4.6 Review

Adjuvant hormone therapy for localised and locally advanced prostate carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

期刊

CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS
卷 35, 期 7, 页码 540-546

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2009.05.001

关键词

Adjuvant hormone therapy; Radiotherapy; Prostatectomy; Prostate cancer; Systematic review; Meta-analysis

类别

资金

  1. Cancer Research Wales

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Adjuvant hormone therapy (AHT) following radiotherapy or surgery is a treatment option frequently offered to men with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. We performed a systematic review of published randomised trials to assess the effectiveness of AHT. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, SCI, LILACS and SIGLE for randomised trials comparing AHT plus primary therapy (radiotherapy or prostatectomy) with primary therapy alone. Data on study design, participants interventions and Outcomes were extracted from relevant studies and where possible pooled for meta-analysis. Findings: AHT following radiotherapy improved overall survival (at 5 years OR fixed effect model 1.29, 95% CI 1.07-1.56, p = 0.007), disease-specific survival (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.53-2.88, p < 0.00001) and disease-free survival (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.16-2.23, p < 0.00001). A random effect model favoured adjuvant hormone therapy but did not reach significance. After prostatectomy, there was no significant overall survival advantage with AHT, although one study reported a significant improvement in disease-specific survival (HR 4.09, p = 0.0004). Disease-free survival was also better with AHT (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.30-6.03, p < 0.00001). AHT-induced toxicities included gynaecomastia, impotence, gastrointestinal and haematological. Conclusions: There are significant clinical benefits associated with the use of AHT for early prostate cancer. Patients should make an informed decision to accept AHT based on its effectiveness and side-effects. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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