skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: A retrospective comparison of androgen deprivation (AD) vs. no AD among low-risk and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, or radical prostatectomy

Journal Article · · International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics
 [1];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [3];  [3];  [1];  [1]
  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Glickman Urological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH (United States)
  2. Glickman Urological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH (United States)
  3. Department of Urology, Kaiser Permanente Ohio, Cleveland, OH (United States)

Purpose: To examine the value of androgen deprivation (AD) in the curative treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with the three major modalities: radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and permanent prostate implantation (PI). Methods and materials: During 1996-2001, 1668 patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated at The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. Only patients with a minimum of 2 years of prostate-specific antigen follow-up were included in the analysis, and biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS) was used as the endpoint. Patients were grouped according to treatment modality and stratified according to the use of AD. Results: The overall 5-year bRFS rate was 87.8%. The 5-year bRFS rate for low-risk patients was 89% and for intermediate-risk patients was 79%. For low-risk patients, the 5-year bRFS rates by treatment modality (without AD vs. with AD, respectively) were PI: 90% vs. 93%; EBRT: 90% vs. 93%; and RRP: 89% vs. 84%. For intermediate-risk patients, the 5-year bRFS rates by treatment modality (without AD vs. with AD, respectively) were PI: 88% vs. 82%; EBRT: 81% vs. 84%; and RRP: 75% vs. 72%. None of the comparisons within risk groups or among modalities supports an increased efficacy with the use of AD. Conclusion: Five-year bRFS rates in low-risk and intermediate-risk patients are not improved by the use of AD.

OSTI ID:
20630971
Journal Information:
International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, Vol. 60, Issue 5; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.05.067; PII: S0360-3016(04)00959-9; Copyright (c) 2004 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); ISSN 0360-3016
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English