Elsevier

Urology

Volume 1, Issue 6, June 1973, Pages 553-560
Urology

Scientific article
Orchiectomy for advanced prostatic carcinoma A reevaluation

https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-4295(73)90515-3Get rights and content

Abstract

The efficacy of four treatments, placebo, orchiectomy plus placebo, estrogen (diethylstilbestrol 5.0 mg. daily), and orchiectomy plus estrogen, was evaluated in 1,903 Stage III and IV prostatic cancer patients by comparing (1) survival curves, (2) causes of death, (3) clinical response, (4) development of metastases in Stage III patients, and (5) incidence of treatment change. Survival curves did not differ significantly for the four treatment groups except in Stage III, in which orchiectomy plus estrogen was worse than placebo, or orchiectomy plus placebo. There were significantly more cancer deaths in the two nonestrogen groups in both stages. Otherwise, there were no appreciable differences between the three hormonal treatments. We conclude that estrogen is more effective than orchiectomy in preventing cancer deaths, and the addition of orchiectomy to estrogen does not offer a clear-cut advantage over either treatment alone. Therefore, if treatment becomes necessary because of cancer symptoms, initial treatment with estrogen is preferred.

References (11)

  • J.L. Emmett et al.

    Endocrine therapy in carcinoma of the prostate gland: 10-year survival studies

    J. Urol.

    (1960)
  • C. Huggins et al.

    The effect of castration, of estrogen, and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate

    Cancer Res.

    (1941)
  • R.M. Nesbit et al.

    Endocrine control of prostatic carcinoma: clinical and statistical survey of 1,818 cases

    J.A.M.A.

    (1950)
  • Treatment and survival of patients with cancer of the prostate

    Surg. Gynec. Obstet.

    (1967)
  • S.J. Cutler

    Computation of survival rates

    Nat. ancer Inst. Monogr.

    (1964)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (103)

  • A cell kinetics model for prostate cancer and its application to clinical data and individual patients

    2010, Journal of Theoretical Biology
    Citation Excerpt :

    As shown in Fig. 9, the model results compare favorably with those of D’Amico et al. (2003a) and Freedland et al. (2005) using α=3×10−5 for GL<8, α=3×10−3 for GL≥8 and the critical cell populations listed in Table 3. With these values, the model can describe the clinical data with HT of Blackard et al. (1973) and Lau et al. (2002), as summarized in Table 5. However, to describe the results with CT of Armstrong et al. (2007), it is important to model the fact that the rate at which the toxins are taken up by the PC cells depends on their metabolic rate compared to that of normal cells.

  • Progress in Understanding Androgen-Independent Prostate Cancer (AIPC): A Review of Potential Endocrine-Mediated Mechanisms

    2008, European Urology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Of the men initially presenting with metastatic disease 85% will die of prostate cancer. The median survival of such men in older but representative studies is in the range of 2.5–3 yr [2]. These rates are dramatically more favourable if prostate cancer is diagnosed at an early stage.

  • The benefits of early androgen blockade

    2008, Best Practice and Research: Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism
    Citation Excerpt :

    Although many large-scale randomized trials conducted in the last half of the past century investigated the potential role of AB in asymptomatic stage-II and -V disease, this issue has still not been conclusively decided. The Veterans Administration Urological Research Group (VACURG) I and II trials attempted to establish the optimal timing of AB in men with asymptomatic advanced or metastatic disease, but several design flaws and errors in the execution of these studies compromised potentially valuable conclusions.19–21 The main criticisms of these studies include toxic treatments and non-adherence to study design.

View all citing articles on Scopus

This study was made under grant R10 CA12443 from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service.

Members are listed on page 560.

View full text