Evaluation of the criteria for renewal of LHRH agonists in patients with prostate cancer: results of the ANAREN Study.

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics

Drugs in Context Pub Date : 2024-06-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.7573/dic.2024-2-2

Jesús Calleja-Escudero, Víctor Barrondo, Andrés Rodriguez-Alonso, Francisco Gómez-Veiga, Joan Bestard, Antonio Gómez-Caamaño, Anne-Sophie Grandoulier, Maria Pérez-Sampietro, Venancio Chantada-Abal, Raúl Poza de Celis

{"title":"Evaluation of the criteria for renewal of LHRH agonists in patients with prostate cancer: results of the ANAREN Study.","authors":"Jesús Calleja-Escudero, Víctor Barrondo, Andrés Rodriguez-Alonso, Francisco Gómez-Veiga, Joan Bestard, Antonio Gómez-Caamaño, Anne-Sophie Grandoulier, Maria Pérez-Sampietro, Venancio Chantada-Abal, Raúl Poza de Celis","doi":"10.7573/dic.2024-2-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Injectable extended-release formulations of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa) have simplified the treatment of prostate cancer with a satisfactory level of androgen castration. This study aims to determine the percentage of patients whose initial LHRHa prescription was renewed during follow-up, how many changed formulation and how their quality of life evolved.Methods: This is an observational, prospective, multicentre study of men with prostate cancer who were to receive treatment with LHRHa (triptorelin every 3 or 6 months, leuprorelin every 3 or 6 months, or goserelin every 3 months) for 24 months. The treatment used was recorded and quality of life was assessed (QLQ-PR25 questionnaire) at four follow-up visits.Results: A total of 497 men (median age 75 years) were evaluated. The median exposure to LHRHa was 24 months. The initial prescription was renewed in 95.7% at follow-up 1 and 75% at follow-up 4. The main reason for changing from a 6-month to a 3-month formulation was a preference for sequential treatment (according to the investigator) and to see the physician more frequently (according to the patient). The main reason for switching from the 3-month to 6-month formulation was simplification of treatment (according to the investigator) and for convenience (according to the patient). Findings in the QLQ-PR25 questionnaire revealed no changes in urinary or bowel symptoms, though an improvement in sexual activity was reported. Practically all investigators and patients were satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment.Conclusion: Changes in formulation were scarce and generally justified by convenience factors or personal preferences. Patients maintained a good health status, with a high rate of retention of LHRHa treatment.Clinical trial registration: Study number: A-ES-52014-224.A plain language summary is provided as supplementary material (available at: https://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/dic.2024-2-2-Suppl.pdf).","PeriodicalId":11362,"journal":{"name":"Drugs in Context","volume":"13 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195525/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7573/dic.2024-2-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Injectable extended-release formulations of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa) have simplified the treatment of prostate cancer with a satisfactory level of androgen castration. This study aims to determine the percentage of patients whose initial LHRHa prescription was renewed during follow-up, how many changed formulation and how their quality of life evolved.

Methods: This is an observational, prospective, multicentre study of men with prostate cancer who were to receive treatment with LHRHa (triptorelin every 3 or 6 months, leuprorelin every 3 or 6 months, or goserelin every 3 months) for 24 months. The treatment used was recorded and quality of life was assessed (QLQ-PR25 questionnaire) at four follow-up visits.

Results: A total of 497 men (median age 75 years) were evaluated. The median exposure to LHRHa was 24 months. The initial prescription was renewed in 95.7% at follow-up 1 and 75% at follow-up 4. The main reason for changing from a 6-month to a 3-month formulation was a preference for sequential treatment (according to the investigator) and to see the physician more frequently (according to the patient). The main reason for switching from the 3-month to 6-month formulation was simplification of treatment (according to the investigator) and for convenience (according to the patient). Findings in the QLQ-PR25 questionnaire revealed no changes in urinary or bowel symptoms, though an improvement in sexual activity was reported. Practically all investigators and patients were satisfied/very satisfied with the treatment.

Conclusion: Changes in formulation were scarce and generally justified by convenience factors or personal preferences. Patients maintained a good health status, with a high rate of retention of LHRHa treatment.

Clinical trial registration: Study number: A-ES-52014-224.A plain language summary is provided as supplementary material (available at: https://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/dic.2024-2-2-Suppl.pdf).

查看原文本刊更多论文

评估前列腺癌患者续用 LHRH 激动剂的标准：ANAREN 研究的结果。

导言：注射用促黄体生成素释放激素激动剂（LHRHa）缓释制剂简化了前列腺癌的治疗，并能达到令人满意的雄激素阉割水平。本研究旨在确定在随访过程中，最初使用促黄体生成素释放激素（LHRHa）的患者中重新获得处方的比例，有多少患者更换了制剂，以及他们的生活质量有何变化：这是一项观察性、前瞻性、多中心研究，研究对象为前列腺癌男性患者，他们将在 24 个月内接受 LHRHa（每 3 或 6 个月一次的曲普瑞林、每 3 或 6 个月一次的利普瑞林或每 3 个月一次的戈舍瑞林）治疗。记录所使用的治疗方法，并在四次随访中评估生活质量（QLQ-PR25问卷）：共有 497 名男性（中位年龄为 75 岁）接受了评估。接受 LHRHa 治疗的时间中位数为 24 个月。在随访1和随访4时，分别有95.7%和75%的患者续用了最初的处方。从6个月制剂改为3个月制剂的主要原因是更倾向于连续治疗（研究者认为）和更经常看医生（患者认为）。从 3 个月制剂改为 6 个月制剂的主要原因是简化治疗（研究人员认为）和方便（患者认为）。QLQ-PR25 问卷调查结果显示，泌尿系统或肠道症状没有变化，但性生活有所改善。几乎所有调查人员和患者都对治疗表示满意或非常满意：结论：配方的改变很少，一般都是出于方便因素或个人喜好。临床试验登记：研究编号A-ES-52014-224.A plain language summary is provided as supplementary material (available at: https://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/dic.2024-2-2-Suppl.pdf).

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Drugs in Context Medicine-Medicine (all)

CiteScore

5.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

9 weeks

期刊介绍： Covers all phases of original research: laboratory, animal and human/clinical studies, health economics and outcomes research, and postmarketing studies. Original research that shows positive or negative results are welcomed. Invited review articles may cover single-drug reviews, drug class reviews, latest advances in drug therapy, therapeutic-area reviews, place-in-therapy reviews, new pathways and classes of drugs. In addition, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are welcomed and may be published as original research if performed per accepted guidelines. Editorials of key topics and issues in drugs and therapeutics are welcomed. The Editor-in-Chief will also consider manuscripts of interest in areas such as technologies that support diagnosis, assessment and treatment. EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines should be followed for each article type. GPP3 Guidelines should be followed for any industry-sponsored manuscripts. Other Editorial sections may include Editorial, Case Report, Conference Report, Letter-to-the-Editor, Educational Section.