1 Department of Clinical Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Københavns Universitet2 unknown3 Department of Clinical Medicine, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Københavns Universitet
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess patient preference regarding the length of treatment intervals of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists for prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted as a questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study at a large university hospital. A specific questionnaire was developed based on current literature, clinical experience and a pilot phase of the study. The primary endpoint was preferred treatment frequency. Secondary outcome measures included reasons for preferred treatment frequency, treatment satisfaction and side-effects. Overall, 238 men receiving ADT for prostate cancer were presented with the questionnaire between September 2011 and May 2012. Descriptive statistics, the chi-squared test and multiple regression were used for analyses. RESULTS: In total, 176 questionnaires (74%) were available for analysis. A total of 38.1% of participants preferred frequent treatment ("Every month", "Every third month"), 32.4% preferred infrequent treatment ("Every sixth month", "Every twelfth month") and 29.6% stated that length of the treatment intervals made no difference (p = 0.37). Patients with disease progression were most likely to prefer frequent treatment (odds ratio 4.4, 95% confidence interval 1.9-10.4). Overall, 84.1% were satisfied with treatment while one patient (0.6%) was dissatisfied. Nine per cent indicated severe side-effects. CONCLUSIONS: Less frequent ADT treatment may help to lower the pressure on healthcare systems and may be of benefit for a large group of patients. However, it cannot be prescribed blindly without possibly affecting patient satisfaction. The choice of treatment intervals should be made in collaboration between the physician and the patient.
Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology, 2014, Vol 48, Issue 2, p. 183-188