Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/23763
Title: | Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer. | Austin Authors: | Perera, Marlon ;Roberts, Matthew J;Klotz, Laurence;Higano, Celestia S;Papa, Nathan P;Sengupta, Shomik ;Bolton, Damien M ;Lawrentschuk, Nathan | Affiliation: | Department of Surgery, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia The University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Department of Urology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia EHCS, Monash University, Box Hill, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Urology Department, Eastern Health, Box Hill, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia Department of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Division of Oncology, University of Washington, Washington, WA, USA |
Issue Date: | 2020 | Date: | 2020-06-30 | Publication information: | Nature reviews. Urology 2020; 17(8): 469-481 | Abstract: | Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is still a mainstay of treatment for advanced prostate cancer. Continuous ADT causes considerable patient morbidity including sexual dysfunction, poor mood and physical capacity, changes in body composition and health-care-related costs. Intermittent ADT has been used as an approach to ADT monotherapy to limit morbidity by enabling cyclical recovery of serum testosterone levels. To date, a number of well-performed randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have demonstrated statistically insignificant differences in oncological outcomes between intermittent and continuous ADT monotherapy. Sexual outcomes, morbidity profiles and cost-savings favour intermittent therapy in most randomized trials, but the benefit for clinical practice is unclear. Despite the growing body of evidence, the optimal administration regime for ADT has not been clearly established and incorporation of adjunctive upfront treatments such as chemotherapy and novel anti-androgen agents has further hampered progress. Recommendations by authoritative urological and oncological societies regarding the use of intermittent ADT are limited. The potential benefits of reduced morbidity for a particular patient must be considered in light of the possible oncological outcomes. Although the oncological changes associated with intermittent ADT are controversial, intermittent ADT does seem to provide symptomatic benefit in patients compared with continuous ADT. However, careful selection of suitable patients is crucial. | URI: | https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/23763 | DOI: | 10.1038/s41585-020-0335-7 | ORCID: | 0000-0003-0552-7402 0000-0002-5145-6783 0000-0002-1138-6389 0000-0003-3357-1216 |
Journal: | Nature reviews. Urology | PubMed URL: | 32606361 | Type: | Journal Article |
Appears in Collections: | Journal articles |
Show full item record
Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.