Electronic medication reconciliation and medication errors.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the impact of electronic medication reconciliation implementation on reports of admission medication reconciliation errors (MREs). DESIGN: Quality improvement project with time-series design. SETTING: A large, urban, tertiary care children's hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All admitted patients from 2011 and 2012. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of an electronic medication reconciliation tool for hospital admissions and regular compliance reporting to inpatient units. The tool encourages active reconciliation by displaying the pre-admission medication list and admission medication orders side-by-side. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Rate of non-intercepted admission MREs identified via a voluntary reporting system. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 33 070 hospital admissions. The pre-admission medication list was consistently recorded electronically throughout the study period. In the post-intervention period, the use of the electronic medication reconciliation tool increased to 84%. Reports identified 146 admission MREs during the study period, including 95 non-intercepted errors. Pre- to post-intervention, the rate of non-intercepted errors decreased by 53% (P = 0.02). Reported errors were categorized as intercepted potential adverse drug events (ADEs) (35%), non-intercepted potential ADEs (42%), minor ADEs (22%) or moderate ADEs (1%). There were no reported MREs that resulted in major or catastrophic ADEs. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully implemented an electronic process for admission medication reconciliation, which was associated with a reduction in reports of non-intercepted admission MREs.

A controlled trial of bicalutamide versus flutamide, each in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy, in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Casodex Combination Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of bicalutamide and flutamide, each used in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing analogue (LHRH-A) therapy, in patients with untreated metastatic (Stage D2) prostate cancer. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy), multicenter study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Eight hundred thirteen patients were allocated 1:1 to bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) and flutamide (250 mg three times daily) and 2:1 to goserelin acetate (3.6 mg every 28 days) and leuprolide acetate (7.5 mg every 28 days). RESULTS: With a median duration of follow-up of 49 weeks, time to treatment failure, the primary endpoint, was significantly (P = 0.005) better for the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group than for the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. Patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group were 34% more likely to fail treatment over the given time period, as indicated by the hazard ratio of 0.749 (95% confidence interval, 0.61 to 0.92) for bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A. Results for secondary endpoints (survival, quality of life, and subjective response) were similar between groups. Diarrhea occurred in 24% of patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group, compared with 10% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic prostate cancer, bicalutamide plus LHRH-A is well tolerated and provides superior efficacy to flutamide plus LHRH-A with respect to time to treatment failure. Assessment of the effects of these regimens on longer term survival requires additional time for follow-up.

Maximal androgen blockade for patients with metastatic prostate cancer: outcome of a controlled trial of bicalutamide versus flutamide, each in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy. Casodex Combination Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: To review the outcome of therapy with maximal androgen blockade and compare the efficacy and safety of bicalutamide and flutamide, each used in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue (LHRH-A) therapy, in patients with untreated metastatic (Stage D2) prostate cancer. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy), multicenter study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. A total of 813 patients were allocated 1:1 to bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) or flutamide (250 mg three times daily), plus 2:1 to goserelin acetate (3.6 mg every 28 days) or leuprolide acetate (7.5 mg every 28 days). RESULTS: At the time of analysis (median follow-up, 49 weeks), bicalutamide plus LHRH-A was associated with a statistically significant improvement in time-to-treatment failure, the primary endpoint, when compared with flutamide plus LHRH-A. The results with longer follow-up (median, 95 weeks) support previous findings of an improved time-to-treatment failure with bicalutamide plus LHRH-A; however, the difference between groups was not statistically significant. A treatment failure endpoint was reached by 68% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group, compared with 72% of patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. The hazard ratio of bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-1.03; P = 0.10). The upper one-sided 95% confidence limit for survival was 1.00, meeting the definition for equivalence (< 1.25). With longer follow-up, overall mortality was 34%, with equivalent survival between groups: 32% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group died, compared with 35% in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. The hazard ratio of bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.69-1.11; P = 0.29). The upper one-sided 95% confidence limit for survival was 1.07, meeting the definition for equivalence (< 1.25). Diarrhea occurred in 24% of patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group compared with 10% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic prostate cancer, bicalutamide plus LHRH-A is effective and well tolerated. Because of its efficacy and tolerability profile, together with its convenient once-daily dosing formulation, bicalutamide represents a prime candidate for antiandrogen of first choice in combination with LHRH-A therapy in the treatment of men with metastatic prostate cancer.

Clinical benefits of bicalutamide compared with flutamide in combined androgen blockade for patients with advanced prostatic carcinoma: final report of a double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial. Casodex Combination Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of bicalutamide and flutamide, each combined with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue (LHRH-A) therapy, in patients with metastatic (Stage D2) prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy), multicenter study with a two-by-two factorial design. Eight hundred thirteen patients were allocated 1:1 to bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) and flutamide (250 mg three times daily) and 2:1 to goserelin acetate (3.6 mg every 28 days) and leuprolide acetate (7.5 mg every 28 days). RESULTS: The median times to progression and death were 97 and 180 weeks for the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group compared with 77 and 148 weeks for the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. The hazard ratio for time to progression for bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79 to 1.10, P = 0.41) and that for survival time was 0.87 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.05, P = 0.15). The therapies were generally well tolerated. The most common adverse event in the two groups was hot flashes. The incidence of hematuria was significantly higher for the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group than for the flutamide plus LHRH-A group (12% versus 6%, P = 0.007), but no patient withdrew from therapy because of hematuria. There was a significantly (26% versus 12%, P < 0.001) higher incidence of diarrhea and more withdrawals for diarrhea (25 patients versus 2) for the flutamide plus LHRH-A group relative to the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group. CONCLUSIONS: With a median follow-up time of 160 weeks, the combination of bicalutamide plus LHRH-A was well tolerated and had equivalent time to progression and survival compared with flutamide plus LHRH-A. Treatment with bicalutamide plus LHRH-A resulted in longer median survival than treatment with flutamide plus LHRH-A.

Single-dose oral ciprofloxacin versus placebo for prophylaxis during transrectal prostate biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether antimicrobial prophylaxis could prevent infections after transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate using automated biopsy devices. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial in which a total of 537 patients received either oral ciprofloxacin 500 mg or placebo before transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate. Repeated urine cultures and urinalysis were obtained at 2 to 6 days after biopsy and 9 to 15 days after biopsy. The primary determinant of efficacy was bacteriologic response (bacteriuria [more than 10(4) colony-forming units (CFU)/mL] versus no bacteriuria) at the 9- to 15-day follow-up evaluation. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven (84%) of 269 ciprofloxacin patients and 230 (86%) of 268 placebo patients were valid for efficacy analysis in which a mean of four biopsies was performed. Six ciprofloxacin-treated (3%) and 19 placebo-treated (8%) patients had bacteriuria (more than 10(4) CFU/mL) after the procedure (P = 0.009). Six ciprofloxacin recipients (3%) and 12 placebo recipients (5%) had clinical signs and symptoms of a urinary tract infection (UTI) (P = 0.15). In addition, no ciprofloxacin-treated patients compared with 4 placebo-treated patients (2%) were admitted to the hospital for febrile UTI after the procedure. Ciprofloxacin reduced the expected net costs of treating infectious complications after biopsy by $23 per patient for an overall annual savings of $68,195 in the five study groups when compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose oral ciprofloxacin reduced bacteriuria after biopsy compared with placebo in patients undergoing transrectal prostatic biopsy and provided an economic advantage. In addition, this study establishes the actual rate of bacteriuria after transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate without antibiotic prophylaxis to be 8% with a clinical rate of UTI of 5% and a hospitalization rate of 2%.

Comparison of goserelin and leuprolide in combined androgen blockade therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To perform exploratory analyses of data from a controlled trial that assessed the efficacy and tolerability of two antiandrogens, bicalutamide and flutamide, each combined with monthly depot preparations of leuprolide or goserelin, in patients with Stage D2 prostate cancer. One analysis compared goserelin plus antiandrogen therapy with leuprolide plus antiandrogen therapy; a second analysis compared the four combined androgen blockade (CAB) regimens. METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter trial, open-label for luteinizing hormone releasing hormone analogue (LHRH-A) therapy, double-blind for antiandrogen therapy, with a two-by-two factorial design. Eight-hundred thirteen patients were allocated in a ratio of 2:1 to goserelin therapy (3.6 mg every 28 days) or leuprolide therapy (7.5 mg every 28 days) and 1:1 to bicalutamide therapy (50 mg once a day) or flutamide therapy (250 mg three times a day). The end points of time to progression and survival were assessed with a median of 160 weeks of follow-up. RESULTS: The percentages of progression events (70.9% versus 73.3%) and deaths (54.3% versus 56.8%) were similar for goserelin plus antiandrogen and leuprolide plus antiandrogen therapies. The hazard ratios for goserelin plus antiandrogen therapy to leuprolide plus antiandrogen therapy were 0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84 to 1.18; P = 0.92) and 0.91 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.11; P = 0.34) for time to progression and survival, respectively. Goserelin plus antiandrogen and leuprolide plus antiandrogen therapies were generally well tolerated, and the side effects associated with depot administration occurred with a low frequency in the two groups. There were no significant differences among the goserelin plus bicalutamide, goserelin plus flutamide, or leuprolide plus bicalutamide therapy groups, but leuprolide plus flutamide therapy had a significantly poorer outcome than the other three therapies. The side-effect profiles for the four CAB groups were generally similar; diarrhea was more common among patients treated with flutamide and hematuria was more common among patients treated with bicalutamide. CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of these exploratory analyses should be interpreted with caution, they indicate that goserelin plus antiandrogen and leuprolide plus antiandrogen therapies are similarly well tolerated and have equivalent time to progression and survival, and that leuprolide plus flutamide therapy appears to be the least effective of the four CAB regimens.

Risk factors for concomitant involvement of the female urethra at cystectomy for malignancy.

To examine the risk factors for urethral involvement in female patients after cystectomy for malignancy, a retrospective review of the records of 22 females treated with cystectomy for primary bladder malignancy were examined and analyzed with respect to presence of urethral involvement, tumor location, pathologic stage, tumor grade, lymph node status, and histologic cell type of the cancer. Of the 22 patients studied, three (13.6%) had urethral involvement in the pathologic specimens. Bladder neck tumors represented a 33% risk of urethral involvement and trigonal tumors had a 20% associated risk. Higher pathologic stage corresponded with an increased risk because 18% of stage T3(b) and 33% of stage T4 patients had urethral involvement. Transitional cell carcinoma was the only histologic cell type to involve the urethra and represented a 17.6% risk. Any female patient undergoing cystectomy for bladder cancer with higher stage tumors (T3(b) and T4) involving the bladder neck and trigone should be considered as high risk for urethral involvement and should not be considered a candidate for orthotopic neobladder reconstruction.

Analysis of polysomnographic events surrounding 252 slow-wave sleep arousals in thirty-eight adults with injurious sleepwalking and sleep terrors.

A systematic study of electrophysiologic events [eight-channel EEG, electrocardiogram, electromyogram (EMGs)] surrounding 252 arousals from slow-wave sleep (SWS) in adults with sleepwalking (SW) and sleep terrors (ST) is reported. Hospital-based, overnight polysomnographic monitoring was conducted in 38 adults presenting to a sleep disorders center with injurious SW, ST (21 males, 17 females; mean age 29 years, range 17-69 years). Before nonbehavioral or behavioral arousals from SWS, neither EEG "delta wave buildup," nor heart rate (HR) acceleration, nor tonic/phasic EMG activation was identified. The postarousal EEG demonstrated three patterns: (a) diffuse, rhythmic, delta activity with a typical frequency of 2.2 Hz, a typical amplitude of 85 microV, and a typical duration of 20 s; (b) diffuse delta and theta activity intermixed with alpha and beta activity; and (c) prominent alpha and beta activity. Multichannel, high-voltage, delta activity was observed in <2% of all prearousal periods. HR acceleration emerged abruptly with SWS arousals, with significant changes in mean pre- versus postarousal HR (p < .001). Macrostructural sleep parameters ("sleep architecture") were intact. Therefore, our findings in adults with SW, ST strongly support the classification of SW/ST as disorders of (abrupt) arousal.

Development of chronic mandibular osteomyelitis in a miniswine model.

Previous attempts to develop a reproducible model of chronic mandibular osteomyelitis have met with limited success. In this study, osteomyelitis was produced in the mandibles of eight adult Yucatan miniswine by the intramedullary application of sodium morrhuate, Staphylococcus aureus, and either polymethylmethacrylate bone cement or bone wax. At 8 weeks' postinfection, the mandibles were surgically debrided and specimens were obtained for culture. Although all of the animals developed clinical evidence of osteomyelitis that was supported by positive cultures, the original organism (S aureus) was recovered only from those animals where bone wax had been used to seal the cortical defects. This animal model may be useful for evaluating newer treatment modalities for chronic osteomyelitis.

Rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. A treatable parasomnia affecting older adults.

Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is a parasomnia defined by intermittent loss of electromyographic atonia during REM sleep with emergence of complex and vigorous behaviors. Punching, kicking, and leaping from bed during attempted dream enactment caused repeated injury in nine of our first ten adult patients. Mean age at onset was 62 years; nine of the patients were male. All patients underwent standard polysomnographic studies with videotaping of behaviors and extensive neurologic and psychiatric evaluations. The RBD was unrelated to psychopathologic conditions but in five cases was closely linked with major neuropathologic disorders: dementia (two), olivopontocerebellar degeneration, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and the Guillain-Barré syndrome. Other common polysomnographic abnormalities were high REM density, increased stage 3/4 (slow-wave) sleep, and both periodic and aperiodic limb twitching in non-REM sleep. Eight patients had dream changes involving motor overactivity and violent confrontations of dream characters. Clonazepam induced rapid and sustained improvement of dream and sleep behavior problems in seven patients, as did desipramine hydrochloride in one patient.

Extramedullary plasmacytoma of the bladder: case report and review of the literature.

Primary plasmacytoma of the bladder is extremely rare, with only 10 cases reported in the literature. We report on a patient who was treated unsuccessfully with radiation and subsequently underwent anterior exenteration with ileo-conduit construction.

Risk factors for bladder tumors in spinal cord injury patients.

PURPOSE: We evaluated risk factors for the development of bladder tumors in spinal cord injury patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was done of all bladder tumors at 1 institution with matched controls for 7 years. RESULTS: We identified 17 malignant and 2 benign tumors. Indwelling bladder catheters and a history of bladder stones were statistically significant risk factors. Four patients with negative biopsies underwent repeat biopsy due to suspicious cytology and cancer was found. CONCLUSIONS: An indwelling urinary catheter and a history of bladder stones are statistically significant risk factors. Cytology and biopsy are complimentary in the evaluation of urothelial malignancy in this population. A high index of suspicion and thorough evaluation are needed in spinal cord injury patients.

Development of synthetic bone-repair materials for craniofacial reconstruction.

In an effort to minimize problems associated with use of bone grafts and bank bone for craniofacial reconstruction, synthetic biodegradable alternatives are under development at the U.S. Army Institute of Dental Research. The focus is on composite materials in which either d,l-polylactide co-glycolide or porous tricalcium phosphate function as degradable delivery systems for bone-inductive proteins. Availability of synthetic bone-repair materials would eliminate the need for invasive graft-harvesting procedures, the dangers of pathogen transmission from, and immunogenic reaction to bank bone. In addition, synthetics should be more easily sculpted to restore facial contours. Elimination of the disadvantages of natural bone grafts would result in improved reconstructive care for victims of trauma, disease, and congenital deformity. Military surgeons can especially appreciate the potential of a convenient synthetic bone replacement for use in mass casualty situations where access to, and storage facilities for natural bone will be extremely limited. This review updates current treatments and requirements for synthetic bone-repair materials and describes several experimental materials under evaluation at the U.S. Army Institute of Dental Research.

Pilot study of the tolerability and toxicity of intravesical valrubicin immediately after transurethral resection of superficial bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess in a pilot study the safety, tolerability, and technical feasibility of administering intravesical valrubicin immediately after transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT) in patients with superficial bladder cancer and to evaluate the optimal dose of valrubicin and its systemic absorption. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with recurrent or newly diagnosed Stage Ta or T1 transitional cell tumors received a single dose of 400 mg, 600 mg, or 800 mg of intravesical valrubicin immediately after TURBT. Four patients thought to be at high risk of recurrence were followed up with five additional doses of 800 mg valrubicin, given weekly. RESULTS: The use of valrubicin after TURBT was generally well tolerated. Little evidence was found to suggest a direct relationship among the dose of valrubicin, the time between the end of TURBT and drug instillation, and the occurrence of most bladder symptoms. The most commonly reported adverse events included dysuria (77%), hematuria (59%), and urgency/frequency (23%). Pharmacokinetic analyses revealed that the mean systemic exposure to valrubicin and its metabolites depended on the extent of the TURBT and the damage to the bladder wall. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicated that administration of valrubicin immediately after TURBT is feasible.

Single-dose oral ciprofloxacin compared with cefotaxime and placebo for prophylaxis during transurethral surgery.

To determine the efficacy and safety of single-dose oral ciprofloxacin prophylaxis for the prevention of post-operative bacteriuria following transurethral resection of the prostate or bladder tumour, a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Five hundred and eighteen patients were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive ciprofloxacin 500 mg, cefotaxime 1 g or placebo 30-90 min before surgery. Of the 368 efficacy-evaluable patients, five (3.3%) ciprofloxacin, seven (4.8%) cefotaxime and five (7.0%) placebo recipients had post-operative bacteriuria (> or = 10(4) cfu/mL) during post-operative days 2-15. Five (3.4%) ciprofloxacin, five (3.4%) cefotaxime and one (2.4%) placebo recipients were considered clinical failures, of whom one, two and one patients, respectively, had concomitant bacteriuria. Drug-related adverse events were reported in six of 204 (3%) ciprofloxacin, 12 of 197 (6%) cefotaxime and one of 101 (1%) placebo patients. The observed rates of post-operative bacteriuria suggest that a single 500 mg dose of ciprofloxacin is suitable prophylaxis for transurethral surgery.

A controlled trial of Casodex (bicalutamide) vs. flutamide, each in combination with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Casodex Combination Study Group.

Between January 1992 and September 1993, 813 patients with stage D2 prostate cancer were enrolled in a multicentre, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy) trial and randomised to antiandrogen therapy with Casodex (bicalutamide, 50 mg once daily) or flutamide (250 mg three times daily) and to luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogue therapy with Zoladex (goserelin, 3.6 mg every 28 days) or leuprolide (7.5 mg every 28 days). Time to treatment failure was the primary efficacy endpoint. At a median follow-up time of 49 weeks, there was a significant (p = 0.005) difference between groups in time to treatment failure in favour of Casodex plus LHRH analogue. Overall, 168 (42%) of 404 patients in the Casodex plus LHRH analogue group and 218 (53%) of 409 patients in the flutamide plus LHRH analogue group reached a treatment failure endpoint. Although a cause-specific treatment-failure analysis was not performed, the difference between groups in treatment failure attributed to adverse events (mainly diarrhoea) was evident primarily in the first 7 months of therapy. The difference between groups in treatment failure for objective progression was most evident after 1 year of therapy. With further follow-up (median time of 95 weeks), the result for time to treatment failure, although no longer statistically significant, were consistent with the previous finding of an improvement in time to treatment failure associated with Casodex plus LHRH analogue therapy. With a median of 95 weeks of follow-up, 34% of deaths had occurred. The survival analysis was not dissimilar between the 2 groups. At 49 weeks median follow up, the incidence of diarrhoea was significantly (p < 0.001) lower among patients in the Casodex plus LHRH analogue group. Diarrhoea led to withdrawal from therapy for 2 patients in the Casodex plus LHRH analogue group, compared with 25 patients in the flutamide plus LHRH analogue group. In conclusion, Casodex plus LHRH analogue is well tolerated and effective with an improvement in time to treatment failure over flutamide plus LHRH analogue. Survival was not dissimilar between the 2 treatment groups.

A controlled trial of bicalutamide versus flutamide, each in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy, in patients with advanced prostate carcinoma. Analysis of time to progression. CASODEX Combination Study Group.

BACKGROUND: A randomized, multicenter trial, double-blind for antiandrogen therapy, compared the antiandrogens bicalutamide and flutamide, each combined with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy (LHRH-A) in 813 patients with Stage D2 prostate carcinoma. An analysis of time to progression (median follow-up, 95 weeks) was performed to augment previous analyses of time to treatment failure and time to death. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to double-blind antiandrogen therapy, receiving either bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) or flutamide (250 mg three times daily), and were assigned 2:1 to LHRH-A with goserelin acetate (3.6 mg every 28 days) or leuprolide acetate (7.5 mg every 28 days). The primary endpoint of the trial was time to treatment failure, defined as an adverse event leading to withdrawal of randomized therapy, objective progression, death, or withdrawal from study therapy for any reason. Secondary endpoints were time to death, quality of life, and subjective response. The current analysis of time to progression included progression data collected prospectively for 561 patients (69%) and retrospectively for 252 patients (31%). RESULTS: Disease progression occurred for 223 of 404 patients (55%) in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group and for 235 of 409 patients (58%) in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. The hazard ratio for time to progression of bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to that of flutamide plus LHRH-A was 0.9 (two-sided 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 1.08; P = 0.26). The upper one-sided 95% CI was 1.05, which met the definition of equivalence (< 1.25). CONCLUSIONS: At a median follow-up time of 95 weeks, bicalutamide plus LHRH-A and flutamide plus LHRH-A had equivalent time to progression.

Exploratory analysis on the effect of race on clinical outcome in patients with advanced prostate cancer receiving bicalutamide or flutamide, each in combination with LHRH analogues. The Casodex Combination Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Black race has been associated with a significantly increased risk of prostate cancer mortality. This exploratory analysis investigated the effect of race on the clinical outcome of combined androgen blockade (CAB). METHODS: Data for analysis were obtained from a double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial comparing CAB in the form of bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) or flutamide (250 mg three times daily) plus luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs (LHRHa; goserelin acetate 3.6 mg, or leuprolide acetate 7.5 mg) in 813 patients with stage D(2) prostate cancer (median follow-up, 160 weeks). Patients were analyzed according to race (African American [AA], white, or other). The primary clinical events were disease progression and survival. RESULTS: Four hundred and four patients received bicalutamide/LHRHa and 409 received flutamide/LHRHa. Although treatment with bicalutamide/LHRHa resulted in slightly longer time to progression and survival time in white and AA males than treatment with flutamide/LHRHa, the differences between the treatment groups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: No marked effect of race on clinical outcome was observed regardless of antiandrogen, suggesting that similar treatment benefits are to be expected in either race.

Prostate specific antigen decreases after withdrawal of antiandrogen therapy with bicalutamide or flutamide in patients receiving combined androgen blockade.

PURPOSE: We determined whether decreases in prostate specific antigen (PSA) would occur after withdrawal of double-blinded antiandrogen therapy with flutamide or bicalutamide for clinical progression or increasing PSA concentration in patients receiving combined androgen blockade for advanced prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PSA concentrations were determined weekly for at least 6 weeks and then every other week for 6 weeks in 22 patients with stage D2 prostate cancer. All patients were withdrawn from antiandrogen therapy (8 flutamide and 14 bicalutamide) due to progression or an increasing PSA concentration. Objective response was evaluated before antiandrogen withdrawal and at week 12. RESULTS: In 4 of 8 patients (50%) withdrawn from flutamide and 4 of 14 (29%) withdrawn from bicalutamide serum PSA concentrations decreased by 50% or more. PSA responses after withdrawal of flutamide therapy occurred within the first few days, whereas those after withdrawal of bicalutamide therapy occurred within 4 to 8 weeks. Of 4 patients assessed for objective response 2 had stable disease and 2 had progression. A PSA response was observed in the 2 patients with stable disease but not the 2 with progression. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with stage D2 prostate cancer and disease progression or an increasing PSA concentration, withdrawal of antiandrogen therapy with bicalutamide or flutamide may result in a PSA response. The time to PSA response is longer with bicalutamide than with flutamide. The clinical significance of the antiandrogen withdrawal phenomenon is unknown.