PD16-07 POST-PROSTATECTOMY ADJUVANT ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY-- PATIENT OPINIONS AND GOALS OF CARE

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023PD16-07 POST-PROSTATECTOMY ADJUVANT ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY-- PATIENT OPINIONS AND GOALS OF CARE Max Levitt, Ameeta Nayak, Dean Fergusson, Luke Lavallee, Christopher Morash, Ilias Cagiannos, and Rodney Breau Max LevittMax Levitt More articles by this author , Ameeta NayakAmeeta Nayak More articles by this author , Dean FergussonDean Fergusson More articles by this author , Luke LavalleeLuke Lavallee More articles by this author , Christopher MorashChristopher Morash More articles by this author , Ilias CagiannosIlias Cagiannos More articles by this author , and Rodney BreauRodney Breau More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003271.07AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Despite the proven benefit of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients receiving primary radiation, few studies evaluate adjuvant ADT after prostatectomy. We surveyed Canadian prostate cancer patients about adjuvant ADT with the goal of informing an adjuvant ADT clinical trial. METHODS: An electronic survey was devised and distributed using a modified Dillman approach. The survey was sent to members of Prostate Cancer Canada, a patient advocacy group. In addition to demographic information, we asked patients about their experience with prostate cancer, if they received post-operative therapy, and about their opinions to inform the design of an adjuvant ADT clinical trial. The survey was sent on May 2021, and all responses were received by July 2021. RESULTS: Forty patients completed the survey. The average participant age was 71±7.3 years old. The average age at prostate cancer diagnosis was 64±6.7 years. Thirty-eight (95%) patients were previously treated with radical prostatectomy and 24 (60%) subsequently developed biochemical recurrence. If it had been available, 30 (75%) participants indicated that they would have been interested in an adjuvant ADT trial to prevent biochemical recurrence. Most (15; 37.5%) stated that 12 months would be the longest duration of ADT that they would consider. The remainder of participants would have considered up to 6 months (9; 22.5%), up to 18 months (3; 7.5%), up to 24 months (5; 12.5%), or greater than 24 months (8; 20%) of adjuvant ADT. A daily oral tablet (31; 52.5%) or injection every 6 months (9; 22.5%) were favoured in a clinical trial over an injection at shorter time intervals. The most important outcomes for a trial of adjuvant ADT were prevention of cancer related death (38; 95%) and cancer recurrence (37; 92%). If 1 year of adjuvant ADT reduced PSA recurrence by 50%, many (29; 47.5%) stated they would have chosen this intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Few trials have assessed adjuvant ADT after radical prostatectomy and many patients claim they would have been interested in participating in a trial if it had been available. Based on these results, a randomized trial is warranted and patient preferences should be incorporated in trial design. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e491 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Max Levitt More articles by this author Ameeta Nayak More articles by this author Dean Fergusson More articles by this author Luke Lavallee More articles by this author Christopher Morash More articles by this author Ilias Cagiannos More articles by this author Rodney Breau More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...