4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and fracture risk: A claims-based cohort study of men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 31, 页码 7897-7903

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.00.6908

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists decrease bone mineral density, a surrogate for fracture risk, in men with prostate cancer. We conducted a claims-based cohort study to characterize the relationship between GnRH agonists and risk for clinical fractures in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Patients and Methods Using medical claims data from a 5% national random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we identified a study group of men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who initiated GnRH agonist treatment from 1992 to 1994 (n = 3,887). A comparison group of men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who did not receive GnRH agonist treatment during the study period (n = 7,774) was matched for age, race, geographic location, and comorbidity. Clinical fractures were identified using inpatient, outpatient, and physician claims during 7 years of follow-up. Results In men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer, GnRH agonists significantly increased fracture risk. The rate of any clinical fracture was 7.88 per 100 person-years at risk in men receiving a GnRH agonist compared with 6.51 per 100 person-years in matched controls (relative risk, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.29; P <.001). Rates of vertebral fractures (relative risk, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.75; P < .001) and hip/femur fractures (relative risk, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.53; P =.002) were also significantly higher in men who received a GnRH agonist. GnRH agonist treatment independently predicted fracture risk in multivariate analyses. Longer duration of treatment conferred greater fracture risk. Conclusion GnRH agonists significantly increase risk for any clinical fracture, hip fractures, and vertebral fractures in men with prostate cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据