4.5 Article

Incidence rate of prostate cancer in men treated for erectile dysfunction with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors: retrospective analysis

Journal

ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 246-248

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.1038/aja.2012.162

Keywords

erectile dysfunction (ED); phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors (PDE-5i); prostate cancer; prostatic neoplasms

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence rate of prostate cancer among men with erectile dysfunction (ED) treated with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE-5i) over a 7-year period vs. men with ED of the same age and with similar risk factors who were not treated with PDE-5i. In a retrospective review of electronic medical records and billing databases between the years 2000 and 2006, men with ED between the ages of 50 and 69 years and no history of prostate cancer prior to 2000 were identified. These individuals were divided into two groups: 2362 men who had treatment with PDE-5i, and 2612 men who did not have treatment. Demographic data in each group were compared. During the study period, 97 (4.1%) men with ED treated with PDE-5i were diagnosed with prostate cancer compared with 258 (9.9%) men with ED in the non-treated group (P<00001). A higher percentage of African Americans were treated with PDE-5i vs. those who were not (10.5% vs. 7.1%; P<0.0001). The PDE-5i group had lower documented diagnosis of elevated prostate-specific antigen (10.0% vs. 13.1%; P=0.0008) and higher percentage of benign prostatic hyperplasia (38.4% vs. 35.1%; P=0.0149). Men with ED treated with PDE-5i tended to have less chance (adjusted odds ratio: 0.4; 95% confidence intervals: 0.3-0.5; P<0.0001) of having prostate cancer. Our data suggest that men with ED treated with PDE-5i tended to have less of a chance of being diagnosed with prostate cancer. Further research is warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available