Urologia internationalis · 2013
Skeletal-related events in metastatic prostate cancer and the number needed to treat: a critical consideration.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Schmitz-Dräger Bernd J, Weiss Claudia, Ebert Thomas, Dörsam Joachim, Bismarck Ekkehardt
Аннотация
PURPOSE: With stage migration induced by early diagnosis of prostate-specific antigen, the course of disease for prostate cancer (PCa) patients has changed. Increasingly, patients undergo long-term androgen ablation with consecutive risks including osteoporosis and pathologic fractures. A recent randomized trial found that the RANK ligand inhibitor denosumab was more effective preventing skeletal-related events in patients with metastatic PCa as compared to treatment with the bisphosphonate zoledronic acid. This improved efficacy was linked to an increase of side effects.
METHODS: The present analysis compares results reported for both substances using a number needed to treat analysis approach. Based upon these findings, risk-benefit calculations were performed.
RESULTS: The results demonstrate that for patients with bone metastatic castration-resistant PCa, decision for or against treatment with either denosumab or zoledronic acid must not only consider efficacy but needs to balance the desired effects versus potential side effects. This is of specific relevance since life expectancy is limited in this patient cohort with end-stage disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Further scientific efforts are necessary to identify optimal dosing and application intervals for denosumab and zoledronic acid as well as to answer the question of optimal duration of treatment. These findings will directly impact the risk versus benefit relations for both therapeutic options.
METHODS: The present analysis compares results reported for both substances using a number needed to treat analysis approach. Based upon these findings, risk-benefit calculations were performed.
RESULTS: The results demonstrate that for patients with bone metastatic castration-resistant PCa, decision for or against treatment with either denosumab or zoledronic acid must not only consider efficacy but needs to balance the desired effects versus potential side effects. This is of specific relevance since life expectancy is limited in this patient cohort with end-stage disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Further scientific efforts are necessary to identify optimal dosing and application intervals for denosumab and zoledronic acid as well as to answer the question of optimal duration of treatment. These findings will directly impact the risk versus benefit relations for both therapeutic options.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalBone Density Conservation AgentsBone DiseasesDenosumabDiphosphonatesDrug Administration ScheduleHumansImidazolesLife ExpectancyMaleNumbers Needed To TreatOsteoporosisProstatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSpinal FracturesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeZoledronic Acid