Immediate versus deferred treatment for advanced prostatic cancer: initial results of the Medical Research Council Trial. The Medical Research Council Prostate Cancer Working Party Investigators Group.
AbstractOBJECTIVE: To compare the effect on the course of advanced prostate cancer of hormone treatment commenced on diagnosis with that deferred until clinically significant progression occurs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nine hundred and thirty-eight patients with locally advanced or asymptomatic metastatic prostate cancer were randomized either to immediate treatment (orchidectomy or luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue) or to the same treatment deferred until an indication occurred. Follow-up and management were otherwise according to the participating clinician's normal practice. Information was collected annually on survival, local and distant progression, and major complications (pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, ureteric obstruction and extra-skeletal metastases). RESULTS: Follow-up data were returned on 934 patients; 51 deferred patients died from causes other than prostate cancer before treatment was started (but only five of these presented at age < 70 years) and 29 died from prostate cancer before treatment could be started. Treatment was commenced for local progression almost as frequently as for metastatic disease. Progression from M0 to M1 disease (P < 0.001, two-tailed) and development of metastatic pain occurred more rapidly in deferred patients; 141 deferred patients needed transurethral resection for local progression compared with 65 treated immediately (P < 0.001, two-tailed). Pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, ureteric obstruction and development of extra-skeletal metastases were twice as common in deferred patients. Of the patients who died, 67% did so from prostate cancer; 361 patients died in the deferred arm compared with 328 in the immediate arm (P = 0.02, two-tailed), where 257 and 203 were deaths from prostate cancer, respectively (P = 0.001 two-tailed). This difference was seen largely in MO patients, with 119 and 81 deaths from prostate cancer, respectively (P < 0.001 two-tailed). CONCLUSIONS: The results consistently favour immediate treatment, although some of the data, especially on MO patients, are immature. The implications for management of advanced prostate cancer are discussed.
CitationImmediate versus deferred treatment for advanced prostatic cancer: initial results of the Medical Research Council Trial. The Medical Research Council Prostate Cancer Working Party Investigators Group. 1997, 79 (2):235-46 Br J Urol
JournalBritish Journal of Urology
- Differences in time to disease progression do not predict for cancer-specific survival in patients receiving immediate or deferred androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: final results of EORTC randomized trial 30891 with 12 years of follow-up.
- Authors: Studer UE, Whelan P, Wimpissinger F, Casselman J, de Reijke TM, Knönagel H, Loidl W, Isorna S, Sundaram SK, Collette L, EORTC Genitourinary Cancer Group.
- Issue date: 2014 Nov
- Early endocrine therapy versus radical prostatectomy combined with early endocrine therapy for stage D1 prostate cancer.
- Authors: Schmeller N, Lubos W
- Issue date: 1997 Feb
- Relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of methods of androgen suppression in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.
- Authors: Seidenfeld J, Samson DJ, Aronson N, Albertson PC, Bayoumi AM, Bennett C, Brown A, Garber A, Gere M, Hasselblad V, Wilt T, Ziegler K
- Issue date: 1999 May
- Immediate versus deferred hormonal treatment for patients with prostate cancer who are not suitable for curative local treatment: results of the randomized trial SAKK 08/88.
- Authors: Studer UE, Hauri D, Hanselmann S, Chollet D, Leisinger HJ, Gasser T, Senn E, Trinkler FB, Tscholl RM, Thalmann GN, Dietrich D
- Issue date: 2004 Oct 15
- Early versus deferred androgen suppression in the treatment of advanced prostatic cancer.
- Authors: Nair B, Wilt T, MacDonald R, Rutks I
- Issue date: 2002