2018
DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s164856
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intermittent androgen deprivation therapy: recommendations to improve the management of patients with prostate cancer following the GRADE approach

Abstract: PurposeThe purpose of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (IADT) compared with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (CADT) for men with prostate cancer (PCA).MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and ECONLIT, from the database inception to December 2017. We adhered to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to assess the quality of the evidence and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
(52 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…HCP participants indicated that their patients appreciate this approach, though they clarified that most HCPs are not embracing intermittent treatment or de-escalation strategies, despite being recommended in clinical guidelines. They explained that this lack of IADT implementation may be due to the relative novelty of clinical data and the increased burden on HCPs having to learn yet another treatment protocol, both of which are reasons supported by previous literature [ 31 , 54 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…HCP participants indicated that their patients appreciate this approach, though they clarified that most HCPs are not embracing intermittent treatment or de-escalation strategies, despite being recommended in clinical guidelines. They explained that this lack of IADT implementation may be due to the relative novelty of clinical data and the increased burden on HCPs having to learn yet another treatment protocol, both of which are reasons supported by previous literature [ 31 , 54 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Real-World IADT Utilization Systematic reviews comparing IADT and CADT demonstrate no difference in progression-free, PC- specific, or overall survival, particularly for nonmetastatic PC. 6,7,21 Despite this, guidelines vary in their recommendations for IADT. The American Urological Association and National Comprehensive Cancer NetworkÒ guidelines suggest IADT may be offered for patients with biochemical failure without metastases, and the European Association of Urology considers IADT for asymptomatic metastatic patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the rationale for IADT includes re-sensitizing the tumor and prolonging survival to castration resistance, the primary benefits are: potential quality of life improvement, reduced adverse effects, and lower treatment cost. 5–7 However, the evidence surrounding its benefits has not been conclusive, 8–11 and concerns remain regarding the trial definitions of noninferiority and their selection criteria. Consequently, guidelines vary in their recommendations for IADT and have not fully adopted this practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These indications are based upon clear evidence from large randomised clinical trials [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] . ADT may also be administered intermittently [14] .…”
Section: Prostate Cancer and Bone Lossmentioning
confidence: 99%