5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Association of Second-generation Antiandrogens With Cognitive and Functional Toxic Effects in Randomized Clinical Trials : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Importance

          The use of second-generation antiandrogens (AAs) in the treatment of prostate cancer is increasing. Retrospective evidence suggests an association between second-generation AAs and adverse cognitive and functional outcomes, but further data from prospective trials are needed.

          Objective

          To examine whether evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in prostate cancer supports an association between second-generation AAs and cognitive or functional toxic effects.

          Data Sources

          PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus (inception to September 12, 2022).

          Study Selection

          Randomized clinical trials of second-generation AAs (abiraterone, apalutamide, darolutamide, or enzalutamide) among individuals with prostate cancer that reported cognitive toxic effects, asthenic toxic effects (eg, fatigue, weakness), or falls were evaluated.

          Data Extraction and Synthesis

          Study screening, data abstraction, and bias assessment were completed independently by 2 reviewers following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research reporting guidelines. Tabular counts for all-grade toxic effects were determined to test the hypothesis formulated before data collection.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Risk ratios (RRs) and SEs were calculated for cognitive toxic effects, asthenic toxic effects, and falls. Because fatigue was the asthenic toxic effect extracted from all studies, data on fatigue are specified in the results. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to generate summary statistics.

          Results

          The systematic review included 12 studies comprising 13 524 participants. Included studies had a low risk of bias. An increased risk of cognitive toxic effects (RR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.30-3.38; P = .002) and fatigue (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.16-1.54; P < .001) was noted among individuals treated with second-generation AAs vs those in the control arms. The findings were consistent in studies that included traditional hormone therapy in both treatment arms for cognitive toxic effects (RR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.12-2.79; P = .01) and fatigue (RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.10-1.58; P = .003). Meta-regression supported that, across studies, increased age was associated with a greater risk of fatigue with second-generation AAs (coefficient, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.04-0.12; P < .001). In addition, the use of second-generation AAs was associated with an increased risk of falls (RR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.27-2.75; P = .001).

          Conclusions and Relevance

          The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that second-generation AAs carry an increased risk of cognitive and functional toxic effects, including when added to traditional forms of hormone therapy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

            Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Oncology
                JAMA Oncol
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                2374-2437
                May 25 2023
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
                [2 ]Department of Dermatology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
                [3 ]Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
                [4 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
                [5 ]Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
                Article
                10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.0998
                37227736
                7ed12f60-6615-4634-bbbe-a6f6ba5f4d1d
                © 2023
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article