a Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology , Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen , Denmark.
b Translational Oncology & Urology Research (TOUR), School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences , King's College London , London , UK.
Acta Oncol. 2019 Jan;58(1):110-118. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2018.1529427. Epub 2018 Oct 30.
In randomised controlled trials, men with advanced, non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) treated with anti-androgen monotherapy (AA) had similar all-cause mortality as men treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists. Using real-world evidence (i.e., observational data), we aimed to further assess the difference in mortality between these two drug categories.
We emulated a trial using data from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden 3.0. We specifically focused on men diagnosed in 2006-2012 with high-risk PCa who had no distant metastasis. They either received primary hormonal therapy with AA (n = 2078) or GnRH agonists (n = 4878) who were followed for a median time of 5 years. Risk of death from PCa and other causes was assessed using competing risk analyses and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, including propensity score matching.
The cumulative 5-year PCa mortality was lower for men treated with AA (16% [95% confidence interval, CI, 15-18%]) than men treated with GnRH agonists (22% [95% CI 21-24%]). The 5-year other cause mortality was also lower for men on AA (17% [95% CI 15-19%] compared to men on GnRH agonists (27% [95% CI 25-28%]). In regression analyses, the risk of PCa death was similar, GnRH agonists versus AA (reference), hazard ratio (HR) 1.08 (95% CI 0.95-1.23), but the risk of death from all causes was higher for men on GnRH agonists, HR 1.23 (95% CI 1.13-1.34). Consistent results were seen in the propensity score-matched cohort.
Our results indicate that the use of AA as primary hormonal therapy in men with high-risk non-metastatic PCa does not increase PCa-specific mortality compared to GnRH. Using AA instead of GnRH agonists may result in shorter time on/exposure to GnRH-treatment, which may reduce the risk of adverse events associated with this treatment.
在随机对照试验中,接受抗雄激素单药治疗(AA)的晚期非转移性前列腺癌(PCa)男性与接受促性腺激素释放激素(GnRH)激动剂治疗的男性的全因死亡率相似。使用真实世界证据(即观察性数据),我们旨在进一步评估这两种药物类别之间死亡率的差异。
我们使用前列腺癌数据库瑞典 3.0 的数据模拟了一项试验。我们特别关注 2006-2012 年诊断为高危 PCa 且无远处转移的男性。他们要么接受 AA(n=2078)的原发性激素治疗,要么接受 GnRH 激动剂(n=4878)的治疗,中位随访时间为 5 年。使用竞争风险分析和 Cox 比例风险回归分析评估前列腺癌和其他原因死亡的风险,包括倾向评分匹配。
接受 AA 治疗的男性 5 年 PCa 死亡率较低(16%[95%置信区间,CI,15-18%]),而接受 GnRH 激动剂治疗的男性 5 年 PCa 死亡率较高(22%[95% CI 21-24%])。接受 AA 治疗的男性 5 年其他原因死亡率也较低(17%[95% CI 15-19%]),而接受 GnRH 激动剂治疗的男性 5 年其他原因死亡率较高(27%[95% CI 25-28%])。在回归分析中,PCa 死亡风险相似,GnRH 激动剂与 AA(参考)相比,风险比(HR)为 1.08(95% CI 0.95-1.23),但所有原因死亡的风险更高 GnRH 激动剂,HR 1.23(95% CI 1.13-1.34)。在倾向评分匹配队列中观察到一致的结果。
我们的结果表明,与 GnRH 相比,将 AA 作为高危非转移性 PCa 男性的原发性激素治疗不会增加 PCa 特异性死亡率。使用 AA 而不是 GnRH 激动剂可能会导致接受 GnRH 治疗的时间缩短/暴露减少,从而降低与这种治疗相关的不良事件的风险。