incidence function, the marginal failure probabilities for a particular cause, which is intuitively appealing and more easily explained to the nonstatistician The cumulative incidence is especially relevant in cost-effectiveness analyses in which the survival probabilities are needed to determine treatment utility Previously, authors have considered methods for combining estimates of the cause-specific hazard functions under the proportional hazards formulation However, these methods do not allow the analyst to directly assess the effect of a covariate on the marginal probability function In this article we pro

11,109 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
16 Sep 1998-JAMA
TL;DR: Low-risk patients had estimates of 5-year PSA outcome after treatment with RP, RT, or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation that were not statistically different, whereas intermediate- and high- risk patients treated with RP or RT did better then those treated by implant.
Abstract: Context.—Interstitial radiation (implant) therapy is used to treat clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate, but how it compares with other treatments is not known.Objective.—To estimate control of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation (RT), or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.Design.—Retrospective cohort study of outcome data compared using Cox regression multivariable analyses.Setting and Patients.—A total of 1872 men treated between January 1989 and October 1997 with an RP (n=888) or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (n=218) at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, or RT (n=766) at the Joint Center for Radiation Therapy, Boston, Mass, were enrolled.Main Outcome Measure.—Actuarial freedom from PSA failure (defined as PSA outcome).Results.—The relative risk (RR) of PSA failure in low-risk patients (stage T1c, T2a and PSA level ≤10 ng/mL and Gleason score ≤6) treated using RT, implant plus androgen deprivation therapy, or implant therapy was 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-2.7), 0.5 (95% CI, 0.1-1.9), and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.3-3.6), respectively, compared with those patients treated with RP. The RRs of PSA failure in the intermediate-risk patients (stage T2b or Gleason score of 7 or PSA level >10 and ≤20 ng/mL) and high-risk patients (stage T2c or PSA level >20 ng/mL or Gleason score ≥8) treated with implant compared with RP were 3.1 (95% CI, 1.5-6.1) and 3.0 (95% CI, 1.8-5.0), respectively. The addition of androgen deprivation to implant therapy did not improve PSA outcome in high-risk patients but resulted in a PSA outcome that was not statistically different compared with the results obtained using RP or RT in intermediate-risk patients. These results were unchanged when patients were stratified using the traditional rankings of biopsy Gleason scores of 2 through 4 vs 5 through 6 vs 7 vs 8 through 10.Conclusions.—Low-risk patients had estimates of 5-year PSA outcome after treatment with RP, RT, or implant with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation that were not statistically different, whereas intermediate- and high-risk patients treated with RP or RT did better then those treated by implant. Prospective randomized trials are needed to verify these findings.

3,408 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The panel recommended that investigators be allowed to use the ASTRO Consensus Definition after EBRT alone (no hormonal therapy) with strict adherence to guidelines as to "adequate follow-up."
Abstract: In 1996 the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) sponsored a Consensus Conference to establish a definition of biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). The ASTRO definition defined prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure as occurring after three consecutive PSA rises after a nadir with the date of failure as the point halfway between the nadir date and the first rise or any rise great enough to provoke initiation of therapy. This definition was not linked to clinical progression or survival; it performed poorly in patients undergoing hormonal therapy (HT), and backdating biased the Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival. A second Consensus Conference was sponsored by ASTRO and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group in Phoenix, Arizona, on January 21, 2005, to revise the ASTRO definition. The panel recommended: (1) a rise by 2 ng/mL or more above the nadir PSA be considered the standard definition for biochemical failure after EBRT with or without HT; (2) the date of failure be determined "at call" (not backdated). They recommended that investigators be allowed to use the ASTRO Consensus Definition after EBRT alone (no hormonal therapy) with strict adherence to guidelines as to "adequate follow-up." To avoid the artifacts resulting from short follow-up, the reported date of control should be listed as 2 years short of the median follow-up. For example, if the median follow-up is 5 years, control rates at 3 years should be cited. Retaining a strict version of the ASTRO definition would allow comparisons with a large existing body of literature.

2,331 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Immediate androgen suppression with an LHRH analogue given during and for 3 years after external irradiation improves disease-free and overall survival of patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.

1,692 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Adjuvant treatment with goserelin, when started simultaneously with external irradiation, improves local control and survival in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.
Abstract: Background We conducted a randomized, prospective trial comparing external irradiation with external irradiation plus goserelin (an agonist analogue of gonadotropin-releasing hormone that reduces testosterone secretion) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Methods From 1987 to 1995, 415 patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy plus immediate treatment with goserelin. The patients had a median age of 71 years (range, 51 to 80). Patients in both groups received 50 Gy of radiation to the pelvis over a period of five weeks and an additional 20 Gy over an additional two weeks as a prostatic boost. Patients in the combined-treatment group received 3.6 mg of goserelin (Zoladex) subcutaneously every four weeks starting on the first day of irradiation and continuing for three years; those patients also received cyproterone acetate (150 mg orally per day) during the first month of treatment to inhibit the transient rise in test...

1,450 citations

Related Papers (5)