Differences in sex hormone recovery profile after cessation of 12‐week gonadotropin‐releasing hormone antagonist versus agonist therapy. (24th September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sasaki, Hiroshi; Miki, Kenta; Tashiro, Kojiro; Mori, Keiichiro; Urabe, Fumihiko; Fukuokaya, Wataru; Kimura, Takahiro; Sato, Shun; Takahashi, Hiroyuki; Aoki, Manabu; Egawa, Shin
• Is Part Of: Andrology. Volume 10:Number 2(2022)
• Page Start: 270
• Page End: 278
• Publication Date: 2021-09-24
• Subjects: gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist -- gonadotropin‐releasing hormone antagonist -- neoadjuvant therapy -- prostate cancer -- testosterone recovery; Andrology -- Periodicals; 616.65
• DOI: 10.1111/andr.13107
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2047-2919

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Pharmacobiological behavior differs between gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists and GnRH agonists. However, reliable evidence clarifying the difference between them is limited. Objectives: We aimed to elucidate the difference in recovery profile between GnRH antagonist (degarelix) and GnRH agonist (leuprorelin acetate or goserelin acetate) as short‐term (12 weeks) neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) prior to 125I‐transperineal prostate brachytherapy (TPPB) for localized prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: This study was initially designed as a single‐center, prospective, open‐label, randomized controlled trial. The primary endpoint was a serum testosterone level above the castration range (>50 ng/dl) after the cessation of 12‐week neoadjuvant ADT (GnRH antagonist or GnRH agonists). All patients underwent 12 weeks of neoadjuvant ADT. The recovery profiles of hormones, prostate‐specific antigen, total prostate volume (TPV), bone mineral density, and quality of life scores were investigated. Results: Testosterone recovery duration after the last injection was significantly longer in the GnRH antagonist arm than in the GnRH agonist arm (median, 27.3 vs. 4.8 weeks, p < 0.001). The serum levels of luteinizing hormone and follicle‐stimulating hormone in the GnRH antagonist arm also remained significantly lower than those in the GnRH agonist arm between 16 and 24 weeks ( p < 0.01). Meanwhile, reduction in TPV at the time of TPPB was comparable between both arms ( p = 0.128). There were also no significant between‐arm differences in the International Prostate Symptom Score and the International Index of Erectile Function scores. Discussion and Conclusion: The recovery patterns of hormonal profiles after short‐term (12 weeks) neoadjuvant ADT differ between GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists. The choice between these drugs matters and may have a clinical impact depending on the primary objective of ADT.