Long-term adherence to GnRH agonists in men with prostate cancer. A nation-wide population-based study in prostate cancer data base Sweden

Association between atherogenic lipids and GnRH agonists for prostate cancer in men with T2DM: a nationwide, population-based cohort study in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH) used in prostate cancer (PCa) are associated with atherogenic dyslipidaemia. It can be assumed that GnRH need to be used with greater caution in men with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study investigated association of GnRH with atherogenic lipids (AL) in PCa men with T2DM.

METHODS

Two cohorts including 38,311 men with 11 years follow-up based on Swedish national registers were defined (PCa-Exposure cohort and GnRH-Exposure cohort). Based on European guidelines on cardiovascular diseases (CVD), primary outcomes were defined as: 1.0 mmol/L increase in AL and lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) intensification. We used Cox proportional-hazards models and Kaplan-Meier curves to assess the association.

RESULTS

There was an association between GnRH and increased AL (i.e., triglyceride, PCa-Exposure cohort: HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.48-2.10; GnRH-Exposure cohort: HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.38-2.57). There was also an association between PCa diagnosis and increased AL. In contrast, no association between LLT intensification and GnRH was found.

CONCLUSION

In this large population-based study, men with T2DM on GnRH for PCa had an increased risk of increased atherogenic lipids. These results highlight the need to closely monitor lipids and to be ready to intensify lipid-lowering therapy in men with T2DM on GnRH for PCa.

Adherence to oral hormonal therapy in advanced prostate cancer: a scoping review

Background:

Orally administrated agents play a key role in the management of prostate cancer, providing a convenient and cost-effective treatment option for patients. However, they are also associated with adherence issues which can compromise therapeutic outcomes. This scoping review identifies and summarizes data on adherence to oral hormonal therapy in advanced prostate cancer and discusses associated factors and strategies for improving adherence.

Methods:

PubMed (inception to 27 January 2022) and conference databases (2020–2021) were searched to identify English language reports of real-world and clinical trial data on adherence to oral hormonal therapy in prostate cancer using the key search terms ‘prostate cancer’ AND ‘adherence’ AND ‘oral therapy’ OR respective aliases.

Results:

Most adherence outcome data were based on the use of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Self-reported and observer-reported adherence data were used. The most common observer-reported measure, medication possession ratio, showed that the vast majority of patients were in possession of their medication, although proportion of days covered and persistence rates were considerably lower, raising the question whether patients were consistently receiving their treatment. Study follow-up for adherence was generally around 6 months up to 1 year. Studies also indicate that persistence may drop further with longer follow-up, especially in the non-mCRPC setting, which may be a concern when years of therapy are required.

Conclusions:

Oral hormonal therapy plays an important role in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Data on adherence to oral hormonal therapies in prostate cancer were generally of low quality, with high heterogeneity and inconsistent reporting across studies. Short study follow-up for adherence and focus on medication possession rates may further limit relevance of available data, especially in settings that require long-term treatment. Additional research is required to comprehensively assess adherence.

Association of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonists for Prostate Cancer With Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Hypertension in Men With Diabetes

IMPORTANCE

Men with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Meanwhile, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists used in prostate cancer (PCa) are associated with increased risk of CVD.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between GnRH agonist use, PCa diagnosis per se, and CVD risk in men with type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nationwide population-based cohort study identified men with type 2 diabetes by use of data in the Prostate Cancer Data Base Sweden version 4.1 and the Swedish National Diabetes Register, with longitudinal data from 2006 to 2016. These data were used to create 2 cohorts, 1 including men with and without PCa and the other including men with PCa who received and did not receive GnRH agonists. Data analysis was conducted from January 2006 to December 2016.

EXPOSURES

Treatment with GnRH agonists and PCa diagnosis were the primary exposures.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcome was a 10% increase in predicted 5-year CVD risk score. Secondary outcome was worsening hypertension as defined by the European Society of Hypertension Guidelines. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze the association.

RESULTS

The PCa exposure cohort included 5714 men (median [IQR] age, 72.0 [11.0]), and the non-PCa cohort included 28 445 men without PCa (median [IQR] age, 72.0 [11.0]). The GnRH agonist-exposure cohort included 692 men with PCa who received a GnRH agonist, compared with 3460 men with PCa who did not receive a GnRH agonist. Men with PCa receiving GnRH agonists had an increased estimated 5-year CVD risk score compared with men without PCa (hazard ratio [HR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16-1.36) and compared with men with PCa not receiving GnRH agonists (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74). Men receiving GnRH agonists had decreased blood pressure compared with men without PCa (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.80) and compared with men with PCa not receiving GnRH agonists (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.82).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this population-based cohort study, there was an increased risk of CVD in men with type 2 diabetes who received a GnRH agonist for PCa. These findings highlight the need to closely control CVD risk factors in men with type 2 diabetes treated with GnRH agonists. The association between GnRH agonist use and decreased blood pressure levels warrants further study.

Qualitative Analysis of Interviews and Focus Groups Exploring Factors Contributing to Adherence to GnRH Agonists in Men with Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Side effects from the prolonged use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists may lead to nonadherence to the treatment in men with advanced prostate cancer (PCa). We investigated the reasons contributing to nonadherence to GnRH agonists through interviews with men with PCa and focus groups with their health care professionals.

DATA SOURCES

The three stages of the study were validation of themes, interviews with men on GnRH agonists, and focus groups with oncology specialists and clinical nurse specialists. An experienced oncologist validated factors contributing to nonadherence identified from the literature. A total of 10 men with PCa were recruited from a large teaching hospital and were interviewed on a one-to-one basis using a topic guide. In stage three, two separate focus groups were held with oncology specialists and clinical nurse specialists treating men with PCa. The interviews and focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Initial codes identified from stage three were grouped into themes and thematically analyzed.

CONCLUSION

Themes identified from the interviews and focus groups influencing adherence to treatment were side effects of treatment, patient belief system, benefits outweigh harm, quality of life over quantity of life, social support, and patient-clinician relationship. Although side effects such as hot flushes and loss of libido were sometimes overwhelming for many, these men felt that treatment benefits outweighed harm.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Reasons leading to nonadherence can be multifactorial and unique to each patient. Employing different strategies by health care professionals may lead to the eventual acceptance of treatment, while also acknowledging their reasons for nonadherence.

Susceptibility to SARS-Cov-2 Infection and Risk for Severe COVID-19 in Patients with Prostate Cancer on Androgen Deprivation Therapy

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been hypothesized to protect against COVID‐19, but previous observational studies of men with prostate cancer on ADT have been inconsistent regarding mortality risk from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Using data from the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), we identified a cohort of 114 547 men with prevalent prostate cancer on the start of follow‐up in February 2020, and followed them until 16 December 2020 to evaluate the association between ADT and time to test positive for COVID‐19. Among men testing positive for COVID‐19, we used regression analyses to estimate the association between ADT and risk of COVID‐19‐related hospital admission/death from any cause within 30 days of the positive test. In total, 1695 men with prostate cancer tested positive for COVID‐19. In crude analyses, exposure to ADT was associated with a 3‐fold increased risk of both testing positive for COVID‐19 infection and subsequent hospital admission/death. Adjustment for age, comorbidity and prostate cancer risk category substantially attenuated the associations: HR 1.3 (95% CI: 1.1‐1.5) for testing positive for COVID‐19, and OR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.0‐1.9) for risk of subsequent hospital admission/death. In conclusion, although these results suggest increased risks of a positive COVID‐19 test, and COVID‐19‐related hospital admission/death in men on ADT, these findings are likely explained by confounding by old age, cancer‐associated morbidity and other comorbidities being more prevalent in men on ADT, rather than a direct effect of the therapy.

Androgen deprivation therapy, comorbidity, cancer stage and mortality from COVID-19 in men with prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Androgens facilitate entrance of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 into respiratory epithelial cells, and male sex is associated with a higher risk of death from corona virus disease (COVID-19). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) could possibly improve COVID-19 outcomes.

METHODS

In a case-control study nested in the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) RAPID 2019, we evaluated the association between ADT and COVID-19 as registered cause of death in men with prostate cancer. Each case was matched to 50 controls by region. We used conditional logistic regression to adjust for confounders and also evaluated potential impact of residual confounding.

RESULTS

We identified 474 men who died from COVID-19 in March-December 2020. In crude analyses, ADT exposure was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death (odds ratio [OR] 5.05, 95% CI: 4.18-6.10); however, the OR was substantially attenuated after adjustment for age, comorbidity, prostate cancer characteristics at diagnosis, recent healthcare use, and indicators of advanced cancer (adjusted OR 1.25, 95% CI: 0.95-1.65). If adjustment has accounted for at least 85% of confounding, then the true effect could be no more than a 5% reduction of the odds for COVID-19 death.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased mortality from COVID-19 in men with prostate cancer treated with ADT was mainly related to high age, comorbidity, and more advanced prostate cancer. There was no evidence to support the hypothesis that ADT is associated with improved COVID-19 outcomes.

Exploring the association between use of gonadotropin releasing hormones agonists and prostate cancer diagnosis per se and diabetes control in men with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a nationwide, population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Gonadotropin Releasing Hormones agonists (GnRH), which are first line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), increase risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aims to quantify the association of use of GnRH with diabetes control in PCa men with T2DM.

METHODS

Nationwide population-based cohort study in the Swedish National Diabetes Register and Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden 4.1, on the association between GnRH and diabetes control in T2DM men with PCa by comparing T2DM men with PCa vs. without PCa, as well as comparing T2DM men with PCa on or not on GnRH. The primary exposure was use of GnRH. Worsening diabetes control was the primary outcome, defined as: 1) HbA1c rose to 58 mmol/mol or higher; 2) HbA1c increase by 10 mmol/mol or more; 3) Start of antidiabetic drugs or switch to insulin. We also combined all above definitions. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze the association.

RESULTS

There were 5714 T2DM men with PCa of whom 692 were on GnRH and 28,445 PCa-free men with T2DM with similar baseline characteristics. Diabetes control was worse in men with GnRH vs. PCa-free men (HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.13-1.34) as well as compared with PCa men without GnRH (HR:1.58, 95% CI: 1.39-1.80), when we defined the worsening control of diabetes by combining all definitions above.

CONCLUSION

Use of GnRH in T2DM men with PCa was associated with worse glycemic control. The findings highlight the need to closely monitor diabetes control in men with T2DM and PCa starting GnRH.

Medication adherence among patients with advanced prostate cancer using oral therapies

Aims: In light of the extended overall survival and improved quality of life provided by advanced prostate cancer (PC) oral therapies, this study aimed to describe treatment adherence to advanced PC oral therapies and evaluate associated patient characteristics and subsequent healthcare resource utilization (HRU). Patients & methods: Patients with advanced PC initiating apalutamide, enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate were identified from administrative data (October 1, 2014-September 30, 2019). Adherence and persistence at six months postinitiation were used to evaluate patient factors and HRU. Results: Aged ≥75 years, Black race, chemotherapy use and higher pharmacy paid amounts were associated with poor adherence/persistence, which translated to higher HRU. Conclusions: Strategies to increase adherence and persistence may improve patient outcomes and associated HRU.

The Effect of an Information Support Program on Self-Efficacy of Prostate Cancer Patients during Hormonal Therapy

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of an information support program on the self-efficacy (SE) of prostate cancer (PCa) patients receiving hormonal therapy (HT).

METHODS

Based on the information support program constructed in a previous study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted in a cancer hospital in Shanghai, China. One hundred subjects were randomly divided into two groups. The control group was provided routine care and communication, and the experimental group participated in an informational support program. Three months later, the following outcomes were compared between the two groups: information acquisition, disease knowledge mastery, SE, healthy behavior adherence, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. t-test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to compare the differences between the two groups, and intention-to-treat analysis was used to increase the reliability of the results.

RESULTS

After the intervention, information acquisition, disease knowledge mastery, and the SE and healthy behavior adherence of the experimental group were significantly increased compared with the control group, whereas the HRQoL and PSA did not significantly differ from that observed in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that information support programs improve information acquisition, disease knowledge mastery, SE, and healthy behavior adherence among PCa patients receiving HT.

Mortality in men with castration‐resistant prostate cancer—A long‐term follow‐up of a population‐based real‐world cohort

Objectives

The objective of this study is to find clinical variables that predict the prognosis for men with castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in a Swedish real‐life CRPC cohort, including a risk group classification to clarify the risk of succumbing to prostate cancer. This is a natural history cohort representing the premodern drug era before the introduction of novel hormonal drug therapies.

Methods

PSA tests from the clinical chemistry laboratories serving health care in six regions of Sweden were retrieved and cross‐linked to the National Prostate Cancer Registry (NPCR) to identify men with a prostate cancer diagnosis. Through further cross‐linking with data sources at the Swedish Board of Health and Welfare, we retrieved other relevant information such as prescribed drugs, hospitalizations, and cause of death. Men entered the CRPC cohort at the first date of doubling of their PSA nadir value with the last value being >2 ng/ml, or an absolute increase of >5 ng/ml or more, whilst on 3 months of medical castration or if they had been surgically castrated (n = 4098). By combining the two variables with the largest C‐statistics, “PSA at time of CRPC” and “PSA doubling time,” a risk group classification was created.

Results

PSA‐DT and PSA at date of CRPC are the strongest variables associated with PC specific survival. At the end of follow‐up, the proportion of men who died due to PC was 57%, 71%, 81%, 86%, and 89% for risk categories one through five, respectively. The median overall survival in our cohort of men with CRPC was 1.86 years (95% CI: 1.79–1.97).

Conclusion

For a man with castration‐resistant prostate cancer, there is a high probability that this will be the main cause contributing to his death. However, there is a significant difference in mortality that varies in relation to tumor burden assessed as PSA doubling time and PSA at time of CRCP. This information could be used in a clinical setting when deciding when to treat more or less aggressively once entering the CRPC phase of the disease.

Androgen deprivation therapy and excess mortality in men with prostate cancer during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Men have a higher risk of death from COVID-19 than women and androgens facilitate entrance of the SARS-CoV-2 virus into respiratory epithelial cells. Thus, androgen deprivation therapy may reduce infection rates and improve outcomes for COVID-19. In the spring of 2020, Sweden was highly affected by COVID-19. The aim was to estimate the impact of androgen deprivation therapy on mortality from COVID-19 in men with prevalent prostate cancer by comparing all-cause mortality in the spring of 2020 to that in previous years.

Patients and methods

Using the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden all men with prostate cancer on March 1 each year in 2015–2020 were followed until June 30 the same year. Exposure to androgen deprivation therapy was ascertained from filled prescriptions for bicalutamide monotherapy, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH), or bilateral orchidectomy.

Results

A total of 9,822 men died in March-June in the years 2015–2020, of whom 5,034 men were on androgen deprivation therapy. There was an excess mortality in 2020 vs previous years in all men. The crude relative mortality rate ratio for 2020 vs 2015–2019 was 0.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.04) in men on GnRH, and 0.90 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.05) in men on bicalutamide monotherapy. After multivariable adjustment these ratios were attenuated to 1.00 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.12) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.12), respectively. When restricting the analysis to the regions with the highest incidence of COVID-19 or to the time period between 2 April to 10 June when mortality in 2020 was increased >30% compared to previous years, the results were similar to the main analysis.

Conclusions

In this large national population-based cohort of men with prevalent prostate cancer, there was no clear evidence in support for an effect of androgen deprivation therapy on COVID-19 mortality.