MP38-16 DOES TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY INCREASE THE RISK OF CONVERSION TO TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER ON ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE?

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP38-16 DOES TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY INCREASE THE RISK OF CONVERSION TO TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER ON ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE? Jorge Daza, Usma Shabir, Zhe Jing, Mohsin Sheikh, Eric Kauffman, Khurshid Guru, Ahmed A Hussein, and Buffalo NY Jorge DazaJorge Daza More articles by this author , Usma ShabirUsma Shabir More articles by this author , Zhe JingZhe Jing More articles by this author , Mohsin SheikhMohsin Sheikh More articles by this author , Eric KauffmanEric Kauffman More articles by this author , Khurshid GuruKhurshid Guru More articles by this author , Ahmed A HusseinAhmed A Hussein More articles by this author , and Buffalo NYBuffalo NY More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003276.16AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the impact of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) in patients with localized prostate cancer who elected active surveillance (AS). METHODS: A retrospective review of our AS database was performed. Patients who received TRT while on AS were identified. A cohort of patients who underwent AS while not on TRT was matched in a ratio of 1:2. Both groups were compared. Kaplan Meier analysis and log-rank test were performed to compare treatment-free survival. Statistical significance was defined as p≤0.05. RESULTS: 23 (2%) patients who underwent TRT while on AS were identified. Two patients elected discontinuation of TRT and 2 were lost to follow up. Median follow-up was 91 months. Nineteen patients in the TRT group were matched to 40 patients without TRT. There was no significant difference in conversion to treatment (21% vs 22%, p=1.00), time to conversion to treatment (56 vs 42 months, p=0.09) or the change in PSA while on AS (-0.05 vs 1.45, p=0.56) (Table 1). Kaplan Meier analysis showed no significant difference in treatment-free survival between the 2 groups (log rank p>0.05) (Figure 1). Univariate analysis showed that Age, CCI, receipt of TRT, Gleason grade at initiation of AS or history of fusion biopsy were not associated with conversion to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: TRT was not associated with conversion to treatment in this matched analysis among patients with localized prostate cancer on AS. Despite limitations, to our knowledge, this study has the longest follow-up in patients receiving TRT while on AS. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e530 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Jorge Daza More articles by this author Usma Shabir More articles by this author Zhe Jing More articles by this author Mohsin Sheikh More articles by this author Eric Kauffman More articles by this author Khurshid Guru More articles by this author Ahmed A Hussein More articles by this author Buffalo NY More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...