Reviews
4 April 2000

Single-Therapy Androgen Suppression in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Publication: Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 132, Number 7

Abstract

Purpose:

To compare luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists with orchiectomy or diethylstilbestrol, and to compare antiandrogens with any of these three alternatives.

Data Sources:

A search of the MEDLINE, Cancerlit, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from 1966 to March 1998 and Current Contents to 24 August 1998 for articles comparing the outcomes of the specified treatments. The search was limited to studies on prostatic neoplasms in humans. Total yield was 1477 studies.

Study Selection:

Reports of efficacy outcomes were limited to randomized, controlled trials. Twenty-four trials involving more than 6600 patients, phase II studies that reported on withdrawals from therapy (the most reliable indicator of adverse effects), and all studies reporting on quality of life were abstracted.

Data Extraction:

Two independent reviewers abstracted each article by following a prospectively designed protocol. The meta-analysis combined data on 2-year overall survival by using a random-effects model and reported results as a hazard ratio relative to orchiectomy.

Data Synthesis:

Ten trials of LHRH agonists involving 1908 patients reported no significant difference in overall survival. The hazard ratio showed LHRH agonists to be essentially equivalent to orchiectomy (hazard ratio, 1.262 [95% CI, 0.915 to 1.386]). There was no evidence of difference in overall survival among the LHRH agonists, although CIs were wider for leuprolide (hazard ratio, 1.0994 [CI, 0.207 to 5.835]) and buserelin (hazard ratio, 1.1315 [CI, 0.533 to 2.404]) than for goserelin (hazard ratio, 1.1172 [CI, 0.898 to 1.390]). Evidence from 8 trials involving 2717 patients suggests that nonsteroidal antiandrogens were associated with lower overall survival. The CI for the hazard ratio approached statistical significance (hazard ratio, 1.2158 [CI, 0.988 to 1.496]). Treatment withdrawals were less frequent with LHRH agonists (0% to 4%) than with nonsteroidal antiandrogens (4% to 10%).

Conclusions:

Survival after therapy with an LHRH agonist was equivalent to that after orchiectomy. No evidence shows a difference in effectiveness among the LHRH agonists. Survival rates may be somewhat lower if a nonsteroidal antiandrogen is used as monotherapy.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

1.
Huggins CHodges CV. Studies on prostate cancer. 1. The effects of castration, of estrogen and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. Cancer Res. 1941;1:293-7.
2.
Huggins CStevens REHodges CV. Studies on prostatic cancer. II. The effects of castration on advanced carcinoma of the prostate gland. Arch Surg. 1941;43:209-23.
3.
Herbst WP. Effects of estradiol dipropionate and diethyl stilbestrol on malignant prostatic tissue. Transactions of the American Association of Genito-Urinary Surgeons. 1941; 34:195-202.
4.
Herbst WP. Biochemical therapeusis in carcinoma of the prostate gland: preliminary report. JAMA. 1942;120:1116-20.
5.
The Veterans Administration Co-operative Urological Research Group. Treatment and survival of patients with cancer of the prostate. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1967;124:1011-7.
6.
Jordan WP JrBlackard CEByar DP. Reconsideration of orchiectomy in the treatment of advanced prostatic carcinoma. South Med J. 1977;70:1411-3.
7.
Byar DPCorle DK. Hormone therapy for prostate cancer: results of the Veterans Administration Cooperative Urological Research Group studies. NCI Monogr. 1988;7:165-70.
8.
Roila F. Buserelin in the treatment of prostatic cancer. Biomed Pharmacother. 1989;43:279-85.
9.
Chrisp PGoa KL. Goserelin. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and clinical use in sex hormone-related conditions. Drugs. 1991;41:254-88.
10.
Plosker GLBrogden RN. Leuprorelin. A review of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in prostatic cancer, endometriosis and other sex hormone-related disorders. Drugs. 1994;48:930-67.
11.
Brogden RNClissold SP. Flutamide. A preliminary review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy in advanced prostatic cancer. Drugs. 1989;38:185-203.
12.
Soloway MSMatzkin H. Antiandrogenic agents as monotherapy in advanced prostatic carcinoma. Cancer. 1993;71 3 Suppl 1083-8.
13.
Kolvenbag GJBlackledge GRGotting-Smith K. Bicalutamide (Casodex) in the treatment of prostate cancer: history of clinical development. Prostate. 1998;34:61-72.
14.
Schroder FH. Cyproterone acetate—mechanism of action and clinical effectiveness in prostate cancer treatment. Cancer. 1993;72 12 Suppl 3810-5.
15.
Goldenberg SLBruchovsky N. Androgen withdrawal therapy: new perspectives in the treatment of prostate cancer. In: Raghavan D, Scher RI, Leibel SA, Lange PH, eds. Principles and Practice of Genitourinary Oncology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997:583-91.
16.
Nicholson SWaxman J. Prostate cancer and endocrine therapy. Endocrine-Related Cancer. 1997;4:141-52.
17.
Caubet JFTosteson TDDong EWNaylon EMWhiting GWErnstoff MSet al . Maximum androgen blockade in advanced prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of published randomized, controlled trials using nonsteroidal antiandrogens. Urology. 1997;49:71-8.
18.
Prostate Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Maximum androgen blockade in advanced prostate cancer: an overview of 22 randomised trials with 3283 deaths in 5710 patients. Lancet. 1995;346:265-9.
19.
Bennett CLTosteson TDSchmitt BWeinberg PDErnstoff MSRoss SD. Maximum androgen-blockade with medical or surgical castration in advanced prostate cancer. A meta-analysis of nine published randomized, controlled trials and 4128 patients using flutamide. Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases. 1999;2:4-8.
20.
Aronson N, Seidenfeld J, Samson DJ, et al. Relative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Methods of Androgen Suppression in the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 4. AHCPR Publication No. 99-E0012. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; May 1999.
21.
Moher DCook DJJadad ARTugwell PMoher MJones Aet al . Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. Health Technol Assess. 1999;3:1-98.
22.
Mulrow CD, Oxman AD, eds. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. Updated 9 December 1996. The Cochrane Collaboration. Issue 1. In: The Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software; 1997.
23.
Mosteller FGilbert JPMcPeek B. Reporting standards and research strategies for controlled trials: agenda for the editor. Control Clin Trials. 1980;1:37-58.
24.
Andersson L. Design of clinical trials on prostate cancer. Urology. 1997;49 4A Suppl 1-2.
25.
Whitehead AWhitehead J. A general parametric approach to the meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Stat Med. 1991;10:1665-77.
26.
Hasselblad V. Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies. Med Decis Making. 1998;18:37-43.
27.
DerSimonian RLaird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177-88.
28.
EGRET Reference Manual, Revision 4. Cambridge, MA: Cytel Statistical Software Corp.; 1993.
29.
Iversen PTyrrell CJKaisary AVAnderson JBBaert LTammela Tet al . Casodex (bicalutamide) 150-mg monotherapy compared with castration in patients with previously untreated nonmetastatic prostate cancer: results from two multicenter randomized trials at a median follow-up of 4 years. Urology. 1998;51:389-96.
30.
Moffat LE. Comparison of Zoladex, diethylstilbestrol and cyproterone acetate treatment in advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 1990;18 Suppl 3 26-7.
31.
Peeling WB. Randomised controlled trial of treatment of patients with prostatic cancer: orchidectomy, diethylstilboestrol, cyproterone acetate. Monograph Series of the European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer.1984; 13:171-2.
32.
Thorpe SCAzmatullah SFellows GJGingell JCO'Boyle PJ. A prospective, randomised study to compare goserelin acetate (Zoladex) versus cyproterone acetate (Cyprostat) versus a combination of the two in the treatment of metastatic prostatic carcinoma. Eur Urol. 1996;29:47-54.
33.
Lund FRasmussen F. Flutamide versus stilboestrol in the management of advanced prostatic cancer. A controlled prospective study. Br J Urol. 1988;61:140-2.
34.
Koutsilieris MTolis G. Long-term follow-up of patients with advanced prostatic carcinoma treated with either buserelin (HOE 766) or orchiectomy: classification of variables associated with disease outcome. Prostate. 1985;7:31-9.
35.
Chang AYeap BDavis TBlum RHahn RKhanna Oet al . Double-blind, randomized study of primary hormonal treatment of stage D2 prostate carcinoma: flutamide versus diethylstilbestrol. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:2250-7.
36.
Iversen P. Update of monotherapy trials with the new anti-androgen, Casodex (ICI 176,334). International Casodex Investigators. Eur Urol. 1994;26 Suppl 1 5-9.
37.
Blackard CEByar DPJordan WP Jr. Orchiectomy for advanced prostatic carcinoma. A reevaluation. Urology. 1973;1:553-60.
38.
Pavone-Macaluso Mde Voogt HJViggiano GBarasolo ELardennois Bde Pauw Met al . Comparison of diethylstilbestrol, cyproterone acetate and medroxyprogesterone acetate in the treatment of advanced prostatic cancer: final analysis of a randomized phase III trial of the European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer Urological Group. J Urol. 1986;136:624-31.
39.
Ostri PBonnesen TNilsson TFrimodt-Moller C. Treatment of symptomatic metastatic prostatic cancer with cyproterone acetate versus orchiectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Urol Int. 1991;46:167-71.
40.
Boccon-Gibod LFournier GBottet PMarechal JMGuiter JRischman Pet al . Flutamide versus orchidectomy in the treatment of metastatic prostate carcinoma. Eur Urol. 1997;32:391-5.
41.
Huben RPMurphy GP. A comparison of diethylstilbestrol or orchiectomy with buserelin and with methotrexate plus diethylstilbestrol or orchiectomy in newly diagnosed patients with clinical stage D2 cancer of the prostate. Cancer. 1988;62:1881-7.
42.
Chodak GSharifi RKasimis BBlock NLMacramalla EKennealey GT. Single-agent therapy with bicalutamide: a comparison with medical or surgical castration in the treatment of advanced prostate carcinoma. Urology. 1995;46:849-55.
43.
de Voogt HJKlijn JGStuder USchroder FSylvester RDe Pauw M. Orchidectomy versus Buserelin in combination with cyproterone acetate, for 2 weeks or continuously, in the treatment of metastatic prostatic cancer. Preliminary results of EORTC-trial 30843. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 1990;37:965-9.
44.
Waymont BLynch THDunn JAEmtage LAArkell DGWallace DMet al . Phase III randomised study of zoladex versus stilboestrol in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Br J Urol. 1992;69:614-20.
45.
Robinson MRSmith PHRichards BNewling DWde Pauw MSylvester R. The final analysis of the EORTC Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Co-Operative Group phase III clinical trial (protocol 30805) comparing orchidectomy, orchidectomy plus cyproterone acetate and low dose stilboestrol in the management of metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. Eur Urol. 1995;28:273-83.
46.
Kaisary AVTyrrell CJBeacock CLunglmayr GDebruyne F. A randomised comparison of monotherapy with Casodex 50 mg daily and castration in the treatment of metastatic prostate carcinoma. Casodex Study Group. Eur Urol. 1995;28:215-22.
47.
Iversen PTveter KVarenhorst E. Randomised study of Casodex 50 MG monotherapy vs orchidectomy in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. The Scandinavian Casodex Cooperative Group. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1996;30:93-8.
48.
de Voogt HJ. Cyproterone acetate as monotherapy in prospective randomized trials. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1990;359:85-91.
49.
Bruun EFrimodt-Moller C. The effect of Buserelin versus conventional antiandrogenic treatment in patients with T2-4NXM1 prostatic cancer. A prospective, randomized multicentre phase III trial. The “Danish Buserelin Study Group.”. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1996;30:291-7.
50.
Kaisary AVTyrrell CJPeeling WBGriffiths K. Comparison of LHRH analogue (Zoladex) with orchiectomy in patients with metastatic prostatic carcinoma. Br J Urol. 1991;67:502-8.
51.
The Leuprolide Study Group. Leuprolide versus diethylstilbestrol for metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1984;311:1281-6.
52.
Citrin DLResnick MIGuinan Pal-Bussam NScott MGau TCet al . A comparison of Zoladex and DES in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer: results of a randomized, multicenter trial. Prostate. 1991;18:139-46.
53.
Vogelzang NJChodak GWSoloway MSBlock NLSchellhammer PFSmith JAet al . Goserelin versus orchiectomy in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer: final results of a randomized trial. Zoladex Prostate Study Group. Urology. 1995;46:220-6.
54.
Soloway MSChodak GVogelzang NJBlock NLSchellhammer PFSmith JAet al . Zoladex versus orchiectomy in treatment of advanced prostate cancer: a randomized trial. Zoladex Prostate Study Group. Urology. 1991;37:46-51.
55.
Klijn JGde Voogt HJStuder UESchroder FHSylvester RDe Pauw M. Short-term versus long-term addition of cyproterone acetate to buserelin therapy in comparison with orchidectomy in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Genitourinary Group. Cancer. 1993;72 12 Suppl 3858-62.
56.
Garnick MB. Leuprolide versus diethylstilbestrol for previously untreated stage D2 prostate cancer. Results of a prospectively randomized trial. Urology. 1986;27 1 Suppl 21-8.
57.
Seely JH. Phase III studies in prostatic cancer with leuprolide acetate. J Androl. 1987;8:S23-6.
58.
Klioze SSMiller MFSpiro TP. A randomized, comparative study of buserelin with DES/orchiectomy in the treatment of stage D2 prostatic cancer patients. Am J Clin Oncol. 1988;11 Suppl 2 S176-82.
59.
Bales GTChodak GW. A controlled trial of bicalutamide versus castration in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Urology. 1996;47 1A Suppl 38-43.
60.
Tyrrell CJKaisary AVIversen PAnderson JBBaert LTammela Tet al . A randomized comparison of ‘Casodex’ (bicalutamide) 150 mg monotherapy versus castration in the treatment of metastatic and locally advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 1998;33:447-56.
61.
Cleary PDMorrissey GOster G. Health-related quality of life in patients with advanced prostate cancer: a multinational perspective. Qual Life Res. 1995;4:207-20.
62.
Cassileth BRSoloway MSVogelzang NJChou JMSchellhammer PDSeidmon EJet al . Quality of life and psychosocial status in stage D prostate cancer. Zoladex Prostate Cancer Study Group. Qual Life Res. 1992;1:323-9.
63.
Herr HW. Quality of life in prostate cancer patients. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997;47:207-17.
64.
Stanford JLStephenson RACoyle LMCerhan JCorrea REley JWet al . Prostate Cancer Trends 1973-1995. SEER Program, National Cancer Institute. NIH Publication No. 99-4543. Bethesda, MD: U.S. National Cancer Institute; 1999.

Comments

0 Comments
Sign In to Submit A Comment

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

cover image Annals of Internal Medicine
Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 132Number 74 April 2000
Pages: 566 - 577

History

Published in issue: 4 April 2000
Published online: 15 August 2000

Keywords

Authors

Affiliations

Jerome Seidenfeld, PhD
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
David J. Samson, BA
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Vic Hasselblad, PhD
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Naomi Aronson, PhD
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Peter C. Albertsen, MD
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Charles L. Bennett, MD, PhD
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Timothy J. Wilt, MD, MPH
From the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center, Chicago, Illinois; Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut; Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; and the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center/VISN 13 Center for Chronic Diseases Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Acknowledgment: The authors thank Maxine Gere, MS, and Kathleen Ziegler, PharmD, for editorial assistance.
Grant Support: This work was developed under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ contract number 290-97-0015). The Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center is an Evidence-based Practice Center of the AHRQ.
Corresponding Author: Jerome Seidenfeld, PhD, Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, 225 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60601-7680; e-mail, [email protected].
Current Author Addresses: Drs. Seidenfeld and Aronson: Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, 225 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60601-7680.
Mr. Samson: Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, 1310 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.
Dr. Hasselblad: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Terrace Level, 2400 Pratt, Room 0311, Durham, NC 27705.
Dr. Albertsen: University of Connecticut Health Center, Division of Urology, 263 Farmington, Farmington, CT 06030-3955.
Dr. Bennett: Veterans Affairs Chicago Health Care Systems, Medical Science Building, 400 East Ontario, Suite 205, Chicago, IL 60611.
Dr. Wilt: Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 1 Veterans Drive, Minneapolis, MN 55417.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format





Download article citation data for:
Jerome Seidenfeld, David J. Samson, Vic Hasselblad, et al. Single-Therapy Androgen Suppression in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ann Intern Med.2000;132:566-577. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-132-7-200004040-00009

View More

Login Options:
Purchase

You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.

Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.

Create your Free Account

You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Related in ACP Journals

Full Text

View Full Text

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media