722 PREFERRED TREATMENT FREQUENCY IN PATIENTS RECEIVING ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY FOR ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Advanced (I)1 Apr 2013722 PREFERRED TREATMENT FREQUENCY IN PATIENTS RECEIVING ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY FOR ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER Mikkel Fode, Torben Nielsen, Jesper R. Andersen, Henrik Jakobsen, and Jens Sønksen Mikkel FodeMikkel Fode Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author , Torben NielsenTorben Nielsen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author , Jesper R. AndersenJesper R. Andersen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author , Henrik JakobsenHenrik Jakobsen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author , and Jens SønksenJens Sønksen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.281AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with GnRH agonists for prostate cancer has typically been administered with 1 or 3 month intervals. New formulations allow for longer injection intervals. The purpose of this study was to assess patient preference regarding the length of intervals between treatment and/or clinical control. METHODS The study was conducted at a large University Hospital between September 2011 and May 2012. Participants were men receiving ADT for advanced prostate cancer. A questionnaire including preferred treatment/control intervals, reasons for wishing either frequent or infrequent treatment/control, as well as satisfaction and side effects with current treatment was developed. A pilot phase where 20 patients filled out the questionnaire and gave comments was carried out to ensure patient understanding. The primary end point was the preferred treatment frequency. Patients were grouped into a frequent-treatment-group (“Every month”, “Every third month”), an infrequent-treatment-group (“Every sixth month”, “Every twelfth month”) and a group for whom the length of treatment intervals made no difference. RESULTS Over all 240 patients were presented with the questionnaire and 178 questionnaires (74%) were available for analysis. Median age of the participants was 77 years. In 49% the disease was considered to be progressing (two consecutively rising PSA values above 2 μg/l). A total of 38% of participants preferred frequent treatment/control, 33% preferred infrequent treatment/control, and 29% stated that it made no difference. The chi square test showed no statistically significant difference in the sizes of the 3 groups (p=0.39). Over all 83.7% were satisfied with treatment while one patient (0.6%) was dissatisfied. Nine percent indicated severe side effects. Taking patient age, disease progression, treatment satisfaction, and side effects into account, a multiple regression analysis showed that patients with stable disease were most likely to prefer infrequent visits (OR 4.1). The most commonly stated reason for wanting frequent visits was that this provided a feeling of security. The most common reasons for wanting less frequent visits were that visits to the hospital served as a reminder of the disease and that hospital visits were impractical. CONCLUSIONS Less frequent ADT treatment may be of benefit for a large group of patients, however, it is not suited for all patients. Longer treatment/control intervals cannot be prescribed blindly without possibly affecting patient satisfaction. © 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 189Issue 4SApril 2013Page: e296-e297 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Mikkel Fode Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author Torben Nielsen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author Jesper R. Andersen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author Henrik Jakobsen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author Jens Sønksen Herlev, Denmark More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...