Commentary on maximal androgen blockade in prostate cancer: a theory to put into practice?
The population at risk of prostate cancer is on the increase, and so is public awareness of this disease. There has been an unresolved controversy surrounding the benefits of maximal androgen blockade (MAB) as a valid approach to treatment of non-curative prostate cancer since it was first proposed in 1945. How are we to interpret the data on MAB in order to give each patient the best advice on treatment? Studies of MAB using medical castration (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone [LHRH] analogue plus antiandrogen) vs. LHRH analogues alone are inconclusive when viewed collectively, although the largest showed objective benefits for MAB. The remaining studies have insufficient power to show the expected effect size. Studies of MAB using surgical castration plus antiandrogen vs. surgical castration alone also gave inconsistent results, although a meta-analysis is in favor of MAB on objective criteria of response. Among trials of MAB using an LHRH analogue vs. surgical castration alone, one is positive and the remaining two are neutral for MAB. No study shows MAB to be worse than either medical or surgical castration alone. An overall meta-analysis shows a trend for benefit with MAB but is not statistically significant. The existing data have strongly suggested that there may be a particular benefit for certain subgroups of patients (including those with minimal disease) but numbers studied have been too small to allow valid conclusions. The INT 0105 trial in progress may permit firmer conclusions to be drawn on this and other questions. In the meantime one of the drawbacks to current MAB regimens is the exchange of modest clinical advantages for the side effects of nilutamide and flutamide. Given that the disease is noncurative, improved quality of life is the main goal of therapy, and excellent tolerability of treatment is fundamental to this. In a comparative trial, bicalutamide (Casodex) was more effective than flutamide (each in combination with an LHRH analogue) in terms of time to treatment failure and produced a significantly lower incidence of diarrhoea. In conclusion, the evidence supports early use of adequate hormonal treatment, and this should mean either medical or surgical castration, ideally augmented by an antiandrogen. Tolerability of the antiandrogen is a key consideration in gaining an improvement in quality of life with MAB.
D000726:Androgen Antagonists / Q000592:standards / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D018931:Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal / Q000592:standards / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D017024:Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D007987:Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone / Q000031:analogs & derivatives; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009919:Orchiectomy / Q000592:standards; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000601:surgery; D011788:Quality of Life; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
D000726:Androgen Antagonists; D018931:Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal; D007987:Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone