Androgen deprivation therapy and cardiovascular risk: No meaningful difference between GnRH antagonist and agonists—a nationwide population-based cohort study based on 2010–2013 French Health Insurance data

A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular disease risk with degarelix and GnRH agonists in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Degarelix is a third-generation GnRH receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of prostate cancer, however, the decision to use a GnRH agonist or an antagonist depends on several factors. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing the cardiovascular disease risk between degarelix and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists in patients with all stages of prostate cancer.

METHODS

Databases were searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared the risk of cardiovascular disease between degarelix and GnRH agonists in patients with prostate cancer. We computed for binary endpoints risk ratio (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) which were analyzed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies were included with 123,969 patients and follow-up ranging from 3 to 13 months. Degarelix was associated with a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.41-0.84; p = 0.003; I2 = 84%). Incidence of stroke (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.56-1.42; p = 0.62; I2 = 0%), all-cause mortality (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.37-1.13; p = 0.12; I2 = 41%), hypertension (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.48, 1.04; p = 0.08; I2 = 0%), myocardial infarction (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0·59-1·84; p = 0·86; I2 = 66%), heart failure (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.38-1.62; p = 0.52; I2 = 79%) and arrhythmia (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.28-1.41; p = 0.86; I2 = 37%), did not reach a statistically significant difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with prostate cancer, degarelix is associated with a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events.

Risk of cardiovascular disease following degarelix versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer treatment involves hormonal therapies that may carry cardiovascular risks, particularly for long-term use. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, such as degarelix, may offer advantages over agonists, but comprehensive comparative cardiovascular outcomes are not well established. This study aimed to systematically review and analyze the cardiovascular safety profiles of degarelix compared to those of traditional GnRH agonists, providing critical insights for optimizing treatment strategies.

METHODS

We used Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases to identify included studies using a preferred search strategy. All studies assessed the cardiovascular events profile between degarelix versus GnRH agonists were included in our study. We used the review manager version 5.4 to perform the analysis.

RESULTS

13 studies (160,214 participants) were included in this meta-analysis. Degarelix was associated with a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events [RR: 0.60, 95%CI (0.41, 0.88), P value = .008]. Incidence of stroke [RR: 0.92, 95%CI (0.56, 1.50), P value= .74], hypertension [RR: 0.85, 95%CI (0.37, 1.93), P value= .69], myocardial infarction [RR: 0.82, 95%CI (0.55, 1.21), P value= .31], heart failure [RR: 0.88, 95%CI (0.63, 1.23), P value= .46] and arrhythmia [RR: 0.61, 95%CI (0.24, 1.54), P value= .30] did not reach a statistically significant difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

Degarelix demonstrates a lower incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to GnRH agonists, suggesting a potential cardiovascular safety advantage in prostate cancer treatment. Further studies are required to prove the results of our systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative Cardiovascular Safety of Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Antagonists and Agonists Among Patients Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Real-world Evidence Studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists and agonists are cornerstone treatments in prostate cancer. However, evidence regarding the comparative cardiovascular safety of these drugs from clinical trials is inconclusive. The objective of this study was to systematically assess the risk of adverse cardiovascular events of GnRH antagonists compared with GnRH agonists across real-world evidence studies.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science (2008-2023). We included real-world evidence studies comparing the risk of cardiovascular outcomes of GnRH antagonists with those of GnRH agonists among patients with prostate cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis of effect estimates across studies at a low or moderate risk of bias, assessed via the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, using random-effect models.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Among ten included studies, four were classified as having a moderate and six as having a serious risk of bias. Across three studies at a moderate risk of bias in the primary analysis, degarelix was associated with an increased risk (pooled relative risk [RR]: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-1.51) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). An augmented risk was observed in two studies among patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (pooled RR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11-1.56) compared with one study among patients without a history of cardiovascular disease (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.83-1.59).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Real-world evidence studies indicate that degarelix, compared with GnRH agonists, is associated with a modest increased risk of MACEs, particularly among patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. However, residual confounding due to the treatment of high-risk patients with degarelix may account for these findings. Additional large studies with detailed data on tumor characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors are needed to confirm these findings.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this systematic evaluation of evidence among patients diagnosed with prostate cancer in routine care, degarelix was associated with higher cardiovascular adverse outcomes than gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists.

Addressing cardiovascular risks with a goal to prevent cardiovascular complications in patients undergoing antihormonal therapy for prostate cancer

Over 1 million cases of prostate cancer are reported every year, and it is the second most common cancer in men. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a hallmark treatment for prostate cancer but is associated with the development or exacerbation of cardiovascular disease. The most common cause of non-cancer death in patients with prostate cancer is cardiovascular disease. Thus, a better understanding of the prevalence of cardiovascular toxicity across all therapies, management of potential cardiovascular complications, and prevention of cardiovascular events is essential as treatments continue to evolve. In this article, the first in a 2-part series, we provide a review of the current landscape of ADT therapy and its association with cardiovascular disease, summarize recent clinical trial data evaluating cardiovascular outcomes, and provide insights on the management of cardiovascular risk factors and adverse events for clinicians managing this high-risk population of men undergoing potentially cardiotoxic treatment for prostate cancer.

Assessing the effects of prostate cancer therapies on cardiovascular health

Contemporary advances in prostate cancer treatments have markedly improved patient outcomes, yet concerns persist regarding the increased cardiovascular toxicity of prostate cancer treatments, which is multifaceted. Local therapies entail non-negligible cardiovascular risks. The effects of androgen deprivation therapy, which is pivotal in disease management, on cardiovascular health remains contentious, with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and antagonists showing varying cardiovascular outcomes. Despite the ongoing controversy over the cardiovascular risks of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists versus agonists, current evidence does not support favouring one over the other based solely on cardiovascular risk. Combination therapy with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors and androgen deprivation therapy shows additive cardiovascular risks, but robust comparative data are lacking. Chemotherapies such as docetaxel and cabazitaxel, along with emerging targeted therapies and radiopharmaceuticals, are associated with varied cardiovascular risks, necessitating personalized patient assessment. Clinicians should adhere to cardio-oncology guidelines when prescribing therapeutic agents, especially for patients with pre-existing cardiovascular conditions. Optimal monitoring and management strategies are essential to mitigate cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Implementing evidence-based strategies for men with biochemically recurrent and advanced prostate cancer: Consensus recommendations from the US Prostate Cancer Conference 2024

Current US clinical practice guidelines for advanced prostate cancer management contain recommendations based on high-level evidence from randomized controlled trials; however, these guidelines do not address the nuanced clinical questions that are unanswered by prospective trials but nonetheless encountered in day-to-day practice. To address these practical questions, the 2024 US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC 2024) was created to generate US-focused expert clinical decision-making guidance for circumstances in which level 1 evidence is lacking. At the second annual USPCC meeting (USPCC 2024), a multidisciplinary panel of experts convened to discuss ongoing clinical challenges related to 5 topic areas: biochemical recurrence; metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer; poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitors; prostate-specific membrane antigen radioligand therapy; and metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. Through a modified Delphi process, 34 consensus recommendations were developed and are intended to provide clinicians who manage prostate cancer with guidance related to the implementation of novel treatments and technologies. In this report, the authors review the areas of consensus identified by the USPCC 2024 experts and evaluate ongoing unmet needs regarding translational application of the current clinical evidence.

A Model-Informed Drug Development Approach to Design a Phase 3 Trial of Teverelix Drug Product in Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients with Increased Cardiovascular Risk

Teverelix drug product (DP) is a parenteral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist that has been successfully tested in phase 2 trials for hormone-sensitive advanced prostate cancer (APC) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In previous APC trials, teverelix DP was administered as intramuscular (IM) and subcutaneous (SC) injections, using a loading dose and (in a single trial) a maintenance dose. Our objective was to derive an optimal dosing regimen for phase 3 clinical development, using a pharmacometrics modeling approach. Data from 9 phase 2 studies (229 patients) was utilized to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model that described the concentration profile accommodating both IM and SC routes of administration. A 2-compartment model with sequential first-order absorption (slow and fast) and lag times best described the PK profiles of teverelix following SC and IM administration. An indirect response model with inhibition of production rate was fit to describe testosterone (T) concentrations based on physiological relevance. The final population PK-pharmacodynamic model was used to conduct simulations of various candidate dosing regimens to select the optimal dosing regimen to achieve clinical castration (T < 0.5 ng/mL by day 28) and to sustain clinical castration for 26 weeks. Model simulation showed that a loading dose of 360 mg SC and 180 mg IM with a maintenance dose of 360 mg SC 6-weekly (Q6W) starting at day 28 can achieve a ≥95% castration rate up to 52 weeks. This dose regimen was selected for phase 3 clinical development, which includes cardiovascular safety assessment in comparison to a GnRH agonist.

Cardiovascular and Thromboembolic Events in Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer Receiving Intensified Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Several phase II trials have investigated neoadjuvant novel androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) followed by radical prostatectomy (RP) in prostate cancer (PC) patients. However, data regarding complications of intense hormone therapy and surgical complications are scarce. Our objective was to evaluate the occurrence of cardiovascular (CV) and thromboembolic (TE) adverse events (AE) in patients with localized PC who have received intense neoadjuvant ADT followed by prostatectomy. A comprehensive search in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and conference abstracts was performed. The strategies were developed and applied for each electronic database on March 7th, 2023. Eligible studies included randomized and single-arm trials testing ARSIs prior to prostatectomy that adequately reported safety data regarding CV and TE AE, peri-operative complications, and mortality during therapy. Pooled incidence (PI) of AE with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was estimated using a random effects model. Quality assessment and reporting followed Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and PRISMA guidelines. PROSPERO: CRD42022344104. Nine randomized controlled trials and three single-arm phase II trials were included, comprising 702 patients (702 patients for CV AE and 522 for perioperative complications). The neoadjuvant regimen was classified as monotherapy with ARSI (100 patients), combination therapy with ADT + ARSI (383 patients), or ADT + ARSI + ARSI (219 patients). The PI of TE within the perioperative interval was 4.2% (95% CI = 2.6%-6.6%, I2 = 0.0%, P = .65), and the PI for CV AE was 4.6% (95% CI = 3.1%-6.7%, I2 = 0.0%, P = .71). Seven deaths were reported, resulting in a PI of 2.2% (95% CI = 1.3%-3.8%, I2 = 0.0%, P = .99), of which two were considered treatment-related and occurred within the perioperative period. The PI of hypertension grade 3-5 was 7.3% (95% CI = 4.8%-11.0%, I2 = 38.8%, P = .04). CV and TE AE associated with intense neoadjuvant hormone therapy in patients with localized PC can occur in up to 4.6% of cases. Our data warns for further assessment of thrombotic risk and prophylactic anticoagulation in this setting.

Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of teverelix DP in patients with advanced prostate cancer: A multicenter, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Teverelix drug product (DP) is a novel injectable gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist.

METHODS

An adaptive phase 2, open-label, multicenter trial was conducted in patients with advanced prostate cancer to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combined subcutaneous (SC) and intramuscular (IM) loading dose regimen of teverelix DP of 120 mg SC + 120 mg IM (Group 1; N = 9) or 180 mg SC + 180 mg IM (Group 2; N = 41) administered at a single visit, followed by 6-weekly SC maintenance doses of 120 mg (Group 1) or 180 mg (Group 2), up to Day 168. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving castration levels with serum testosterone <0.5 ng/mL at Day 28 with a target castration rate of 90%. Injection sites were inspected by the investigator at every visit and reactions (ISRs) were proactively recorded.

RESULTS

The target castration rate was reached in Group 2 (97.5%) but not in Group 1 (62.5%). The castration rates were not maintained to Day 42 (Group 2: 82.5%; Group 1: 50.0%). Suppression of testosterone to castrate levels occurred rapidly (median time: 2 days for both groups). Suppression of testosterone, prostate-specific antigen, follicle-stimulating hormone, and luteinizing hormone was sustained throughout the treatment period, being more prominent with the higher dose. The adverse event (AE) profile was similar between groups. The most common AEs were injection-site induration (n = 40: 80.0%), injection-site erythema (n = 35: 70.0%), and hot flush (n = 21: 42.0%). Most ISRs were Grade 1.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the teverelix DP doses were generally well-tolerated but did not adequately maintain castration levels.

Perspectives on the Cardiovascular and Metabolic Effects of Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of non-cancer mortality in men with prostate cancer. This review summarizes the existing and emerging literature examining the cardiometabolic effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

The evidence behind the metabolic effects of ADT is derived from older studies and has not been validated in modern cohorts. Most of the newer studies focus on the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) with ADT. Recently published studies like the HERO and PRONOUNCE trials have once again sparked debate about the effects of different types and durations of ADT on cardiovascular outcomes. The link between ADT and CVD is inherently complex with a majority of the evidence collected from population-based or non-randomized trials without enriching for high-risk populations. Ongoing clinical trials may provide more informative data to guide the cardiovascular care of prostate cancer survivors.

Risk of prostate cancer death after radical radiotherapy with neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy with bicalutamide or gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists

BACKGROUND

Oncological outcome after radical radiotherapy (RRT) combined with neoadjuvant and adjuvant androgen suppression therapy (AST) may differ according to type of AST. The aim of this nationwide register-based study was to investigate risk of prostate cancer (Pca) death after different neoadjuvant and adjuvant ASTs; (i) bicalutamide, (ii) gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH) or (iii) combined bicalutamide and GnRH (CAB), together with RRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data for 6882 men diagnosed with high-risk Pca between 2007 and 2020 and treated with primary RRT was retrieved from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) 5.0. Time to Pca death according to type of neoadjuvant and adjuvant AST was assessed by use of Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for putative confounders.

RESULTS

Data were stratified by RRT type since the effect of AST in risk of Pca death differed according to type of RRT. Compared with the reference RRT combined with neoadjuvant CAB/adjuvant GnRH, risk of Pca death for men treated with CAB/bicalutamide and conventionally fractionated external beam radiotherapy (CF-EBRT) was hazard ratio (HR) 0.73 (95% CI: 0.50-1.04), hypofractionated EBRT (HF-EBRT), HR 1.35 (95% CI: 0.65-2.81) and EBRT with high dose rate brachytherapy (EBRT-HDRBT), HR 0.85 (95% CI: 0.37-1.95). Risk of Pca death for men treated with bicalutamide/bicalutamide and: (i) CF-EBRT was HR 2.35 (95% CI: 1.42-3.90), (ii) HF-EBRT, HR 0.70 (95% CI: 0.26-1.85), (iii) HF-EBRT, HR 4.07 (95% CI: 1.88-8.77) vs the reference.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, risk of Pca death between men receiving different combinations of AST varied according to RRT type. No difference was found in risk of Pca death for men treated with bicalutamide or GnRH as adjuvant therapy to RRT following neoadjuvant CAB. Risk of Pca death was increased for men with monotherapy neo-/adjuvant bicalutamide in combination with CF-EBRT or EBRT-HDRBT.

Cardiovascular risk of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus agonist in men with prostate cancer: an observational study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

The impact of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and agonist (GnRHa) treatment on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in prostate cancer (PCa) remains inconclusive due to conflicting findings. We compared the effects of GnRH antagonist and GnRHa treatments on CVD risk in patients with PCa and pre-existing CVD, in a Taiwan population-based database.

METHODS

We assessed the risk of major adverse CV events (MACE: ischemic heart disease [IHD], stroke, congestive heart failure [CHF] or all cause deaths) and composite CV events (IHD, stroke, CHF or CV deaths) occurring ≥90 days after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) initiation in patients with PCa after 90 days of treatment with either GnRH antagonist (degarelix; n = 499) or GnRHa (goserelin, leuprolide, triptorelin; n = 15,127). Patients identified with pre-existing CVD had received cardiac therapy for IHD, reported a stroke or CHF within a year before ADT initiation. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained for MACE and composite CV events risk after adjusting for age, baseline status of diabetes, hypertension and treatments received.

RESULTS

All GnRH antagonist-treated patients showed lower risk of composite CV events than the GnRHa-treated patients. The lower composite CV events risk associated with GnRH antagonist was also observed in patients with metastasis at diagnosis (aHR 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.38; p = 0.013) and those receiving ADT for more than six months (aHR 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.54; p < 0.0001). In patients with pre-existing CVD, the MACE risk was 33% lower (aHR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.46-0.96; p = 0.0299) and composite CV events risk was 84% lower (aHR 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05-0.50; p = 0.0017) in GnRH antagonist-treated than the GnRHa-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PCa and pre-existing CVD, GnRH antagonist use was associated with lower risks for composite CV events and MACE compared with GnRHa.

Impact of Concomitant Cardiovascular Therapies on Efficacy and Safety of Relugolix vs Leuprolide: Subgroup Analysis from HERO Study in Advanced Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular (CV) events are the leading cause of death in prostate cancer. Men with prostate cancer are likely to have CV risk factors and use CV-related concomitant medications. In the phase 3 HERO study, a 54% lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events was reported in men treated with the oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, relugolix, vs leuprolide. Herein, we characterize the impact of concomitant CV therapies on efficacy and safety in the HERO study.

METHODS

In HERO, 930 men with advanced prostate cancer (APC) were randomized 2:1 and treated with relugolix (120 mg orally once daily; after single 360 mg loading dose) or leuprolide (injections every 3 months) for 48 weeks. Subgroups analyzed included men who received antihypertensives, antithrombotics, or lipid-modifying therapies (LMAs), as well as the most common drug classes (> 10%) and single most common agent within each class. Assessments included sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (< 50 ng/dL) through 48 weeks and safety.

RESULTS

Antihypertensives, antithrombotics, and LMAs were utilized by 52.7%, 39.1%, and 39.6% of men in HERO, respectively. In the main subgroups, point estimates for sustained castration rates were generally consistent with overall estimates of relugolix and leuprolide observed in the overall population. Sustained castration rates were also mostly consistent for men taking the most common drug classes and individual agents in each class (losartan [n = 103]: relugolix, 95.4% vs leuprolide, 80.6%; amlodipine [n = 229]: 97.2% vs 85.5%; metoprolol [n = 88]: 95.7% vs 86.9%; acetylsalicylic acid [n = 259]: 97.0% vs 92.1%; clopidogrel [n = 43]: 96.4% vs 86.7%; simvastatin [n = 78]: 98.0% vs 87.3%). Incidence and types of adverse events (AEs) among men who received these medications were mostly consistent with overall population results, with some increases in grade ≥ 3 and fatal AEs.

CONCLUSION

Relugolix suppressed testosterone and was generally well tolerated when given with concomitant CV agents.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial ID NCT03085095.

PRIOR PRESENTATION

Data presented at 15th Annual Genitourinary Cancers Symposium; February 17-19, 2022, San Francisco, CA, USA [Abstract 101, Poster board E11]. The published abstract from this presentation can be found at https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.6_suppl.101 .

Adverse cardiovascular effect following gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus GnRH agonist for prostate cancer treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Androgen deprivation therapy is the mainstay of medical treatment for prostate cancer (Pca); however, it is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular (CV) events and death. To date, CV death has been the leading noncancer cause of death in Pca patients. Both GnRH antagonists (an emerging class of drugs) and GnRH agonists (most frequently prescribed) are efficacious against Pca. However, the adverse effects, especially the adverse CV effect between them remain unclear.

Methods

Through a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, all available studies comparing the safety of CV risk between GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists in Pca patients were extracted. Comparisons of outcomes of interest between these two classes of drugs were calculated using the risk ratio (RR). Subgroup analyses were performed depending on the study design and preexisting CV disease at baseline.

Results

Nine randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and five real-world observational studies comprising 62160 Pca patients were included in our meta-analysis. Patients receiving GnRH antagonists experienced fewer CV events (RR: 0.66, 95% CI:0.53-0.82, P<0.001), CV death (RR:0.4, 95% CI: 0.24-0.67, P<0.001) and myocardial infarctions (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.52-0.96, P=0.03). No difference was found in the incidence of stroke and heart failure. Moreover, GnRH antagonists were associated with fewer CV events in patients with preexisting CV disease but not in those without preexisting CV disease in the RCT series.

Conclusion

GnRH antagonists appear to offer favorable safety in terms of adverse CV events and CV death compared with GnRH agonists among men diagnosed with Pca, especially those who had established CV disease at baseline.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2023-2-0009/, identifier INPLASY202320009.

Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With Prostate Cancer Based on Existence of Cardiovascular Risk

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) associated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with prostate cancer. We sought to evaluate the association between gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists versus GnRH antagonist and the risk of CVD in patients with prostate cancer with or without prior CVD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using administrative databases from Quebec, Canada, we identified first-time GnRH agonists and antagonist (degarelix) users between January 2012 and June 2016. Follow-up ended at the earliest of the following: first CVD event (myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, ischemic heart disease [IHD], arrhythmia, and heart failure [HF]); switch of GnRH group; death; or December 31, 2016. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score was used to control for potential confounding. IPTW-Cox proportional hazards model accounting for competing risks was used to evaluate the association of interest.

RESULTS

Among 10,785 patients identified, 10,201 and 584 were on GnRH agonists and antagonist, respectively. Median age was 75 years (interquartile range, 69-81 years) for both groups. A total of 4,152 (40.7%) men in the GnRH agonists group and 281 (48.1%) men in the GnRH antagonist group had CVD in the 3-year period prior to ADT initiation. Risk of HF was decreased in the antagonist group compared with the GnRH agonist group among patients with prior CVD (hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.79). Risk of IHD was decreased in the antagonist group in patients without prior CVD (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.65). Use of antagonist was associated with an increased risk of arrhythmia among patients with no prior CVD (HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.63-3.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with GnRH agonists, the GnRH antagonist was found to be associated with a decreased risk of HF, specifically among patients with prior CVD. Among those with no prior CVD, the GnRH antagonist was associated with a decreased risk of IHD but an increased risk of arrhythmia.

Appropriateness and complications of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: Can we do better? A retrospective observational analysis from a referral center

INTRODUCTION

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the key of medical treatment for advanced prostate cancer (PCa), especially in elderly patients. However, the adherence of ADT prescription to current guidelines is not optimal and must be balanced against possible side effects. Aim of this study was to evaluate the prescriptive appropriateness of ADT and ADT-related adverse events in a referral center for PCa.

METHODS

Five hundred fifty six patients who received an outpatient prescription for ADT from 2014 to 2018 were retrospectively identified from an administrative database. Only standard ADT was considered, including GnRH agonists, GnRH antagonists, and antiandrogens. Prescriptive appropriateness was defined according to the last European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines. Our cohort was stratified according to age categories and patient follow-up was updated.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty five patients were available for analysis. Mean age was 80 years; 96.3% of our patients fell in the "elderly" category. There was a predominance of GnRH agonists over the antagonists (84.9% vs 13%). 15.5% of ADTs did not have an appropriate indication according to guidelines. Patient compliance to ADT was evaluated as good in 372 (87.5%) cases. ADT-related complications were detected in 166 (39%) patients: bone, cardiovascular, and other complications were reported in 7.3%, 8.9%, and 19% of patients. Progression of disease was noted in 165 (38.8%) cases during ADT. At last follow-up, 124 (30.1%) patients were deceased.

CONCLUSIONS

In a referral center, most ADT prescriptions followed EAU guidelines, but a non-negligible proportion still did not fall within these indications, exposing patients to unnecessary side effects. Compliance to ADT was generally good with a predominant use of GnRH agonists. Tolerance to ADT was fair, even if standardized reports were lacking.

Assessment and Mitigation of Cardiovascular Risk for Prostate Cancer Patients: A Review of the Evidence

Background

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a common comorbidity in patients with prostate cancer. In this review, we summarize the published literature on the association of cardiovascular risk with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) treatment and explore the potential differences between the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists and antagonists and the molecular mechanisms that may be involved. We also provide a practical outlook on the identification of underlying CV risk and explore the different stratification tools available.

Results

While not definitive, the current evidence suggests that GnRH antagonists may be associated with lower rates of certain CV events vs agonists, particularly in patients with preexisting CVD. Risk reduction strategies such as lifestyle advice, consideration of ADT modality, and comedications may help to reduce CV risk factors and improve outcomes in prostate cancer patients receiving ADT.

Conclusions

Given all the data that is currently available, identification of baseline CV risk factors may be key to risk mitigation in patients with prostate cancer receiving ADT.

Complete androgen blockade vs. medical castration alone as adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Background:

Till date, the optimal treatment strategy for delivering adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa), as a lower stage in PCa progression compared with metastatic PCa, is still unclear. This study compares the efficacy of castration alone with complete androgen blockade (CAB) as adjuvant ADT in patients with localized and locally advanced PCa undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP).

Methods:

Patients diagnosed with PCa, without lymph node or distant metastasis, who received RP in West China Hospital between January 2009 and April 2019, were enrolled in this study. We performed survival, multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression, and subgroup analyses.

Results:

A total of 262 patients were enrolled, including 107 patients who received castration alone and 155 patients who received CAB. The survival analysis revealed that there was no significant difference between the two groups (hazard ratios [HR] = 1.07, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] = 0.60–1.90, P = 0.8195). Moreover, the multivariable Cox model provided similarly negative results before and after adjustment for potential covariant. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the clinical recurrence between the two groups in both non-adjusted and adjusted models. Furthermore, our subgroup analysis showed that CAB achieved better biochemical recurrence (BCR) outcomes than medical castration alone as adjuvant ADT for locally advanced PCa (P for interaction = 0.0247, HR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.14–1.00, P = 0.0497).

Conclusion:

Combined androgen blockade achieved better BCR outcomes compared with medical castration alone as adjuvant ADT for locally advanced PCa without lymph node metastasis.

Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Prostate Cancer: The Primary Results of the PRONOUNCE Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The relative cardiovascular safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared with GnRH agonists in men with prostate cancer and known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains controversial.

METHODS

In this international, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label trial, men with prostate cancer and concomitant atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive the GnRH antagonist degarelix or the GnRH agonist leuprolide for 12 months. The primary outcome was the time to first adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) through 12 months.

RESULTS

Because of slower-than-projected enrollment and fewer-than-projected primary outcome events, enrollment was stopped before the 900 planned participants were accrued. From May 3, 2016, to April 16, 2020, a total of 545 patients from 113 sites across 12 countries were randomly selected. Baseline characteristics were balanced between study groups. The median age was 73 years, 49.8% had localized prostate cancer; 26.3% had locally advanced disease, and 20.4% had metastatic disease. A major adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 15 (5.5%) patients assigned to degarelix and 11 (4.1%) patients assigned to leuprolide (hazard ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.59-2.79]; P=0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

PRONOUNCE (A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease) is the first, international, randomized clinical trial to prospectively compare the cardiovascular safety of a GnRH antagonist and a GnRH agonist in patients with prostate cancer. The study was terminated prematurely because of the smaller than planned number of participants and events, and no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events at 1 year between patients assigned to degarelix or leuprolide was observed. The relative cardiovascular safety of GnRH antagonists and agonists remains unresolved. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02663908.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist associated with lower cardiovascular risk compared with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist in prostate cancer: A nationwide cohort and in vitro study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine whether cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) differs between those who receive gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (GnRHa) therapy and those who receive GnRH antagonist therapy.

METHODS

Using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we analyzed data by comparing 666 participants receiving GnRH antagonists and 1332 propensity score-matched participants treated with GnRHa in a 1:2 fashion during the period from May 1, 2015, to September 30, 2018. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate the treatment effect on CV outcomes. Furthermore, we conducted an in vitro study to investigate the effect of a GnRHa (leuprolide) or a GnRH antagonist (degarelix) on matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) expression and invasion ability in THP-1 differentiated macrophages.

RESULTS

GnRH antagonist therapy was associated with a lower risk of composite CV events of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or CV death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.90) than GnRHa therapy, with a mean follow-up period of 1.21 years. Significantly lower risks of CV death (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.70) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.97) were observed in the GnRH antagonist group. In the in vitro study, leuprolide, but not degarelix, significantly increased the expression of MMP-9 activity and the invasive ability of THP-1 differentiated macrophages through gelatin zymography and the matrix invasion assay, respectively.

CONCLUSION

GnRH antagonists were associated with reduced risk CV events compared with the GnRHa among patients with PCa, which may be through effects on macrophages.

Risk of cardiovascular intervention after androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer patients with a prior history of ischemic cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease: A nationwide population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer is known to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, but there is controversy regarding the cardiovascular risk in patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease. This study assessed the risk of cardiovascular intervention after androgen deprivation therapy in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, and cardiovascular intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2008 and 2017, 195,308 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were identified from the nationwide claims database in South Korea. Among them, 49,090 men with a history of ischemic cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases were analyzed. The patients were divided into the androgen deprivation therapy (n = 14,092) and non-androgen deprivation therapy (n = 34,988) groups. The primary outcome was cardiovascular interventions (percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and coronary bypass surgery). Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of the events.

RESULTS

After balancing the covariates with 1:1 exact matching, the two groups had 10,514 subjects each. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that androgen deprivation therapy was not significantly associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular interventions (hazard ratio, 1.060; 95% confidence interval, 0.923-1.217; P = 0.4104), regardless of the duration of therapy. A history of cardiovascular intervention, diabetes mellitus, antithrombotic medication use, and cardiovascular events significantly increased the risk of cardiovascular intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Androgen deprivation therapy was not associated with cardiovascular intervention in patients with a previous history of cardiovascular disease, regardless of the duration of therapy. Therefore, the cardiovascular risk of androgen deprivation therapy should be reassessed in this population.

Obesity and low levels of physical activity impact on cardiopulmonary fitness in older men after treatment for prostate cancer

The purpose of this study was to compare fitness parameters and cardiovascular disease risk of older and younger men with prostate cancer (PCa) and explore how men's fitness scores compared to normative age values. 83 men were recruited post-treatment and undertook a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET), sit-to-stand, step-and-grip strength tests and provided blood samples for serum lipids and HbA1c. We calculated waist-to-hip ratio, cardiovascular risk (QRISK2), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and Godin leisure-time exercise questionnaire [GLTEQ]. Age-group comparisons were made using normative data. Men > 75 years, had lower cardiopulmonary fitness, as measured by VO₂ Peak (ml/kg/min) 15.8 + 3.8 p < 0.001, and lower grip strength(28.6+5.2 kg p < 0.001) than younger men. BMI ≥30kg/m² and higher blood pressure all contributed to a QRisk2 score indicative of 20% chance of cardiovascular risk within 10 years (mean: 36.9-6.1) p < 0.001. Age, BMI and perceived physical activity were significantly associated with lower cardiopulmonary fitness. Men with PCa > 75 years had more cardiovascular risk factors compared to normative standards for men of their age. Although ADT was more frequent in older men, this was not found to be associated with cardiopulmonary fitness, but obesity and low levels of physical activity were. Secondary prevention should be addressed in men with PCa to improve men's overall health.

Risk of cardiovascular disease following gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists vs antagonists in prostate cancer: Real-world evidence from five databases

Observational studies in prostate cancer (PCa) have shown an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) following gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, whereas randomised-controlled trials have shown no associations. Compared to GnRH agonists, GnRH antagonists have shown less atherosclerotic effects in preclinical models. We used real-world data from five countries to investigate CVD risk following GnRH agonists and antagonists in PCa men. Data sources included cancer registries, primary and secondary healthcare databases. CVD event was defined as an incident or fatal CVD. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), which were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Stratified analyses were conducted by history of CVD and age (75 years). A total of 48 757 men were on GnRH agonists and 2144 on GnRH antagonists. There was no difference in risk of any CVD for men on GnRH antagonists and agonists (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.96-1.61; I2 : 64%). Men on GnRH antagonists showed increased risk of acute myocardial infarction (HR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.11-2.35; I2 : 0%) and arrhythmia (HR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.11-2.15, I2 : 17%) compared to GnRH agonists. Having a history of CVD was found to be an effect modifier for the associations with some CVD subtypes. Overall, we did not observe a difference in risk of overall CVD when comparing GnRH antagonists with agonists-though for some subtypes of CVD we noted an increased risk with antagonists. Further studies are required to address potential confounding caused by unadjusted variables such as severity of CVD history and PCa stage.

Canadian Urological Association guideline on androgen deprivation therapy: Adverse events and management strategies

NA

Follicle-stimulating hormone promotes growth of human prostate cancer cell line-derived tumor xenografts

Chemical castration in prostate cancer can be achieved with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists or antagonists. Their effects differ by the initial flare of gonadotropin and testosterone secretion with agonists and the immediate pituitary-testicular suppression by antagonists. While both suppress luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) initially, a rebound in FSH levels occurs during agonist treatment. This rebound is potentially harmful, taken the expression of FSH receptors (R) in prostate cancer tissue. We herein assessed the role of FSH in promoting the growth of androgen-independent (PC-3, DU145) and androgen-dependent (VCaP) human prostate cancer cell line xenografts in nude mice. Gonadotropins were suppressed with the GnRH antagonist degarelix, and effects of add-back human recombinant FSH were assessed on tumor growth. All tumors expressed GnRHR and FSHR, and degarelix treatment suppressed their growth. FSH supplementation reversed the degarelix-evoked suppression of PC-3 tumors, both in preventive (degarelix and FSH treatment started upon cell inoculation) and therapeutic (treatments initiated 3 weeks after cell inoculation) setting. A less marked, though significant FSH effect occurred in DU145, but not in VCaP xenografts. FSHR expression in the xenografts supports direct FSH stimulation of tumor growth. Testosterone supplementation, to maintain the VCaP xenografts, apparently masked the FSH effect on their growth. Treatment with the LH analogue hCG did not affect PC-3 tumor growth despite their expression of luteinizing hormone/choriongonadotropin receptor. In conclusion, FSH, but not LH, may directly stimulate the growth of androgen-independent prostate cancer, suggesting that persistent FSH suppression upon GnRH antagonist treatment offers a therapeutic advantage over agonist.

Sexual Motivation and Sexual Reward in Male Rats are Attenuated by the Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Receptor Antagonist Degarelix

BACKGROUND

Preclinical studies that have examined the effects of androgen deprivation therapies (ADTs) on sexual outcomes have either relied on a surgical castration model of ADTs or have largely focused on consummatory sexual behaviors.

AIM

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of a single administration of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist, degarelix, on sexual incentive motivation (SIM), sexual reward, consummatory sexual behaviors, anxiety-like behavior, and androgen receptor signaling in male rats, and to determine if sexual stimulation attenuates the effects of degarelix on SIM.

METHODS

Male rats were treated with degarelix, or vehicle, and half of the rats in each condition were briefly exposed to a sexually receptive female immediately before SIM trials (experiment 1). Rats treated with degarelix or vehicle were also given a sex-conditioned place preference test (experiment 2A), weekly mating tests (experiment 2B), and an elevated zero maze test (experiment 3). Androgen-sensitive tissues were excised upon completion of testing.

OUTCOMES

SIM was indicated by the percentage of time spent near a sexually receptive female on the SIM tests. The percentage of time spent in the chamber of a conditioned place preference maze associated with sexual experience was indicative of sexual reward. The percentage of trials in which a mount, intromission, and ejaculation occurred was indicative of copulatory ability. Sexual performance was characterized by the average latencies to first exhibit these behaviors, as well as the average frequency of these behaviors. Anxiety-like behavior was indicated by the percentage of time in the open zones of an elevated zero maze. Relative weights of the seminal vesicles and bulbourethral glands were used to quantify androgen activity.

RESULTS

Rats treated with degarelix exhibited lower levels of SIM. In rats treated with degarelix, contact with a female immediately before SIM testing increased activity, but not SIM. Treatment with degarelix reduced the rewarding aspects of sexual behavior, as well as most aspects of copulatory ability and sexual performance. Degarelix treatment reduced androgen signaling, but did not impact anxiety-like behavior.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The behavioral side effects associated with the use of degarelix may be restricted to sexual behaviors.

STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS

Strengths include the objective measurement of sexual behaviors. The study is limited in that only one ADT was examined.

CONCLUSION

These findings serve as an extension of previous preclinical studies as they indicate that gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonism in male rats also attenuates sexual motivation and sexual reward, in addition to copulatory ability and sexual performance. Hawley WR, Kapp LE, Green PA, et al. Sexual Motivation and Reward in Male Rats are Attenuated by the Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Receptor Antagonist Degarelix. J Sex Med 2021;18:240-255.

[Antihormonal therapy of prostate cancer - treatment indication and cardiovascular risk profile - advantage for GnRH antagonists?]

INTRODUCTION

 Prostate cancer is the most common urological tumour disease in men. In the localized tumour stage in combination with radiotherapy and especially in advanced metastastic disease, classical androgen deprivation remains an essential therapy. During the last 10 years, our knowledge of the cardiovascular risk of this therapy has rapidly increased.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

 This non-systematic review highlights the current data on cardiovascular risk in the use of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer.

RESULTS

 Essential publications about the cardiovascular risk of antihormonal therapy are summarised in detail. In particular, the current data on the potential cardiovascular benefit when using GnRH antagonists in androgen deprivation are discussed. The article further highlights the problem of today's antihormonal overtreatment, despite the lack of scientific evidence and points out that patient selection should be improved in the future.

CONCLUSION

 The multicentre prospective PRONOUNCE study has been designed to answer the question in more detail, as to whether GnRH antagonist therapy provides benefit with respect to the cardiovascular risk as compared to classical LHRH analogue androgen deprivation therapy.

Comparing the risk of cardiovascular disease following GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist therapy for patient with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this review is to compare the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) following gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist and GnRH antagonist therapy for patient with prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched PubMed, Web of science, Opengery, Cochrane library databases and international congress reports for studies published before December 2019. This meta-analysis was conducted using Stata v. 12.0. Relative ratios (RRs) and their credible intervals (CI) were applied for the cardiovascular safety evaluation of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) medical interventions, including GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist therapy. In addition, fixed-effect or random-effect models were applied in the statistical analyses according to the heterogeneity.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Six articles including 32,997 participants were analyzed with a random effects model. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with GnRH agonist, the incidents of CVD was equal to GnRH antagonist therapy for patient with PCa (RR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.94-1.02). When considering, under sub-group analysis with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs), no statistical differences in risk of CVD were found in two sub-group analyses. No evidence of publication bias was found in our meta-analysis by a funnel plot (Pr> | z |=0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis indicates that compared treatment with GnRH antagonist, risks of CVD in PCa patients was the same as GnRH agonist. Further RCTs are strongly required to provide more definitive evidence.

Patterns of practice of androgen deprivation therapy combined to radiotherapy in favorable and unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer. Results of The PROACT Survey from the French GETUG Radiation Oncology group

PURPOSE

The intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) group is heterogeneous in terms of prognosis. For unfavorable or favorable IR PCa treated by radiotherapy, the optimal strategy remains to be defined. In routine practice, the physician's decision to propose hormonal therapy (HT) is controversial. The PROACT survey aimed to evaluate pattern and preferences of daily practice in France in this IR population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A web questionnaire was distributed to French radiotherapy members of 91 centers of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Uro-Genitales (GETUG). The questionnaire included four sections concerning: (i) the specialists who prescribe treatments and multidisciplinary decisions (MTD) validation; (ii) the definition of IR subsets of patients; (iii) radiotherapy parameters; (iv) the pattern of practice regarding cardiovascular (CV) and (iv) metabolic evaluation. A descriptive presentation of the results was used.

RESULTS

Among the 82 responses (90% of the centers), HT schedules and irradiation techniques were validated by specific board meetings in 54% and 45% of the centers, respectively. Three-fourths (76%) of the centers identified a subset of IR patients for a dedicated strategy. The majority of centers consider PSA>15 (77%) and/or Gleason 7 (4+3) (87%) for an unfavorable IR definition. Overall, 41% of the centers performed systematically a CV evaluation before HT prescription while 61% consider only CV history/status in defining the type of HT. LHRH agonists are more frequently prescribed in both favorable (70%) and unfavorable (98%) IR patients. Finally, weight (80%), metabolic profile (70%) and CV status (77%) of patients are considered for follow-up under HT.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first survey on HT practice in IR PCa. The PROACT survey indicates that three-quarters of the respondents identify subsets of IR-patients in tailoring therapy. The CV status of the patient is considered in guiding the HT decision, its duration and type of drug.

Cardiovascular risk profiles of GnRH agonists and antagonists: real-world analysis from UK general practice

PURPOSE

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay for the management of metastatic prostate cancer. Available pharmaceutical ADTs include gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists and antagonists. Here, real-world data are presented from the UK general practitioner Optimum Patient Care Research Database. The study investigated the hypothesis that GnRH antagonists have lower cardiac event rates than GnRH agonists.

METHODS

The incidence of cardiac events following initiation of GnRH antagonist or agonist therapy was investigated in a population-based cohort study conducted in UK primary care between 2010 and 2017.

RESULTS

Analysis of real-world data from the UK primary care setting showed that relative risk of experiencing cardiac events was significantly lower with degarelix, a GnRH antagonist, compared with GnRH agonists (risk ratio: 0.39 [95% confidence interval 0.191, 0.799]; p = 0.01). Patients that received degarelix as first-line treatment switched treatment more frequently (33.7%), often to a GnRH agonist, than those who initiated treatment with a GnRH agonist (6.7-18.6%).

CONCLUSION

Screening for known or underlying vascular disease and identifying those at high risk of a cardiac event is important for risk mitigation in patients with prostate cancer receiving hormone therapy. The GnRH antagonist degarelix conferred a significantly lower risk of cardiac events than GnRH agonists. Prior to treatment, patients should be stratified based on level of cardiovascular (CV) risk, and appropriate lifestyle, and pharmacological interventions to mitigate CV risk should be recommended. CV risk factors and patient response to the intervention should be monitored at regular intervals.

[French CCAFU guidelines on prostate cancer: hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer-update 2020]

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the Cancerology Committee of the French Association of urology (CCAFU) is to propose an update of the guidelines in the management of hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review (Medline) of the literature from 2018 to 2020 was conducted by the CCAFU Findings. Several patterns can be defined at this stage depending on prognostic, metastatic volume, and whether metastases are synchronous or metachronous. Androgenic deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the mainstay of treatment at the metastatic stage. Docetaxel in combination with ADT improves overall survival in synchronous metastatic prostate cancer. In this situation, the combination of ADT with abiraterone is also a standard of care regardless of tumor volume. Recent data have led to the recommendation that ADT should be used in conjunction with a new generation hormone therapy (Apalutamide or Enzalutamide) in metastatic synchronous or metachronous patients, regardless of tumour volume. Local treatment of prostate cancer with radiotherapy improves survival in synchronous oligometastatic patients. Metastases-directed therapy is being evaluated.

CONCLUSION

This update of the French recommendations should help improve the management of patients with prostate cancer.

Hormonal prostate cancer therapies and cardiovascular disease: a systematic review

Therapeutic intervention for prostate cancer mostly relies on eliminating circulating androgen or antagonizing its effect at the cellular level. As the use of endocrine therapies grows, an under-reported incidence of cardiovascular toxicities occurs in prostate cancer patients. In this review, we summarize data of clinical studies, investigating the cardiovascular and metabolic alterations associated with the use of old and new endocrine drugs (gonadotropin-releasing hormone [GnRH] agonists and antagonists, androgen receptor inhibitors, 17α-hydroxylase/c-17,20-lyase [CYP17] inhibitor) in prostate cancer. To date, studies looking for links between cardiovascular complications and hormone-mediated therapies in prostate cancer have reached conflicting results. Several confounding factors, such as age of patients and related cardiovascular liability, other comorbidities, and use of concomitant drugs, have to be carefully evaluated in future clinical trials. Further research is needed given the continuous advancements being made in prostate cancer treatment.

Cardiovascular Risk Profile in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with GnRH Agonists versus Antagonists: An Italian Real-World Analysis

Purpose

To evaluate and compare the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) events in a large contemporary cohort of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) and in treatment with GnRH agonists or GnRH antagonists.

Patients and Methods

An Italian observational retrospective cohort study based on administrative databases of three local health units and two Regions was performed. PCa patients treated with GnRH agonists or antagonist were included between January 01, 2013 and December 31, 2016. Index date (ID) was the date of first GnRH agonist/antagonist prescription during inclusion period. Follow-up was from ID to December 31, 2017. Patients were excluded if they were under abiraterone treatment or combination therapy with antiandrogens during follow-up. The incidence rate of CV events (acute myocardial infarction, ischemic heart diseases, cerebrovascular diseases, cardiac dysrhythmias, heart failure, atherosclerosis, aneurism, other CV-related conditions) was calculated among patients not switching to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the overall cohort and in a sub-cohort of patients without previous CV events.

Results

In total, 9785 (mean age 76.8 ± 8.5) patients were included: 9158 (93.6%) were treated with a GnRH agonist and 627 (6.4%) with a GnRH antagonist. Of them, 9627 did not switch to ADT and were considered in the analyses. The incidence of CV events was significantly higher in patients treated with GnRH agonists rather than antagonists (8.8 vs 6.2, p=0.002). Mean time to CV event was beyond 1 year of treatment in both groups. In the multivariable regression analysis, the risk of experiencing CV events was significantly lower in patients treated with GnRH antagonist rather than those treated with GnRH agonists [HR (95% CI): 0.76 (0.60-0.95), p=0.018]. These findings were confirmed in the sub-cohort of patients without previous CV events.

Conclusion

This Italian observational study shows that most patients received a GnRH agonist rather than a GnRH antagonist prescription. GnRH antagonist seems to have a better CV risk profile than GnRH agonist, both in patients with and without a history of CV events.

The Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Androgen Deprivation Therapies

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), with a proven role in prostate cancer management, has been associated with various cardiovascular diseases. However, few studies have investigated these associations by type of ADT, particularly for newer ADTs such as the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist degarelix. We investigated the risk of cardiovascular disease by type of ADT in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We identified men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer, from 2009 to 2015, from the Scottish Cancer Registry and ADTs from the nationwide Prescribing Information System. Cardiovascular events were based upon hospitalization (from hospital records) or death from cardiovascular disease (from death records). We used Cox regression to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cardiovascular events with time-varying ADT exposure, comparing ADT users with untreated patients, after adjusting for potential confounders, including prior cardiovascular disease.

RESULTS

The cohort contained 20,216 prostate cancer patients, followed for 73,570 person-years, during which there were 3,853 cardiovascular events. ADT was associated with a 30% increase in cardiovascular events (adjusted HR = 1.3; 95% CI = 1.2, 1.4). This reflected increases in cardiovascular events associated with GnRH agonists (adjusted HR = 1.3; 95% CI = 1.2, 1.4), degarelix (adjusted HR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.2, 1.9), but not bicalutamide monotherapy (adjusted HR = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.82, 1.3).

CONCLUSIONS

There were increased risks of cardiovascular disease with the use of GnRH agonists and degarelix, but not with bicalutamide monotherapy. This is the first study to observe increased cardiovascular risks with degarelix, but the cause of this association is unclear and merits further investigation.

Androgen deprivation therapy prescription, blood and bone-density testing in a French population-based study exploring adherence to the French prostate cancer guidelines

The safety profile of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is well known, and cardiovascular and osteoporosis risk factors should be assessed before ADT initiation. In order to examine whether the French Committee of Urologic Oncology Prostate Cancer (PCa) Guidelines were properly followed by clinicians, including urologists, oncologists and radiotherapists, we used a nationwide comprehensive cohort of prostate cancer patients, who were new ADT users in 2011 and were followed-up to 2013. Reimbursements for biological examinations and prescribers were identified, as well as PCa specialist consultations at drug initiation. Our results in this French cohort showed that the proportions of patients resorting to specialized care between one year and 3 months before ADT initiation and in the 6 months following was around 40% for fasting glucose and 30% for lipid assessments. Bone densitometry was performed in approximately 1% of patients. In the 12 months after ADT initiation, 75% of the patients were seen by a urologist and about 47% by an oncologist or a radiotherapist. Overall, there is still room for improvement in terms of ADT monitoring by clinicians and in the information provided to general practitioners and patients regarding the expected adverse effects of this treatment.

Is androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer associated with cardiovascular disease? A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is widely being applied in men who suffered from prostate cancer. Whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with an increased risk of developing cardiovascular-related disease is poorly defined.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present meta-analysis is to explore the relationship between ADT and the risk of cardiac events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched databases from inception to April 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies that reported data on ADT administration and cardiac event incidence. The connection was evaluated through estimating relative risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A significantly increased acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was detected in the ADT group compared with the control group (RR = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.39, P < .05). A significant difference between cardiovascular disease (CVD) and ADT was also observed, with summary RR = 1.25, 95% CI, 1.11-1.40, P < .05. Furthermore, our study also suggested ADT was not related to increased incidence of sudden cardiac death (SCD) (RR = 1.13, 95% CI, 0.92-1.38, P = .24); AMI and CVD were not connected with the duration of ADT (AMI: RR = 1.31; 95% CI, 0.66-2.63, P = .44, for > 5 year group; CVD: RR = 1.12, 95% CI, 0.97-1.30, P = .12, for > 5 year group). In addition, the RR for risk of CVD was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.01-1.62, P < .05) for men with PCa on new hormonal agents.

DISCUSSION

Various ADT modalities have different impact on cardiovascular disease risk in different level. Long-term application of ADT is not associated with increased risk of AMI and CVD. Both abiraterone and enzalutamide could significantly increase the incidence of cardiac events in patients who suffered from prostate cancer. Cautions and periodic cardiovascular elevation are necessary for patients before the ADT starting.

CONCLUSIONS

Androgen deprivation therapy is associated with increased risk of AMI, CHD, in contrast, this association is not detected in SCD.

Cardiovascular and Metabolic Effects of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) entails lowering serum testosterone levels to castrate levels and forms a cornerstone of the management of hormone-sensitive advanced prostate cancer; however, the benefit of ADT is partially offset by its detrimental metabolic and cardiovascular adverse effects. ADT decreases insulin sensitivity while promoting dyslipidemia and sarcopenic obesity, which leads to an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and potentially mortality. The risk seems to be highest in elderly patients who have had recent cardiovascular events before starting ADT. It is prudent to engage in an individualized risk-benefit discussion and develop a cohesive multidisciplinary management plan to medically optimize and closely observe these patients before and during treatment with ADT.

Real-world insights into risk of developing cardiovascular disease following GnRH agonists versus antagonists for prostate cancer: a methodological protocol to a study using five European databases

One of the more recently investigated adverse long-term side effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists for prostate cancer (PCa) is cardiovascular disease (CVD). Studies suggest lower risk of CVD following GnRH antagonists (degarelix) than GnRH agonists. This protocol describes precise codes used to extract variables from five European databases for a study that compares risk of CVD following GnRH agonists and antagonists for PCa. PCa men on primary GnRH agonists or antagonists were identified from the UK THIN (The Health Improvement Network) database, National Health Service (NHS) Scotland, Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR), Dutch PHARMO Database Network and French National Database (SNIIRAM). Cohort entry was defined as date of treatment initiation. CVD event was defined as any first incident or fatal CVD after cohort entry. Readcodes in THIN and ICD codes in NHS Scotland, BCR, PHARMO and SNIIRAM were used to extract variables. Risk of Bias in Non-randomised studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used to assess the potential risk of biases in this study. 51 572 men with a median follow-up time of 2 years started on GnRH agonists and 2 417 men with a median follow-up time of 1 year started on GnRH antagonists between 2010 and 2017 in the UK, Scotland, Belgium, the Netherlands and France. Data from five countries improved the study power and internal validity required to compare risk of CVD between GnRH agonists and antagonists, the latter being a fairly new drug with limited data in individual countries.

Is androgen deprivation therapy associated with cerebral infarction in patients with prostate cancer? A Korean nationwide population-based propensity score matching study

Purpose

Previous studies have suggested that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with cerebral infarction. However, conflicting results have been reported by other researchers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between ADT and cerebral infarction in patients with prostate cancer (PC) using big data.

Materials and Methods

Using information from the National Health Insurance Service database representative of the entire Korean adult PC population (n = 206 735), data regarding ADT and cerebral infarction between 2009 and 2016 were analyzed. Adjusted hazard ratios for cerebral infarction associated with ADT were estimated using propensity score‐matched Cox proportional hazards models and Kaplan‐Meier survival analyses.

Results

The final cohort comprised 36 146 individuals with PC, including 24 069 men (66.6%) who underwent ADT. During the mean follow‐up of 4.1 years, 2792 patients were newly diagnosed with cerebral infarction. In the unmatched cohort, there was a significant difference in the annual incidence of cerebral infarction between the ADT and non‐ADT groups (22.8 vs 14.6 per 1000 person‐years, respectively). However, there was no significant difference between the ADT and non‐ADT groups in the matched cohort (14.9 vs 14.6 per 1000 person‐years). The adjusted hazard ratio for cerebral infarction for PC patients who underwent ADT was 1.045 (95% CI 0.943‐1.159; P = 0.401) compared with those who did not undergo ADT. In addition, the cumulative duration of ADT was also not associated with an increased risk for cerebral infarction. However, older age, hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, renal disease, dementia, and atrial fibrillation were revealed to be factors contributing to cerebral infarction.

Conclusion

This nationwide population‐based study revealed that ADT was not associated with cerebral infarction after adjusting for potential confounders.

Retrospective Analysis of Patients With Prostate Cancer Initiating GnRH Agonists/Antagonists Therapy Using a German Claims Database: Epidemiological and Patient Outcomes

Objective: The objective of this study was to obtain real-world information on gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist (GnRHa) therapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa).

Materials and methods: Anonymized, routine healthcare claims data from approx. 75 German statutory health insurance funds from 2010–2015 (n = 4,205,227) were analyzed. Patients had an enrolment of 1 year before GnRHa, 1 index quarter of initial GnRHa prescription and ≥2 years of follow-up.

Results: In total, 2,382 patients with PCa were eligible. The most frequent index therapy was leuprolide in 56.6%. The rank order of PCa comorbidity prevalence was consistent over time (% at index and 3-years of follow-up): hypertension (71.5; 85.0), hyperlipidemia (45.2; 60.8), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (35.7; 54.1), and diabetes (28.3; 36.2). Comparing pooled therapy classes (agonists, hybrids, and antagonist), no significant differences in the incidence of CVD or diabetes were observed. For hypertension, there was a significant increase for agonists (16.4%) compared to antagonists (6.9%, p = 0.022) and leuprolide hybrid group (11.6%, p = 0.006). During the follow-up period 23.9% of all PCa patients died. There were no significant differences concerning mortality rate and discontinuation rates between the cohorts. In total, 11.2% of all patients discontinued GnRHa after first prescription; the mean time to first switch to another GnRHa therapy was 100 days earlier for hybrids than for agonists (p = 0.016).

Conclusion: This comparative retrospective analysis provides real-world information about healthcare characteristics and treatment patterns, highlighting the impact of different GnRHa on clinical outcomes for patients with advanced PCa in Germany.

Comparison of fusion protein and DC vaccine in inhibition of mouse B16F10 melanoma tumor

Dendritic cell (DC) vaccine and fusion protein vaccine have been put into clinical use in cancer immunotherapy. This study compared DC vaccine and fusion protein vaccine directly in their capability of inducing specific immune response. We used mouse Granulocyte Macrophage-Colony Stimulating Factor (mGM-CSF) fused with gastrin-releasing peptide (GRP) and Gonadotrophin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) respectively to obtain mGM-CSF/GRP6 (mG6) and mGM-CSF/mGGn (mGGn) fusion proteins. We prepared fusion protein vaccine and DC vaccine including mG6 protein vaccine (6P), mGGn protein vaccine (nP), mG6 DC vaccine (6D) and mGGn DC vaccine (nD), then the two proteins were mixed to prepare combination proteins vaccine (6nP) and DC vaccine (6nD). After that, C57BL/6 mice were injected with B16F10 cell line to build melanoma tumor model, and were immunized with vaccines to produce antibodies to inhibit and destruct melanoma tumor cells. The discoveries showed that anti- mGM-CSF-GRP6 and anti- mGM-CSF-mGGn antibody vaccines were successfully created as expected; this was deduced from significant inhibition of melanoma tumor in vivo and significant reduction of tumor weight and volume. The effects of DC groups were better than that of the protein groups and the combination of vaccines were more effective than vaccine given separately. Our results indicate that using combination vaccine provides a new strategy to inhibit melanoma tumor growth but a complete cure of melanoma needs further investigations.