Immediate versus deferred androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: the jury is still out
Alexandre R Zlotta* and Claude Schulman
Correspondence *Department of Urology, Erasme Hospital, University Clinics of Brussels, Route de Lennik 808, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium
Email azlotta@ulb.ac.be
This article has no abstract so we have provided the first paragraph of the full text.
Controversy continues about the optimal timing of hormonal therapy for prostate cancer. Advocates of early treatment believe that delayed progression translates into prolonged survival, although the studies on which their arguments are based have been criticized.1 Proponents of delayed treatment stress that many patients die with prostate cancer rather than from it, and that side effects can outweigh clinical benefits. In localized disease, adjuvant treatment with the antiandrogen bicalutamide could actually decrease survival, and produce significant adverse effects. Clearly there is a fine balance between the benefits and adverse effects of hormonal therapy in localized disease.2
Full text of this article is available with one of the following:
- Personal subscription Purchase your own personal subscription to this journal. Already a subscriber? Please log in for immediate access.
- 7 day single article pass for US$18 In order to purchase this article you must be a registered user. Please register or log in.
- Site licence Learn more about institutional site licences
Current Subscribers
Please log in to access the full text article using the login box at the top of the page.