Jesús Calleja-Escudero, Víctor Barrondo, Andrés Rodriguez-Alonso, Francisco Gómez-Veiga, Joan Bestard, Antonio Gómez-Caamaño, Anne-Sophie Grandoulier, Maria Pérez-Sampietro, Venancio Chantada-Abal, Raúl Poza de Celis
{"title":"Evaluation of the criteria for renewal of LHRH agonists in patients with prostate cancer: results of the ANAREN Study.","authors":"Jesús Calleja-Escudero, Víctor Barrondo, Andrés Rodriguez-Alonso, Francisco Gómez-Veiga, Joan Bestard, Antonio Gómez-Caamaño, Anne-Sophie Grandoulier, Maria Pérez-Sampietro, Venancio Chantada-Abal, Raúl Poza de Celis","doi":"10.7573/dic.2024-2-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Injectable extended-release formulations of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa) have simplified the treatment of prostate cancer with a satisfactory level of androgen castration. This study aims to determine the percentage of patients whose initial LHRHa prescription was renewed during follow-up, how many changed formulation and how their quality of life evolved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is an observational, prospective, multicentre study of men with prostate cancer who were to receive treatment with LHRHa (triptorelin every 3 or 6 months, leuprorelin every 3 or 6 months, or goserelin every 3 months) for 24 months. The treatment used was recorded and quality of life was assessed (QLQ-PR25 questionnaire) at four follow-up visits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 497 men (median age 75 years) were evaluated. The median exposure to LHRHa was 24 months. The initial prescription was renewed in 95.7% at follow-up 1 and 75% at follow-up 4. The main reason for changing from a 6-month to a 3-month formulation was a preference for sequential treatment (according to the investigator) and to see the physician more frequently (according to the patient). The main reason for switching from the 3-month to 6-month formulation was simplification of treatment (according to the investigator) and for convenience (according to the patient). Findings in the QLQ-PR25 questionnaire revealed no changes in urinary or bowel symptoms, though an improvement in sexual activity was reported. Practically all investigators and patients were satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Changes in formulation were scarce and generally justified by convenience factors or personal preferences. Patients maintained a good health status, with a high rate of retention of LHRHa treatment.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>Study number: A-ES-52014-224.A plain language summary is provided as supplementary material (available at: https://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/dic.2024-2-2-Suppl.pdf).</p>","PeriodicalId":11362,"journal":{"name":"Drugs in Context","volume":"13 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195525/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7573/dic.2024-2-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Injectable extended-release formulations of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa) have simplified the treatment of prostate cancer with a satisfactory level of androgen castration. This study aims to determine the percentage of patients whose initial LHRHa prescription was renewed during follow-up, how many changed formulation and how their quality of life evolved.
Methods: This is an observational, prospective, multicentre study of men with prostate cancer who were to receive treatment with LHRHa (triptorelin every 3 or 6 months, leuprorelin every 3 or 6 months, or goserelin every 3 months) for 24 months. The treatment used was recorded and quality of life was assessed (QLQ-PR25 questionnaire) at four follow-up visits.
Results: A total of 497 men (median age 75 years) were evaluated. The median exposure to LHRHa was 24 months. The initial prescription was renewed in 95.7% at follow-up 1 and 75% at follow-up 4. The main reason for changing from a 6-month to a 3-month formulation was a preference for sequential treatment (according to the investigator) and to see the physician more frequently (according to the patient). The main reason for switching from the 3-month to 6-month formulation was simplification of treatment (according to the investigator) and for convenience (according to the patient). Findings in the QLQ-PR25 questionnaire revealed no changes in urinary or bowel symptoms, though an improvement in sexual activity was reported. Practically all investigators and patients were satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment.
Conclusion: Changes in formulation were scarce and generally justified by convenience factors or personal preferences. Patients maintained a good health status, with a high rate of retention of LHRHa treatment.
Clinical trial registration: Study number: A-ES-52014-224.A plain language summary is provided as supplementary material (available at: https://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/dic.2024-2-2-Suppl.pdf).
期刊介绍：
Covers all phases of original research: laboratory, animal and human/clinical studies, health economics and outcomes research, and postmarketing studies. Original research that shows positive or negative results are welcomed. Invited review articles may cover single-drug reviews, drug class reviews, latest advances in drug therapy, therapeutic-area reviews, place-in-therapy reviews, new pathways and classes of drugs. In addition, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are welcomed and may be published as original research if performed per accepted guidelines. Editorials of key topics and issues in drugs and therapeutics are welcomed. The Editor-in-Chief will also consider manuscripts of interest in areas such as technologies that support diagnosis, assessment and treatment. EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines should be followed for each article type. GPP3 Guidelines should be followed for any industry-sponsored manuscripts. Other Editorial sections may include Editorial, Case Report, Conference Report, Letter-to-the-Editor, Educational Section.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
