MACE risk following ADT initiation was higher for older patients compared with younger patients. All comparisons were significant with a P value of < 0.05. A 13% reduction in mortality was observed in the screening group, with an improved harm-benefit ratio. For every 456 men screened, one prostate cancer death was prevented. It is an easy and inexpensive test, though concerns remain regarding unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment.
Pasritamig was administered to patients who had received a median of four prior lines of systemic therapy. It was well tolerated, with manageable adverse events, making it suitable for outpatient administration. The treatment showed a median radiographic progression-free survival of 7.85 months, and 14 out of 33 participants achieved a ≥50% reduction in baseline PSA levels. So, stay tuned.
In patients with localized prostate cancer, predominantly low-risk and intermediate-risk disease, the long-term update reveals 13-year outcomes. Treatment failure occurred less frequently in men undergoing HIMRT (n = 13) compared with those undergoing CIMRT.
Another study showing the benefits of adding AR blocker to ADT. Improved PFs and suggestive improvement in OS, also less fatigue.
Less radiation is non-inferior, this is for low and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer patients. Would like input from our radiation oncologists as to whether or not this adoptable?
1 thought on “Low Risk of Cardiovascular Events With ADT for Prostate Cancer; Higher Risk in Older Men”
A large retrospective VA study presented at ASCO 2020 reported increased MACE and more so with Agonists than antagonists. So I am skeptical about this EMR review data and it dose not differentiate Agonist vs antagonist; For patients with pre-existing or high risk I choose direct antagonists than agonists. Also to be noted there are increasing data that Abiratarone is associated with increase cardiovascular events.