4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Anti-androgens increase N-terminal pro-BNP levels in men with prostate cancer

期刊

CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 68, 期 1, 页码 59-65

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2007.02999.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The aim of this study was to determine the effects of anti-androgens on left ventricular (LV) function and levels of N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), a sensitive cardiac risk marker, in men with prostate cancer as these are widely used drugs in this condition, and evidence suggests that endogenous androgens are cardioprotective in men. Design and patients Forty-three men (mean age 70.7 +/- 6.2 years) with prostate cancer were randomized to goserelin (an LH-releasing hormone analogue) or bicalutamide (an androgen-receptor blocker) for 6 months; 20 men with a history of prostate cancer on no treatment were studied in parallel. Results Mean changes in testosterone and oestradiol, respectively, from baseline to 6 months were -88% and -46% with goserelin, +50% and +44% with bicalutamide, and -1% and -9% for the 'no-treatment' group. Bicalutamide significantly increased NT-proBNP from baseline to 3 and 6 months (median value at baseline, 3 and 6 months: 55, 101 and 118 ng/l, respectively). Goserelin caused a significant increase from baseline to 3 months but not to 6 months (median value at baseline, 3 and 6 months: 66, 87 and 72 ng/l, respectively). No significant changes occurred in the 'no-treatment' cohort (median value at baseline 3 and 6 months: 60, 53 and 60 ng/l, respectively). No significant changes in LV function, blood pressure (BP), body mass index or waist-hip ratio occurred to account for the changes in NT-proBNP. Conclusion Androgen receptor blockade and, to a lesser extent, androgen suppression cause an increase in NT-pro-BNP in men with prostate cancer. The significance is not clear but could imply an adverse effect on cardiovascular risk following hormonal manipulation.

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

4.4
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