Skip to main content

Table 4 Efficacy analysis in the trials included in the meta-analysis

From: Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation for locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Arm

Design of study

Time to progression or time to castration-resistant disease

Cancer-specific survival

Overall survival (95% CI)

Crook 2012 [9, 10](CIC-CTG PR.7 Trial)

CAD

Non-inferiority

10 years

HR: 1.18 (0.90-1.55)

9.1 years

 

IAD

(HR <1.25)

9.8 years

p = 0.24

8.8 years

   

HR: 0.80 (0.67-0.98) p = 0.024

 

HR: 1.02 (0.86-1.21) for non-inferiority (IAD vs CAD ≥1.25) = 0.009

Calais da Silva 2009/2011 [44, 45](SEUG Trial)

CAD

Non-inferiority

HR: 0.81 (0.63-1.05) favoring CAD

HR: 1.27 (0.98-1.64)

HR: 0.96 (0.80-1.14) favoring CAD

 

IAD

(<30%)

   

Hussain 2013 [8, 55](SWOG 9346 Trial)

CAD

Non-inferiority

NR

NR

5.8 years

 

IAD

(HR <1.20)

  

5.1 years

     

HR: 1.10 (0.97-1.25)

Salonen 2012/2013 [11, 12]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

30.2 months

44.3 months

45.7 months

(FinnProstate Trial VII)

IAD

 

34.5 months

45.2 months

45.2 months

   

HR: 1.08 (0.90-1.29) favoring IAD

HR: 1.17 (0.91-1.51) favoring IAD

HR: 1.15 (0.94 -1.4) favoring IAD

Tunn 2012 [1, 46, 47](EC507 Trial)

CAD

Non-inferiority

16 risk of progression

NR

NR

 

IAD

 

37 risk of progression

  
   

p = 0.853

  
   

HR: 0.97 (0.68-1.38) &

  

De Leval 2002 [51]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

14.4 months

4 (12.1%) deaths

NR

 

IAD

 

25.7 months

2 (5.7%) deaths

 
   

HR: 0.57 (0.07-4.64) &

NS

 
    

HR: 0.46 (0.09-2.35) &

 

Langenhuijsen 2008/2011 [52, 53]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

24.1 months#

NR

NS

(TULP Trial)

IAD

 

18 months

  
   

NS

  

Miller 2007 [56]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

11.5 months

NR

53.8 months

 

IAD

 

16.6 months

 

51.4 months

   

p = 0.1758

 

p = 0.658

   

HR: 0.69 (0.41-1.16)&

 

HR: 1.04 (0.86-1.28)&

Mottet 2012 [50](TAP 22 Trial)

CAD

Compare the efficacy

15.1 months

NR

52 months

 

IAD

 

20.7 months

 

42.2 months

   

p = 0.74

 

p = 0.75

   

HR: 0.88 (0.63-1.4)&

 

HR: 1.14 (0.74-1.77)&

Verhagen 2008/2013 [48, 49]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

NS

NS

NS

 

IAD

    

Hering 2000 [54]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

20.1 months

2 (11.1%) deaths

NR

 

IAD

 

NR

2 (8%) deaths

 
   

NS

NS

 
    

HR: 0.70 (0.09-5.44) &

 

Irani 2008 [57]

CAD

Compare the efficacy

HR: 1.1 (0.6-1.8) p = 0.3 favoring IAD

HR: 0.6 (0.2–1.6) p = 0.12 favoring CAD

HR: 0.6 (0.3–1.3) p = 0.06 favoring CAD

 

IAD

    

Silva 2013 [58](SEUG 9901 Trial)

CAD

Non-inferiority

HR: 1.16 (0.93-1.47)

HR: 1.0 (0.76-1.32)

HR: 0.90 (0.76-1.07)

 

IAD

(HR < 1.20)

   
  1. Abbreviations: ITT intention-to-treat, HR Hazard ratios, Mo months, NS not significant, IAD intermittent androgen deprivation, CAD continuous androgen deprivation.
  2. #No hazard ratio or P value reported.
  3. &Calculated the meta-analytic survival curves as suggested by Parmar et al. [18].
Back to article page

BMC Urology

ISSN: 1471-2490

Contact us