Bilateral orchidectomy and flutamide versus orchidectomy alone in newly diagnosed patients with metastatic carcinoma of the prostate--an Australian multicentre trial. A controlled trial of castration with and without nilutamide in metastatic prostatic carcinoma. Goserelin acetate with or without flutamide in the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. The Italian Prostatic Cancer Project (PONCAP) Study Group. Complete androgen blockade versus chemical castration in advanced prostatic cancer: analysis of an Italian multicentre study. Italian Leuprorelin Group. A randomized double-blind study evaluating Anandron associated with orchiectomy in stage D prostate cancer. Goserelin acetate and flutamide versus bilateral orchiectomy: a phase III EORTC trial (30853). EORTC GU Group and EORTC Data Center. A multicenter randomized trial comparing the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue goserelin acetate alone and with flutamide in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. The International Prostate Cancer Study Group. Anandron (RU 23908) associated to surgical castration in previously untreated stage D prostate cancer: a multicenter comparative study of two doses of the drug and of a placebo. [Therapy of metastatic prostatic cancer by orchiectomy plus Anandron versus orchiectomy plus placebo. Initial results of a randomized multicenter study]. Double-blind study of Anandron versus placebo in stage D2 prostate cancer patients receiving buserelin. Results on 49 cases from a multicentre study. Total androgen blockade with Zoladex plus flutamide vs. Zoladex alone in advanced prostatic carcinoma: interim report of a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Combination treatment versus LHRH alone in advanced prostatic cancer. A phase III trial of zoladex and flutamide versus orchiectomy in the treatment of patients with advanced carcinoma of the prostate. Evaluation of total versus partial androgen blockade in the treatment of advanced prostatic cancer. Long-term efficacy and safety of nilutamide plus castration in advanced prostate cancer, and the significance of early prostate specific antigen normalization. International Anandron Study Group. A controlled trial of leuprolide with and without flutamide in prostatic carcinoma. Bilateral orchiectomy with or without flutamide for metastatic prostate cancer. Combination treatment in M1 prostate cancer.
To investigate the hypothesis that maximal androgen blockade improves the outcome of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.
                A total of 222 previously untreated patients with metastatic prostatic cancer were entered into a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of bilateral orchidectomy with or without androgen blockade (112 receiving flutamide and 110 a placebo) which commenced in 1985 in four Australian centres. The characteristics of the patients, e.g. age, performance status, the presence of bone pain, duration of disease and the use of prior radiation, were well balanced between the groups. Patients commenced the protocol therapy with flutamide or placebo within the 7 days preceding surgery and continued this medication for a minimum of 2 years, unless there was unequivocal evidence of tumour progression.
                Apart from a difference in grade 3 or 4 gastrointestinal toxicities between the flutamide and placebo arms (13% and 3%, respectively), serious or life-threatening toxicities were uncommon and equally balanced. The assessment of response in six patients (three in each arm) was inevaluable. The objective response rates were 45% and 56% in the flutamide and placebo arms, respectively. There was no difference in survival between the treatments.
                This study was not sufficiently powerful to detect small differences in outcome (although the trend in survival favoured the placebo arm) but nevertheless failed to show any benefit for maximal androgen blockade over orchidectomy in this group of patients. A randomized double-blind trial in patients with disseminated, previously untreated prostate cancer (Stage D2) was conducted in eight Canadian centers. All 203 patients enrolled in this study underwent bilateral orchiectomy and were randomized to receive either the nonsteroidal anti-androgen nilutamide or a placebo. Patient responses were graded according to the criteria of the National Prostatic Cancer Project (NPCP). Patients treated with nilutamide had a significantly greater number of positive objective responses (partial and complete regression) than did the patients treated with castration alone (46% versus 20%, P = 0.001). Progression-free survival was improved initially in the nilutamide group, but the median time to progression was 12 months for both groups. Despite an increase in the median length of survival from 18.9 to 24.3 months with the nilutamide, the survival time was not significantly longer in the nilutamide group (log = rank test, P = 0.048). Although minor side effects were frequent, adverse effects related to the medication and leading to discontinuation of treatment were observed in 9% of cases. These results suggest some benefit of the combined treatment (orchiectomy + nilutamide) over orchiectomy alone in the treatment of metastatic prostatic carcinoma. From March 1987 to December 1990, 373 patients with stage C and D prostate cancer were randomized to receive either goserelin acetate alone or goserelin acetate plus flutamide. At a median follow-up time of 24 months, there was no significant difference in the response rate, progression-free and overall survival between the two treatment groups. In particular, median time to progression was 18 months in the goserelin arm and 24 months in the combined treatment arm (P = 0.09). However, median time to progression in stage D patients was 12 months in both treatment groups. Median time to death was 32 and 34 months, respectively. The combination regimen produced a more rapid normalisation of prostatic acid phosphatase levels and a prompt relief of bone pain. However, significantly more patients in the combination arm experienced treatment-related side-effects such as diarrhoea and increases in transaminase levels. The concurrent use of goserelin acetate and flutamide does not seem to significantly improve the results that can be achieved with goserelin acetate alone. In spite of a great amount of data, the hormonal treatment of advanced prostatic carcinoma (CaP) still remains controversial. As a relevant amount of dihydrotestosterone is present within the prostate tissue after castration, complete androgen blockade (CAB), with inhibition of the activity of both testicular and adrenal androgens, has been advocated as up-front treatment of advanced CaP. However, many controlled studies have failed to demonstrate a benefit for CAB in comparison with simple surgical or chemical castration. The present study was performed to bring additional data for a worldwide meta-analysis of all phase III trials comparing castration and CAB.
                This is a centrally controlled phase III study in which chemical castration with leuprorelin acetate depot was compared with leuprorelin plus flutamide in stage C and D CaP. Two hundred and forty-one eligible and evaluable patients with histologically proven CaP were recruited for the study (120 treated with castration and 121 with CAB). The diagnostic and staging workup consisted of blood chemistry, general condition assessment, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), abdominal sonography and computed tomography scan, and whole-body isotopic bone scan. End points of the study were survival, time to treatment failure, and time to progression. The patients were followed every 6 months with PSA and sonography.
                At a cut-off analysis performed in December 1996, when the mean follow-up period was 43.7 +/- (SD) 24.1 months, no statistical differences in terms of time to treatment failure, time to progression, and death rate could be detected. Also considering the common risk factors, such as basal PSA, haemoglobin, alkaline phosphatase, and Gleason score, the outcome did not show any clear advantage for CAB.
                This study appears to confirm that the advantages of first-line CAB in CaP are at best marginal. The final analysis will be performed when the follow-up period has reached 5-years, but it seems unlikely that the present results will change. A randomized double-blind study with a 3-yr follow-up comparing the two arms "orchiectomy + Anandron (300 mg)" vs "orchiectomy + placebo" in 125 patients with stage D prostate cancer has confirmed the beneficial effects of the combined Anandron therapy on subjective parameters and on the best objective response (NPCP criteria), although these effects were not statistically significant, but failed to detect any improvement in time-to-disease progression or survival. Comparison with the results of other trials emphasizes the urgent need to establish suitable prognostic factors by further clinical research before evaluating the benefits of individual drugs. Maximal androgen blockade (MAB), the eradication of the effects of adrenal androgens on prostate cancer cells after castration, has been used with differing success in the treatment of prostatic carcinoma. The aim of this randomized phase III study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of bilateral orchiectomy versus a combination of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRH-A) depot formulation, goserelin acetate (3.6 mg s.c. once every four weeks), and flutamide (250 mg three times daily), in patients with metastatic cancer. Treatment usually continued until disease progression (or for a minimum of three months). Efficacy was assessed by response, time to disease progression, and duration of survival. Clinical evaluations, standard laboratory tests, and imaging examinations were carried out regularly. A total of 327 patients were entered in this study. There was a difference in response only for prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) with a more frequent decrease of the serum values to normal in the serum in patients assigned to MAB treatment. The MAB treatment, however, proved significantly better for time to subjective progression, time to objective progression, time to first (subjective and objective) progression, and duration of survival. The most frequent side effects for both treatments included hot flushes and gynecomastia. In conclusion, significant time to progression and survival benefits are achieved by adding flutamide to an LHRH-A regimen, probably improving the quality of life of patients with metastatic cancer. A prospective randomized trial was conducted to compare the effects of the nonsteroidal antiandrogen flutamide (250 mg. 3 times daily) plus the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue goserelin acetate (Zoladex) (3.6 mg. subcutaneous depot injection every 28 days) with goserelin acetate alone in advanced prostatic carcinoma. A total of 571 eligible patients, of whom 57% had distant metastases, showed no difference in subjective or objective response rates, interval to progression, treatment failure or survival after a median followup of 2 years. In the combination group more patients had an early decrease in elevated levels of tumor markers and the small number of patients with an increase in signs and symptoms within the first 4 weeks showed a significant decrease. However, increased gastrointestinal and hepatic toxicity in the combination group resulted in 44 patients being withdrawn from the trial. These results indicate that the combination of goserelin acetate with flutamide provides no long-term clinical benefit in patients with advanced prostatic carcinoma compared to goserelin acetate alone. nan In the course of a randomized double blind trial conducted by 7 Swiss urological centres, 51 patients with advanced, not pretreated carcinoma of the prostate were included. Following orchiectomy the patients were either administered 300 mg Anandron daily (Roussel RU 23908) or Placebo. Twelve months later the Anandron-group shows a slightly better objective response whereas there is no difference in survival rates. The adverse effects of Anandron-treatment are described. nan A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter study was undertaken to investigate the effects of Zoladex plus flutamide vs. Zoladex plus placebo in patients with advanced prostatic cancer. Interim analysis has revealed no differences between the 2 groups in objective or subjective responses at 6 months' follow-up or in overall survival and time to disease progression at 15 months' follow-up. Androgen deprivation based on hormone manipulation is the treatment of choice in advanced prostatic cancer. The unequivocal role of adrenal androgens in the growth of prostatic cancer after medical or surgical castration requires a new logical approach (complete androgen blockade) in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. One hundred and fifty patients with biopsy-proven advanced prostatic cancer were randomized into two groups. One group (74 patients) received leuprolide + flutamide (complete androgen blockade); the second group (76 patients) received only leuprolide and, during the first 3 weeks of treatment, cyproterone acetate (150 mg/day) to prevent flare-up phenomena. The aim of the study was to evaluate the differences between the two groups on overall survival and time to progression (log-rank test). One hundred and twenty-five patients were evaluable, 62 in the leuprolide-only group and 63 in the leuprolide + flutamide group. Median duration of follow-up was 102 weeks. No statistical difference between the two groups was observed in overall survival, in time to disease progression, and in time to treatment failure. In the combination (leuprolide + flutamide) treatment group, a positive trend for overall survival and in time to progression was observed in a subgroup of patients with good performance status and no bone metastases. We observed mild gastrointestinal toxicity (diarrhea, nausea) in the group treated with leuprolide + flutamide. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of total androgen withdrawal with medical testicular suppression in advanced prostatic cancer. No significant statistical difference was observed between the two groups in overall survival and in time to progression, but probably too few patients were enrolled in each treatment arm to give a statistical interpretation of our results. We conclude that there is a positive trend in the combination treatment arm in patients with good prognostic factors. In a multicenter Phase III trial 264 patients with advanced prostatic cancer were randomized to either bilateral orchiectomy or treatment with zoladex supplemented by flutamide. Presently, median follow-up time is 30 months. A small difference in objective response was recorded in favor of the combination therapy, whereas no statistically significant difference was found in subjective response to therapy, time to progression, and overall survival. Adverse effects were more commonly encountered in the pharmacologically treated patients. It is concluded that the combination of zoladex plus flutamide is not clinically superior to orchiectomy in the treatment of patients with advanced carcinoma of the prostate. In order to evaluate the proposed benefit of complete androgen blockade in the treatment of patients with advanced prostatic cancer, we initiated a multicenter prospective and randomized study. At the time of this report 99 patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated prostatic cancer were randomly distributed to one of the following treatments: group I, orchiectomy plus antiandrogen Flutamide; group II, depot LH-RH analog Zoladex plus Flutamide; group III, orchiectomy alone, and group IV, Zoladex alone. Our preliminary data fail to demonstrate a superiority of total androgen blockade over partial androgen blockade in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer of the prostate. We studied the long-term efficacy and tolerability of nilutamide, a nonsteroidal antiandrogen, combined with orchiectomy in patients with advanced prostate cancer.
                A large double-blind trial was done on 457 patients randomized to receive nilutamide or placebo after orchiectomy.
                At 8.5 years of followup significant benefits were found for progression and survival in favor of patients receiving nilutamide and orchiectomy. In addition, normalized prostate specific antigen levels at 3 months from the start of therapy were predictive of good long-term outcome. Moreover, combined androgen blockade with nilutamide increased the chance of patients having normal prostate specific antigen levels at 3 months. Nilutamide was well tolerated in the long term with no increase in the incidence of drug specific adverse events.
                With long-term followup of patients with advanced prostate cancer, the combination of nilutamide and orchiectomy has significant benefits in interval to progression and improved survival compared to orchiectomy and placebo. To test the hypothesis that maximal androgen blockade improves the effectiveness of the treatment of prostatic cancer, we conducted a randomized, double-blind trial in patients with disseminated, previously untreated prostate cancer (stage D2). All 603 men received leuprolide, an analogue of gonadotropin-releasing hormone that inhibits the release of gonadotropins, in combination with either placebo or flutamide, a nonsteroidal antiandrogen that inhibits the binding of androgens to the cell nucleus. As compared with the 300 patients receiving leuprolide and placebo, the 303 patients randomly assigned to receive leuprolide and flutamide had a longer progression-free survival (16.5 vs. 13.9 months; P = 0.039) and an increase in the median length of survival (35.6 vs. 28.3 months; P = 0.035). The differences between the treatments were particularly evident for men with minimal disease and good performance status; however, further studies should be conducted in this subgroup. Symptomatic improvement was greatest during the first 12 weeks of the combined androgen blockade, when leuprolide alone often produces a painful flare in the disease. We conclude that in patients with advanced prostate cancer, treatment with leuprolide and flutamide is superior to treatment with leuprolide alone. Combined androgen blockade for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer consists of an antiandrogen drug plus castration. In a previous trial, we found that adding the antiandrogen flutamide to leuprolide acetate (a synthetic gonadotropin-releasing hormone that results in medical ablation of testicular function) significantly improved survival as compared with that achieved with placebo plus leuprolide acetate. In the current trial, we compared flutamide plus bilateral orchiectomy with placebo plus orchiectomy.
                We randomly assigned patients who had never received antiandrogen therapy and who had distant metastases from adenocarcinoma of the prostate to treatment with bilateral orchiectomy and either flutamide or placebo. Patients were stratified according to the extent of disease and according to performance status.
                Of the 1387 patients who were enrolled in the trial, 700 were randomly assigned to the flutamide group and 687 to the placebo group. Overall, the incidence of toxic effects was minimal; the only notable differences between the groups were the greater rates of diarrhea and anemia with flutamide. There was no significant difference between the two groups in overall survival (P=0.14). The estimated risk of death (hazard ratio) for flutamide as compared with placebo was 0.91 (90 percent confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.01). Flutamide was not associated with enhanced benefit in patients with minimal disease.
                The addition of flutamide to bilateral orchiectomy does not result in a clinically meaningful improvement in survival among patients with metastatic prostate cancer. The treatment of advanced prostate cancer is based on hormone manipulation to eliminate the trophic effect of testosterone on sensitive androgen tissue of the tumor. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of the partial androgen blockage versus the complete androgen blockage. One hundred, twenty-two patients were entered in this study and randomly were treated with buserelin alone or with buserelin and flutamide. The group that received buserelin was given cyproterone acetate (200 mg/day) during first 3 weeks of treatment to avoid "flare-up". During the follow-up (range 0-244 +/- 1 weeks), we evaluated 59 patients (61.4%) that had positive response and 37 patients (38.6%) that showed progressive disease: There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups, not even in the evaluation of median time to response and of median time to treatment failure. In conclusion, the results emphasize that total androgenic blockage is as effective as a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog used alone.
MAB produces a modest overall and cancer-specific survival at five years but is associated with increased adverse events and reduced quality of life.