4.6 Article

Bicalutamide monotherapy versus flutamide plus goserelin in prostate cancer: Updated results of a multicentric trial

Journal

EUROPEAN UROLOGY
Volume 42, Issue 5, Pages 481-489

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00435-9

Keywords

bicalutamide; antiandrogen monotherapy; prostate cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of bicalutamide monotherapy to maximal androgen blockade in advanced prostatic cancer. Patients and Methods: Previously untreated patients with histologically proven stage C or D (American Urological Association Staging System) disease were randomly allocated to either bicalutamide (B) or goserelin plus flutamide (G + F). After disease progression, patients treated with B were assigned to castration. The primary endpoint for this trial was overall survival. Prostate cancer-specific survival and progression were included among secondary endpoints. Results: In total 108 patients received B and 112 received G + F. At a median follow-up time of 54 months (range 1-89), 151 patients progressed and 113 died. There was no significant difference in the duration of either progression-free or overall survival. Hazards of progression, death and cancer-specific death, corrected by disease stage, tumor grade and baseline PSA level, showed that patients initially assigned to B had a higher risk of progression but a comparable risk of death and cancer-specific death with the exception of patients with G3 tumors who had an increased risk of death). Conclusions: In patients with well or moderately well differentiated tumors, B monotherapy followed by castration may offer the same survival chance as maximal androgen deprivation. In those patients it thus represents a reasonable choice that can avoid the side effects of androgen deprivation for considerable periods of time. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available