Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23896094›Full record

SynthesisUrology2013

Efficacy of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy vs conventional continuous androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

Huei-Ting Tsai, David F Penson, Kepher H Makambi, John H Lynch, Stephen K Van Den Eeden, Arnold L Potosky

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Urology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation therapy to biochemical recurrence after external beam radiotherapy: a phase 3 GICOR study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2017
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Uroncor consensus statement: Management of biochemical recurrence after radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer: From biochemical failure to castration resistance.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Huei-Ting TsaiDepartment of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA. ccsuny.tw@gmail.com
David F Penson
Kepher H Makambi
John H Lynch
Stephen K Van Den Eeden
Arnold L Potosky

Funding

Tissue Culture Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI Louis M Weiner · 1990 to 2026
$71.5M
Outcomes of Prostate Cancer Androgen Deprivation TherapyR01CA142934 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI POTOSKY, ARNOLD L · 2010 to 2012
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008NCI NIH HHS P30CA051008NCI NIH HHS R01 CA142934NCI NIH HHS R01CA142934
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the efficacy of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (IADT) vs continuous androgen deprivation therapy (CADT) for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer; we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessing the risks of disease progression, all-cause, and disease-specific mortality. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a systematic search of several bibliographic systems to identify all RCTs of IADT in men with newly diagnosed metastatic or biochemical only prostate cancer. We abstracted outcome data, study characteristics, and participant demographics. We performed heterogeneity tests and calculated the summarized risk differences (RD) and risk ratios at 95% confidence intervals (CI), using inverse variance methods in random-effects approaches.

resultsWe identified 8 RCTs (N = 4664) comparing mortality between IADT and CADT. For all men combined, we observed small but nonsignificant differences in all-cause mortality (RD = 0.02, 95% CI = -0.02, 0.06), disease-specific mortality (RD = 0.04, 95% CI = -0.01, 0.08), and disease progression (RD = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.09, 0.04). Among the prespecified subgroup with histologically confirmed, newly diagnosed metastatic disease, we found no difference in overall survival (RD = 0.00, 95% CI = -0.09, 0.09).

conclusionWe found no difference in overall survival, but a small increased risk in disease-specific survival for men treated with IADT relative to CADT was observed. IADT could be considered as an alternative to CADT because of better quality of life outcome. Patients should be informed of the possible risks and benefits of both therapies. More research confirming the benefits of IADT vs CADT is needed to inform treatment decisions.

Indexed as

Androgen AntagonistsConfidence IntervalsDisease ProgressionGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneHumansMaleOdds RatioProstatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival AnalysisAndrogen AntagonistsGonadotropin-Releasing Hormone

Identifiers

PMID23896094
PMCPMC4154705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.