RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The study aimed at investigating prostate cancer patients' choice of androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) and possible factors that would affect their preferences of ADT. METHODS: This was a single-centre cross-sectional study investigating the usage and preferences of ADT. Consecutives prostate cancer patients who were receiving injectable luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist or antagonist were recruited from the prostate cancer clinic in a tertiary academic hospital. Patients who received bilateral orchidectomy or those who could not consent to the study were excluded. Disease characteristics, treatment information and patient background were documented. The survey collected information related to their change in ADT regimen, preferences on drug usage (routes and frequency of administration) and their reasons. A hypothetical set of three drug formularies was designed. Questions regarding patient preference and the contributing reasons raised in the format of questionnaire. RESULTS: 100 patients completed the survey. Most patients started with more frequent injections (3-monthly, 54%; 1-monthly, 38%) and switched to 6-monthly injections (89%) at the time of the survey. Primary reasons for the change were healthcare opinion (72%) and less frequent treatment (51%). Three options of ADT (oral daily, 1-monthly and 6-monthly injection) with the same efficacies and side effect profile were offered: 61% preferred 6-monthly injection, 1% preferred 1-monthly injection and 38% preferred oral regimen. When patients were informed of lower cardiovascular side effects in 1-monthly injection or daily oral drug, patients' preference was 56% (6-monthly), 6% (1-monthly), and 39% (oral). Patients with polypharmacy (more than 5 regular medications) were more inclined to choose injections (p = 0.025). Patient age, educational background, employment status, marriage status and disease status were not found to be statistically significant contributing factors to patient preference. CONCLUSION: 6-monthly ADT injection was the preferred ADT despite greater cardiovascular risks. Among 1-monthly or daily oral LHRH antagonist, more patients prefer oral option. Convenience factor was highly valued.
RESUMEN
Purpose: In the era of concurrent combination therapy in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer, the impact of the testosterone level before initiating androgen deprivation therapy on treatment outcome is still uncertain. We aimed to investigate its effect on time-to-castration-resistance in a metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer cohort. Methods: This is a multi-center retrospective study of 5 databases from China, Japan, Austria and Spain including 258 metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer patients with androgen deprivation therapy initiated between 2002 and 2021. Baseline testosterone was divided into high and low groups using 12 nmol/L as cutoff level. Primary outcome was time-to-castration-resistance. Secondary outcomes were survival functions. Kaplan-Meier method was employed to evaluate the correlation between baseline testosterone and time-to-castration-resistance. Subgroup analysis was performed to elucidate the effect of upfront combination-therapy and metastatic volume. Results: Median age was 72 years. Median follow-up time was 31 months. Median pre-treatment prostate-specific-antigen level was 161 ng/mL. Majority of case were graded as International-Society-of-Urological-Pathology grade 5 (63.6%). 57.8% patients had high volume disease and 69.0% received upfront combination treatment. 44.6% of the cohort developed castration-resistance. The low testosterone group demonstrated shorter mean-time-to-castration-resistance (19.0 vs 22.4 months, p=0.031). The variance was more significant in patients without combination therapy (13.2 vs 26.3 months, p=0.015). Cancer-specific and overall survival were inferior in the low baseline testosterone level group without receiving combination therapy (p=0.001). Conclusions: Lower pre-treatment testosterone level is correlated to shorter time-to-castration resistance and worse survival in metastatic prostate cancer patients without upfront combination therapy. Those with low baseline testosterone should be encouraged to adopt combination therapy to delay progression.
