International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026
Real-World Comparative Study of Apalutamide Versus Bicalutamide in Combination With Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Takahashi Hidetsugu, Fukuokaya Wataru, Muramoto Katsuki, Katsumi Kota, Urabe Fumihiko, Mori Keiichiro, Yanagisawa Takafumi, Tashiro Kojiro, Kimura Takahiro, JIKEI‐YAYOI Collaborative group
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the real-world effectiveness and safety of apalutamide versus bicalutamide in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in Japanese clinical practice.
METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study analyzed 477 patients with mHSPC who received either apalutamide (n = 102) or bicalutamide (n = 375) in combination with ADT across 19 Japanese institutions. The primary outcome was time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, and adverse events.
RESULTS: The apalutamide group showed significantly higher CRPC-free probability at 24 months (68.2% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.001) compared to the bicalutamide group. While OS was similar between groups, the apalutamide group demonstrated superior PSA response at 3 months (median PSA: 0.8 vs. 3.4 ng/mL) and lower requirement for secondary treatment (36.3% vs. 53.9%, p = 0.002). Adverse events were more frequent in the apalutamide group (30.4% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.001), particularly rash (15.7% vs. 0.3%, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In real-world Japanese clinical practice, apalutamide demonstrated superior efficacy in delaying progression to CRPC compared to bicalutamide when combined with ADT for mHSPC, with manageable safety profiles.
METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study analyzed 477 patients with mHSPC who received either apalutamide (n = 102) or bicalutamide (n = 375) in combination with ADT across 19 Japanese institutions. The primary outcome was time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, and adverse events.
RESULTS: The apalutamide group showed significantly higher CRPC-free probability at 24 months (68.2% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.001) compared to the bicalutamide group. While OS was similar between groups, the apalutamide group demonstrated superior PSA response at 3 months (median PSA: 0.8 vs. 3.4 ng/mL) and lower requirement for secondary treatment (36.3% vs. 53.9%, p = 0.002). Adverse events were more frequent in the apalutamide group (30.4% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.001), particularly rash (15.7% vs. 0.3%, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In real-world Japanese clinical practice, apalutamide demonstrated superior efficacy in delaying progression to CRPC compared to bicalutamide when combined with ADT for mHSPC, with manageable safety profiles.