ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics
Abiraterone or Enzalutamide for Patients With Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Veterans Affairs Study.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEnzalutamide or abiraterone, combined with androgen-deprivation therapy, is standard of care for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). However, no trials have compared these drugs. This study compared clinical outcomes in patients with mCSPC treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients with mCSPC initiating enzalutamide or abiraterone between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2023, within the nationwide US Veterans Affairs health care system. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) differences in overall survival (OS), time to treatment switch or death (TTS), and prostate cancer survival (PCS) were evaluated.
resultsThe study included 5,135 patients with mCSPC treated with enzalutamide (1,803) or abiraterone (3,332). The median age was 74.33 years; 58.0% were non-Hispanic White, 28.2% non-Hispanic Black, and 5.6% Hispanic. After weighting, baseline characteristics were well balanced. The median follow-up was 18.74 months for abiraterone and 24.76 months for enzalutamide. Outcomes were similar overall: for OS, the 3-year RMST difference was 0.72 months (95% CI, -0.06 to 1.50); for TTS, the 3-year RMST difference was 0.53 months (95% CI, -0.45 to 1.51), and for PCS, the 1-year RMST difference was -0.12 months (95% CI, -0.35 to 0.11). In subgroup analysis, enzalutamide was associated with improved OS among patients age 75 years and older (3-year RMST difference: 1.65 months, 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.89), but not among younger patients (3-year RMST difference: 0.13 months, 95% CI, -0.86 to 1.11).
conclusionIn this nationwide cohort study, enzalutamide and abiraterone yielded comparable OS, TTS, and PCS outcomes overall, although a small but statistically significant OS benefit was observed for enzalutamide among older patients (≥75 years). These real-world findings from the largest integrated US health care system may provide guidance for selecting mCSPC treatments, although residual confounding cannot be fully excluded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.