Comparison of oncological outcomes of upfront androgen receptor signaling inhibitors and combined androgen blockade in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global health & medicine Pub Date : 2024-06-30 DOI:10.35772/ghm.2024.01019
Michio Noda, Taketo Kawai, Kanade Hagiwara, Takahiro Yoshida, Kazuki Yanagida, Yuumi Tokura, Itsuki Yoshimura, Tomoyuki Kaneko, Tohru Nakagawa
{"title":"Comparison of oncological outcomes of upfront androgen receptor signaling inhibitors and combined androgen blockade in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.","authors":"Michio Noda, Taketo Kawai, Kanade Hagiwara, Takahiro Yoshida, Kazuki Yanagida, Yuumi Tokura, Itsuki Yoshimura, Tomoyuki Kaneko, Tohru Nakagawa","doi":"10.35772/ghm.2024.01019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years, randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that upfront androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) prolong overall survival (OS) compared with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone or combined androgen blockade (CAB) in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). However, it remains unclear whether upfront ARSI is superior to CAB in Asian populations, among which the efficacy of ADT/CAB is considered relatively high. In this study, we compared the oncological outcomes of upfront ARSI and CAB in Japanese patients with mCSPC. Patients with mCSPC who underwent systemic therapy between May 2009 and October 2023 were enrolled retrospectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare the castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival (CRPC-FS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and OS between patients treated with upfront ARSI (ARSI group) and those treated with CAB (CAB group). In total, 30 and 142 patients were enrolled in the ARSI and CAB groups, respectively. After PSM (25 patients in each group), CRPC-FS was significantly longer in the ARSI group than in the CAB group (median: 36.7 <i>vs.</i> 12.3 months, hazard ratio: 0.44, 95% confidence interval: 0.20-0.97, <i>p</i> = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in CSS or OS between the two groups. In conclusion, when compared to CAB, upfront ARSI might have the potential to extend CRPC-FS among individuals in the Japanese population.</p>","PeriodicalId":12556,"journal":{"name":"Global health & medicine","volume":"6 3","pages":"199-203"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11197164/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global health & medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35772/ghm.2024.01019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that upfront androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) prolong overall survival (OS) compared with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone or combined androgen blockade (CAB) in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). However, it remains unclear whether upfront ARSI is superior to CAB in Asian populations, among which the efficacy of ADT/CAB is considered relatively high. In this study, we compared the oncological outcomes of upfront ARSI and CAB in Japanese patients with mCSPC. Patients with mCSPC who underwent systemic therapy between May 2009 and October 2023 were enrolled retrospectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare the castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival (CRPC-FS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and OS between patients treated with upfront ARSI (ARSI group) and those treated with CAB (CAB group). In total, 30 and 142 patients were enrolled in the ARSI and CAB groups, respectively. After PSM (25 patients in each group), CRPC-FS was significantly longer in the ARSI group than in the CAB group (median: 36.7 vs. 12.3 months, hazard ratio: 0.44, 95% confidence interval: 0.20-0.97, p = 0.035). No significant differences were observed in CSS or OS between the two groups. In conclusion, when compared to CAB, upfront ARSI might have the potential to extend CRPC-FS among individuals in the Japanese population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日本转移性阉割敏感性前列腺癌患者前期雄激素受体信号抑制剂与联合雄激素阻断治疗的肿瘤学疗效比较。
近年来,随机对照试验证明,与单纯雄激素剥夺疗法(ADT)或雄激素联合阻断疗法(CAB)相比,前期雄激素受体信号转导抑制剂(ARSI)可延长转移性阉割敏感性前列腺癌(mCSPC)患者的总生存期(OS)。然而,在亚洲人群中,前期 ARSI 是否优于 CAB 仍不清楚,而在亚洲人群中,ADT/CAB 的疗效被认为相对较高。在这项研究中,我们比较了日本 mCSPC 患者前期 ARSI 和 CAB 的肿瘤治疗效果。2009年5月至2023年10月期间接受系统治疗的mCSPC患者均被纳入回顾性研究。采用倾向得分匹配法(PSM)比较了接受前期ARSI治疗的患者(ARSI组)和接受CAB治疗的患者(CAB组)的无阉割耐药前列腺癌生存率(CRPC-FS)、癌症特异性生存率(CSS)和OS。ARSI组和CAB组分别共有30名和142名患者。PSM 后(每组 25 名患者),ARSI 组的 CRPC-FS 明显长于 CAB 组(中位数:36.7 对 12.3):36.7个月对12.3个月,危险比:0.44,95%置信区间:0.20-0.97,P = 0.035)。两组患者的 CSS 和 OS 均无明显差异。总之,在日本人群中,与 CAB 相比,前期 ARSI 有可能延长 CRPC-FS 的时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Advances in HIV management and challenges in Japan: Current situation of pre-exposure prophylaxis in Tokyo. Analysis of tumor infiltrating immune cells in Kaposi sarcoma lesions discovers shifts in macrophage populations. Changes in epidemiological and treatment-related characteristics among newly reported HIV/AIDS cases in an urban area in Shanghai, China from 2001 to 2019: A population-based retrospective study. Exploration of PrEP/PEP service delivery model in China: A pilot in eastern, central and western region. Identification of new circulating recombinant form of HIV-1 CRF139_02B in Japan, and search for the origin.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1