Why the study?
Does androgen deprivation therapy increase cardiovascular mortality in men with prostate cancer?
Does androgen deprivation therapy increase cardiovascular mortality in men with prostate cancer?
Propensity-matched analysis suggests that the apparent increased risk of cardiovascular mortality with androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer may be driven by confounding rather than a true causal effect.
PURPOSE: The potential association between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and cardiovascular mortality (CVM) remains controversial. This study assessed mortality outcomes in a large national registry to further elucidate the association between treatment selection and cause of mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 7,248 men in the CaPSURE registry were analyzed. Treatment was categorized as local only, primary ADT monotherapy, local treatment plus ADT, and watchful waiting/active surveillance (WW/AS). Competing hazards survival analysis was performed for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), CVM, and all-cause mortality. A propensity score-adjusted and a propensity-matched analysis were undertaken to adjust for imbalances in covariates among men receiving various treatments. RESULTS: Patients treated with ADT or WW/AS had a higher likelihood of PCSM than those treated with local therapy alone. Patients treated with primary ADT had an almost two-fold greater likelihood of CVM (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.97) than those treated with local therapy alone; however, patients treated with WW/AS had a greater than two-fold increased risk of CVM (HR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.53 to 3.95). A propensity-matching algorithm in a subset of 1,391 patients was unable to find a significant difference in CVM between those who did or did not receive ADT. CONCLUSION: Patients matched on propensity to receive ADT did not show an association between ADT and CVM. This suggests that potential unmeasured variables affecting treatment selection may confound the relationship between ADT use and cardiovascular risk. However, an association may yet exist, because the propensity score could not include all known risk factors for CVM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Punnen et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: