Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Impact of androgen deprivation therapy on mortality of prostate cancer patients with COVID-19: a propensity score-based analysis.
Duarte, Mateus Bringel Oliveira; Leal, Frederico; Argenton, Juliana Luz Passos; Carvalheira, José Barreto Campello.
Affiliation
  • Duarte MBO; Division of Oncology, Department of Anesthesiology, Oncology and Radiology, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Leal F; Uberlândia Cancer Hospital, Federal University of Uberlândia, UFU, Uberlândia, MG, Brazil.
  • Argenton JLP; Division of Oncology, Department of Anesthesiology, Oncology and Radiology, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  • Carvalheira JBC; Fundação de Desenvolvimento da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (FUNCAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Infect Agent Cancer ; 16(1): 66, 2021 Nov 25.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34823563
BACKGROUND: Previous studies hypothesized that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV2) infectivity. However, it is unknown whether there is an association between ADT and a higher survival in prostate cancer patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of prostate cancer (PC) patients hospitalized to treat COVID-19 in Brazil's public health system. We compared patients with the active use of ADT versus those with non-active ADT, past use. We constructed propensity score models of patients in active versus non-active use of ADT. All variables were used to derive propensity score estimation in both models. In the first model we performed a pair-matched propensity score model between those under active and non-active use of ADT. To the second model we initially performed a multivariate backward elimination process to select variables to a final inverse-weight adjusted with double robust estimation model. RESULTS: We analyzed 199 PC patients with COVID-19 that received ADT. In total, 52.3% (95/199) of our patients were less than 75 years old, 78.4% (156/199) were on active ADT, and most were using a GnRH analog (80.1%; 125/156). Most of patients were in palliative treatment (89.9%; 179/199). Also, 63.3% of our cohort died from COVID-19. Forty-eight patients under active ADT were pair matched against 48 controls (non-active ADT). All patients (199) were analyzed in the double robust model. ADT active use were not protective factor in both inverse-weight based propensity score (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.38-1.31, P = 0.263), and pair-matched propensity score (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.27-1.63, P = 0.374) models. We noticed a significant imbalance in the propensity score of patients in active and those in non-active ADT, with important reductions in the differences after the adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: The active use of ADT was not associated with a reduced risk of death in patients with COVID-19.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Prognostic_studies Language: En Journal: Infect Agent Cancer Year: 2021 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Country of publication: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Prognostic_studies Language: En Journal: Infect Agent Cancer Year: 2021 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Country of publication: United kingdom