We have located links that may give you full text access.
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.
Prostate International 2018 March
Background: 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).
Materials and methods: 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).
Results: 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).
Conclusions: 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.
Materials and methods: 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).
Results: 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).
Conclusions: 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.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app