Detailed Evaluation of Androgen Deprivation Overtreatment in Prostate Cancer Patients Compared to the European Association of Urology Guidelines Using Long-term Data from the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam.
Androgen deprivation therapy
European Association of Urology
Guideline adherence
Overtreatment
Prostate cancer
Journal
European urology open science
ISSN: 2666-1683
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Open Sci
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101771568
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2022
Aug 2022
Historique:
accepted:
13
06
2022
entrez:
1
8
2022
pubmed:
2
8
2022
medline:
2
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Guidelines on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) arise from a critical appraisal of scientific evidence, which is a costly effort. Despite these efforts and the side effects of ADT, guidelines may not always be adhered to. To determine ADT overtreatment in PCa patients compared to the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines, and to identify predictors and physicians' motivations for this overtreatment. Men were included from the European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) Rotterdam who were diagnosed with PCa between 2001 and 2019, and received ADT <1 yr after diagnosis. Patients were categorised into the concordant ADT or discordant ADT group following the EAU guidelines. Physicians' motivations for discordancy were reported. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors for guideline-discordant ADT including the nonlinear fit of the year of diagnosis. Of 3608 PCa patients, 1037 received ADT <1 yr after diagnosis. Adherence improved gradually over the study period, resulting in overall discordancy of 15%. A patient diagnosed in 2011 had 3.3 times lower risk on guideline-discordant ADT than a patient diagnosed in 2004 (odds ratio [OR] 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-0.50). The most common reason for discordancy was unwillingness or unfitness for curative treatment of asymptomatic patients. Age (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.15-1.24) and Gleason score ≥4 + 3 (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.06-2.74) were associated with guideline-discordant ADT. In a Dutch cohort, slow adaptation of the EAU guidelines on ADT for PCa patients between 2001 and 2019 resulted in overall overtreatment of 15%, mostly in asymptomatic patients who were unfit or unwilling for curative treatment. Clear, structured presentation, or integration of these tailored guidelines into the electronic health record might accelerate the adaptation of future guidelines. Slow adaptation of the guidelines on hormonal therapy resulted in overtreatment in 15% of prostate cancer patients, mostly in asymptomatic patients who were unfit or unwilling for curative treatment.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Guidelines on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) arise from a critical appraisal of scientific evidence, which is a costly effort. Despite these efforts and the side effects of ADT, guidelines may not always be adhered to.
Objective
UNASSIGNED
To determine ADT overtreatment in PCa patients compared to the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines, and to identify predictors and physicians' motivations for this overtreatment.
Design setting and participants
UNASSIGNED
Men were included from the European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) Rotterdam who were diagnosed with PCa between 2001 and 2019, and received ADT <1 yr after diagnosis.
Outcome measurements and statistical analysis
UNASSIGNED
Patients were categorised into the concordant ADT or discordant ADT group following the EAU guidelines. Physicians' motivations for discordancy were reported. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors for guideline-discordant ADT including the nonlinear fit of the year of diagnosis.
Results and limitations
UNASSIGNED
Of 3608 PCa patients, 1037 received ADT <1 yr after diagnosis. Adherence improved gradually over the study period, resulting in overall discordancy of 15%. A patient diagnosed in 2011 had 3.3 times lower risk on guideline-discordant ADT than a patient diagnosed in 2004 (odds ratio [OR] 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-0.50). The most common reason for discordancy was unwillingness or unfitness for curative treatment of asymptomatic patients. Age (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.15-1.24) and Gleason score ≥4 + 3 (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.06-2.74) were associated with guideline-discordant ADT.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
In a Dutch cohort, slow adaptation of the EAU guidelines on ADT for PCa patients between 2001 and 2019 resulted in overall overtreatment of 15%, mostly in asymptomatic patients who were unfit or unwilling for curative treatment. Clear, structured presentation, or integration of these tailored guidelines into the electronic health record might accelerate the adaptation of future guidelines.
Patient summary
UNASSIGNED
Slow adaptation of the guidelines on hormonal therapy resulted in overtreatment in 15% of prostate cancer patients, mostly in asymptomatic patients who were unfit or unwilling for curative treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35911085
doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.06.004
pii: S2666-1683(22)00720-0
pmc: PMC9334877
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
42-49Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors.
Références
Eur Urol. 2001 Aug;40(2):97-101
pubmed: 11528184
N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 26;360(13):1320-8
pubmed: 19297566
Scand J Urol. 2020 Jun;54(3):208-214
pubmed: 32338176
Eur Urol. 2021 Feb;79(2):173-176
pubmed: 33129581
Eur Urol. 2015 May;67(5):825-36
pubmed: 25097095
Eur Urol. 2008 May;53(5):941-9
pubmed: 18191322
BJU Int. 2002 Sep;90(4):427-32
pubmed: 12175403
Lancet. 1993 Nov 27;342(8883):1317-22
pubmed: 7901634
Visc Med. 2021 Dec;37(6):491-498
pubmed: 35087899
BJU Int. 2016 Jun;117(6):867-73
pubmed: 26332130
J Clin Oncol. 2001 Jun 1;19(11):2886-97
pubmed: 11387362
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Jan;54(1):85-90
pubmed: 16420202
J Urol. 2021 Jan;205(1):60-67
pubmed: 32856962
Eur Urol. 2016 Sep;70(3):429-35
pubmed: 26951945
Ann Oncol. 2013 May;24(5):1338-43
pubmed: 23277483
BJU Int. 2003 Dec;92 Suppl 2:48-54
pubmed: 14983955
J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2020 Jun;13(3):451-462
pubmed: 31833002
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Sep 20;24(27):4448-56
pubmed: 16983113
BMJ. 1999 Feb 20;318(7182):527-30
pubmed: 10024268
BJU Int. 2019 Feb;123(2):252-260
pubmed: 29626845