Loading…
Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) versus docetaxel (T) as first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with or without the ineligible factors of the COU-AA-302 study (presence of visceral metastases, symptomat...
Saved in:
Published in: | Prostate international 2018-03, Vol.6 (1), p.24-30 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3 |
container_end_page | 30 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 24 |
container_title | Prostate international |
container_volume | 6 |
creator | Poon, Darren M.C. Chan, Kuen Lee, Siu H. Chan, Tim W. Sze, Henry Lee, Eric K.C. Lam, Daisy Chan, Michelle F.T. |
description | This study aimed to compare the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) versus docetaxel (T) as first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with or without the ineligible factors of the COU-AA-302 study (presence of visceral metastases, symptomatic disease, and/or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2).
The clinical records of chemo-naïve mCRPC patients who received AA in six public oncology centers or T in two of these centers between 2003 and 2014 were reviewed. The survival time was compared among four subgroups of patients: those with ineligible factors administered AA (Group Ineligible–AA) or T (Group Ineligible–T), and those without ineligible factors and administered AA (Group Eligible–AA) or T (Group Eligible–T).
During the study period, we identified 115 mCRPC patients who received AA or T, among whom 29, 36, 29, and 21 patients were classified as Groups Ineligible–AA, Ineligible–T, Eligible–AA, and Eligible–T, respectively. Both Group Ineligible–AA and Group Eligible–AA had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and similar overall survival (OS) as Group Ineligible–T and Group Eligible–T (Ineligible, PFS: 6.3 vs. 5.9 months, P=0.0234, OS: 7.8 vs. 15.7 months, P=0.1601; Eligible, PFS: 9.8 vs. 5.6 months, P=0.0437, OS: 20.5 vs. 18.2 months, P=0.7820).
Compared to T, AA treatment resulted in longer PFS and similar OS in chemo-naïve mCRPC patients, irrespective of the presence of ineligible factors, suggesting that the initial treatment by AA may still be beneficial to those with the aforementioned ineligible factors. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.prnil.2017.08.001 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_edf841c8b6844c12b76d3bd3b64b9b71</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2287888217300764</els_id><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_edf841c8b6844c12b76d3bd3b64b9b71</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2015839595</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kktuFDEQhlsIRKKQEyAhL9n0YLtf9gKk0fCKFCkbIrGzbHd5xqPu9mB7JuRUHII7sabmQSAbrJbKsv_6qrr8F8VLRmeMsvbNeraJkx9mnLJuRsWMUvakOOdcdKWk1denp70Qgp8VlymtKS5ZMymb58UZl03T1qI9L369985BhMlCIn4idvCTt3ogYZttGIEYyHcAE-mDhay_w0D01BNtfNQZYpiA6P1FxphIXgFxPqZcIgZIjqDzCFM-kFcwhnLSP3_sgIyYkjDLW2JxgywfpjJC8niK-k0M6QC1GjuLZIMC5CRy5_OKhHiI2OKhIpYa_NKbAf6277TNISYS3EGyuLkt5_OyopykvO3vXxTPnB4SXJ7iRXH78cOXxefy-ubT1WJ-XdqGN7mUWnJW17KjAOAa1nHJe6Mr2hkqpTEdZVpzWnVMuF530Nu6grYxrpfWuhqqi-LqyO2DXqtN9KOO9yporw4HIS6VjjiFART0TtTMCtOKuraMm67tK4NfWxtpOoasd0fWZmtGLIXziHp4BH18M_mVWoadakSDDdYIeH0CxPBtCymr0ScLw6AnCNuk0EuNqGQjG5RWR6nFh0gR3EMZRtXegGr_N2jAfVKnqFBoQMx69W-HDzl_7IaCt0cB4Mx3HqJK1u-91_sINuNQ_H8L_AY1Evap</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2015839595</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study</title><source>ScienceDirect (Online service)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Poon, Darren M.C. ; Chan, Kuen ; Lee, Siu H. ; Chan, Tim W. ; Sze, Henry ; Lee, Eric K.C. ; Lam, Daisy ; Chan, Michelle F.T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Poon, Darren M.C. ; Chan, Kuen ; Lee, Siu H. ; Chan, Tim W. ; Sze, Henry ; Lee, Eric K.C. ; Lam, Daisy ; Chan, Michelle F.T. ; Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology (HKSUO)</creatorcontrib><description>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) versus docetaxel (T) as first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with or without the ineligible factors of the COU-AA-302 study (presence of visceral metastases, symptomatic disease, and/or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2).
The clinical records of chemo-naïve mCRPC patients who received AA in six public oncology centers or T in two of these centers between 2003 and 2014 were reviewed. The survival time was compared among four subgroups of patients: those with ineligible factors administered AA (Group Ineligible–AA) or T (Group Ineligible–T), and those without ineligible factors and administered AA (Group Eligible–AA) or T (Group Eligible–T).
During the study period, we identified 115 mCRPC patients who received AA or T, among whom 29, 36, 29, and 21 patients were classified as Groups Ineligible–AA, Ineligible–T, Eligible–AA, and Eligible–T, respectively. Both Group Ineligible–AA and Group Eligible–AA had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and similar overall survival (OS) as Group Ineligible–T and Group Eligible–T (Ineligible, PFS: 6.3 vs. 5.9 months, P=0.0234, OS: 7.8 vs. 15.7 months, P=0.1601; Eligible, PFS: 9.8 vs. 5.6 months, P=0.0437, OS: 20.5 vs. 18.2 months, P=0.7820).
Compared to T, AA treatment resulted in longer PFS and similar OS in chemo-naïve mCRPC patients, irrespective of the presence of ineligible factors, suggesting that the initial treatment by AA may still be beneficial to those with the aforementioned ineligible factors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2287-8882</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2287-903X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.prnil.2017.08.001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29556486</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Korea (South): Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Abiraterone Acetate ; Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer ; Chemo-Naïve ; Chemotherapy ; Metastasis ; Original</subject><ispartof>Prostate international, 2018-03, Vol.6 (1), p.24-30</ispartof><rights>2017</rights><rights>2017 Asian Pacific Prostate Society, Published by Elsevier Korea LLC. 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5857184/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287888217300764$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,3549,27924,27925,45780,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29556486$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Poon, Darren M.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Kuen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Siu H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Tim W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sze, Henry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Eric K.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lam, Daisy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Michelle F.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology (HKSUO)</creatorcontrib><title>Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study</title><title>Prostate international</title><addtitle>Prostate Int</addtitle><description>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) versus docetaxel (T) as first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with or without the ineligible factors of the COU-AA-302 study (presence of visceral metastases, symptomatic disease, and/or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2).
The clinical records of chemo-naïve mCRPC patients who received AA in six public oncology centers or T in two of these centers between 2003 and 2014 were reviewed. The survival time was compared among four subgroups of patients: those with ineligible factors administered AA (Group Ineligible–AA) or T (Group Ineligible–T), and those without ineligible factors and administered AA (Group Eligible–AA) or T (Group Eligible–T).
During the study period, we identified 115 mCRPC patients who received AA or T, among whom 29, 36, 29, and 21 patients were classified as Groups Ineligible–AA, Ineligible–T, Eligible–AA, and Eligible–T, respectively. Both Group Ineligible–AA and Group Eligible–AA had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and similar overall survival (OS) as Group Ineligible–T and Group Eligible–T (Ineligible, PFS: 6.3 vs. 5.9 months, P=0.0234, OS: 7.8 vs. 15.7 months, P=0.1601; Eligible, PFS: 9.8 vs. 5.6 months, P=0.0437, OS: 20.5 vs. 18.2 months, P=0.7820).
Compared to T, AA treatment resulted in longer PFS and similar OS in chemo-naïve mCRPC patients, irrespective of the presence of ineligible factors, suggesting that the initial treatment by AA may still be beneficial to those with the aforementioned ineligible factors.</description><subject>Abiraterone Acetate</subject><subject>Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer</subject><subject>Chemo-Naïve</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Metastasis</subject><subject>Original</subject><issn>2287-8882</issn><issn>2287-903X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kktuFDEQhlsIRKKQEyAhL9n0YLtf9gKk0fCKFCkbIrGzbHd5xqPu9mB7JuRUHII7sabmQSAbrJbKsv_6qrr8F8VLRmeMsvbNeraJkx9mnLJuRsWMUvakOOdcdKWk1denp70Qgp8VlymtKS5ZMymb58UZl03T1qI9L369985BhMlCIn4idvCTt3ogYZttGIEYyHcAE-mDhay_w0D01BNtfNQZYpiA6P1FxphIXgFxPqZcIgZIjqDzCFM-kFcwhnLSP3_sgIyYkjDLW2JxgywfpjJC8niK-k0M6QC1GjuLZIMC5CRy5_OKhHiI2OKhIpYa_NKbAf6277TNISYS3EGyuLkt5_OyopykvO3vXxTPnB4SXJ7iRXH78cOXxefy-ubT1WJ-XdqGN7mUWnJW17KjAOAa1nHJe6Mr2hkqpTEdZVpzWnVMuF530Nu6grYxrpfWuhqqi-LqyO2DXqtN9KOO9yporw4HIS6VjjiFART0TtTMCtOKuraMm67tK4NfWxtpOoasd0fWZmtGLIXziHp4BH18M_mVWoadakSDDdYIeH0CxPBtCymr0ScLw6AnCNuk0EuNqGQjG5RWR6nFh0gR3EMZRtXegGr_N2jAfVKnqFBoQMx69W-HDzl_7IaCt0cB4Mx3HqJK1u-91_sINuNQ_H8L_AY1Evap</recordid><startdate>20180301</startdate><enddate>20180301</enddate><creator>Poon, Darren M.C.</creator><creator>Chan, Kuen</creator><creator>Lee, Siu H.</creator><creator>Chan, Tim W.</creator><creator>Sze, Henry</creator><creator>Lee, Eric K.C.</creator><creator>Lam, Daisy</creator><creator>Chan, Michelle F.T.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Asian Pacific Prostate Society</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180301</creationdate><title>Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study</title><author>Poon, Darren M.C. ; Chan, Kuen ; Lee, Siu H. ; Chan, Tim W. ; Sze, Henry ; Lee, Eric K.C. ; Lam, Daisy ; Chan, Michelle F.T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Abiraterone Acetate</topic><topic>Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer</topic><topic>Chemo-Naïve</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Metastasis</topic><topic>Original</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Poon, Darren M.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Kuen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Siu H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Tim W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sze, Henry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Eric K.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lam, Daisy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Michelle F.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology (HKSUO)</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Prostate international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Poon, Darren M.C.</au><au>Chan, Kuen</au><au>Lee, Siu H.</au><au>Chan, Tim W.</au><au>Sze, Henry</au><au>Lee, Eric K.C.</au><au>Lam, Daisy</au><au>Chan, Michelle F.T.</au><aucorp>Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology (HKSUO)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study</atitle><jtitle>Prostate international</jtitle><addtitle>Prostate Int</addtitle><date>2018-03-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>24</spage><epage>30</epage><pages>24-30</pages><issn>2287-8882</issn><eissn>2287-903X</eissn><abstract>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) versus docetaxel (T) as first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with or without the ineligible factors of the COU-AA-302 study (presence of visceral metastases, symptomatic disease, and/or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2).
The clinical records of chemo-naïve mCRPC patients who received AA in six public oncology centers or T in two of these centers between 2003 and 2014 were reviewed. The survival time was compared among four subgroups of patients: those with ineligible factors administered AA (Group Ineligible–AA) or T (Group Ineligible–T), and those without ineligible factors and administered AA (Group Eligible–AA) or T (Group Eligible–T).
During the study period, we identified 115 mCRPC patients who received AA or T, among whom 29, 36, 29, and 21 patients were classified as Groups Ineligible–AA, Ineligible–T, Eligible–AA, and Eligible–T, respectively. Both Group Ineligible–AA and Group Eligible–AA had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and similar overall survival (OS) as Group Ineligible–T and Group Eligible–T (Ineligible, PFS: 6.3 vs. 5.9 months, P=0.0234, OS: 7.8 vs. 15.7 months, P=0.1601; Eligible, PFS: 9.8 vs. 5.6 months, P=0.0437, OS: 20.5 vs. 18.2 months, P=0.7820).
Compared to T, AA treatment resulted in longer PFS and similar OS in chemo-naïve mCRPC patients, irrespective of the presence of ineligible factors, suggesting that the initial treatment by AA may still be beneficial to those with the aforementioned ineligible factors.</abstract><cop>Korea (South)</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>29556486</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.prnil.2017.08.001</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2287-8882 |
ispartof | Prostate international, 2018-03, Vol.6 (1), p.24-30 |
issn | 2287-8882 2287-903X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_edf841c8b6844c12b76d3bd3b64b9b71 |
source | ScienceDirect (Online service); PubMed Central |
subjects | Abiraterone Acetate Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Chemo-Naïve Chemotherapy Metastasis Original |
title | Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T20%3A51%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differences%20in%20clinical%20outcome%20between%20docetaxel%20and%20abiraterone%20acetate%20as%20the%20first-line%20treatment%20in%20chemo-na%C3%AFve%20metastatic%20castration-resistant%20prostate%20cancer%20patients%20with%20or%20without%20the%20ineligible%20clinical%20factors%20of%20the%20COU-AA-302%20study&rft.jtitle=Prostate%20international&rft.au=Poon,%20Darren%20M.C.&rft.aucorp=Hong%20Kong%20Society%20of%20Uro-Oncology%20(HKSUO)&rft.date=2018-03-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=24&rft.epage=30&rft.pages=24-30&rft.issn=2287-8882&rft.eissn=2287-903X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.prnil.2017.08.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2015839595%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c525t-9a92144970eeef517292dba307b099bb701aa203718fda7edc43e65bfd9ccf4e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2015839595&rft_id=info:pmid/29556486&rfr_iscdi=true |