Utility of LHRH antagonists for advanced prostate cancer

Canadian Journal of Urology

Volumn 21, Issue , 2014, Pages 22-27

  Moul, Judd W ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Abarelix; Androgen deprivation; Antagonists; Degarelix; Hormonal therapy; LHRH; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

ABARELIX; ACETYL-2-NAPHTHYLALANYL-3-CHLOROPHENYLALANYL-1-OXOHEXADECYL-SERYL-4-AMINOPHENYLALANYL(HYDROOROTYL)-4-AMINOPHENYLALANYL(CARBAMOYL)-LEUCYL-ILYS-PROLYL-ALANINAMIDE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; GONADORELIN; OLIGOPEPTIDE; TESTOSTERONE;

ANTAGONISTS AND INHIBITORS; CANCER STAGING; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MALE; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; GONADOTROPIN-RELEASING HORMONE; HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; OLIGOPEPTIDES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TESTOSTERONE;

EID: 84906903240     PISSN: 11959479     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Dreicer R, Bajorin DF, McLeod DG, Petrylak DP, Moul JW. New data, new paradigms for treating prostate cancer patients-VI: novel hormonal therapy approaches. Urology 2011;78(5 Suppl): S494-S498.
2. Moul JW. Twenty-five year evolution of medical hormonal therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2009;103(2):145-146.
3. Mongiat-Artus P, Teillac P. Abarelix: the first gonadotrophinreleasing hormone antagonist for the treatment of prostate cancer. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2004;5(10):2171-2179.
4. McLeod D, Zinner N, Tomera K et al. A phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized study of abarelix versus leuprolide acetate in men with prostate cancer. Urology 2001;58(5):756-761.
5. Klotz L, Boccon-Gibod L, Shore ND et al. The efficacy and safety of degarelix: a 12-month, comparative, randomized, open-label, parallel-group phase III study in patients with prostate cancer. BJU Int 2008;102(11):1531-1538.
6. Garnick MB, Mottet N. New treatment paradigm for prostate cancer: abarelix initiation therapy for immediate testosterone suppression followed by a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist. BJU Int 2012;110(4):499-504.
7. Crawford ED, Tombal B, Miller K et al. A phase III extension trial with a 1-arm crossover from leuprolide to degarelix: comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and antagonist effect on prostate cancer. J Urol 2011;186(3):889-897.
8. Tombal B, Miller K, Boccon-Gibod L et al. Additional analysis of the secondary end point of biochemical recurrence rate in a phase 3 trial (CS21) comparing degarelix 80 mg versus leuprolide in prostate cancer patients segmented by baseline characteristics. Eur Urol 2010;57(5):836-842.
9. Schröder FH, Tombal B, Miller K et al. Changes in alkaline phosphatase levels in patients with prostate cancer receiving degarelix or leuprolide: results from a 12-month, comparative, phase III study. BJU Int 2010;106(2):182-187.
10. Albertsen PC, Klotz L, Tombal B, Grady J, Olesen TK, Nilsson J. Cardiovascular morbidity associated with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists and an antagonist. Eur Urol 2014;65(3):565-573.
11. Moul JW. Prostate cancer: making the switch from LHRH antagonist to LHRH agonist. Nat Rev Urol 2012;9(3):125-126.
12. Hatoum HT, Crawford ED, Nielsen SK, Lin SJ, Marshall DC. Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing degarelix with leuprolide in hormonaltherapy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2013;13(2):261-270.
13. Perachino M, Eandi M. The utility of a model-based costeffectiveness analysis of degarelix versus leuprolide in the therapy of hormone-dependent advanced prostate cancer. FarmEconomia 2013;14(3):131-146.