Display options
Share it on

Infect Agent Cancer. 2021 Nov 25;16(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s13027-021-00406-y.

Impact of androgen deprivation therapy on mortality of prostate cancer patients with COVID-19: a propensity score-based analysis.

Infectious agents and cancer

Mateus Bringel Oliveira Duarte, Frederico Leal, Juliana Luz Passos Argenton, José Barreto Campello Carvalheira

Affiliations

  1. Division of Oncology, Department of Anesthesiology, Oncology and Radiology, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  2. Uberlândia Cancer Hospital, Federal University of Uberlândia, UFU, Uberlândia, MG, Brazil.
  3. Fundação de Desenvolvimento da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (FUNCAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
  4. Division of Oncology, Department of Anesthesiology, Oncology and Radiology, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil. [email protected].

PMID: 34823563 PMCID: PMC8614632 DOI: 10.1186/s13027-021-00406-y

Abstract

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.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Keywords: Androgen antagonists; Androgen receptor antagonists; Antineoplastic agents; COVID-19

References

  1. Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Aug 1;25(15):4603-4610 - PubMed
  2. Lancet. 2021 Jan 9;397(10269):99-111 - PubMed
  3. N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 30;382(18):1708-1720 - PubMed
  4. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020 Jul;19(7):1545-1547 - PubMed
  5. Mol Med Rep. 2017 Oct;16(4):5450-5458 - PubMed
  6. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017 Dec;26(12):1513-1519 - PubMed
  7. Int J Biol Sci. 2020 Sep 30;16(15):3028-3036 - PubMed
  8. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020 Jul;83(1):308-309 - PubMed
  9. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Dec 11;: - PubMed
  10. Cancers (Basel). 2020 Aug 18;12(8): - PubMed
  11. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2016 Jul;76(1):50-8 - PubMed
  12. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 11;17(16): - PubMed
  13. BMC Med. 2020 Jul 15;18(1):216 - PubMed
  14. Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Apr;9(4):407-418 - PubMed
  15. Biol Sex Differ. 2020 Sep 18;11(1):53 - PubMed
  16. Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Jun;9(6):655-664 - PubMed
  17. Ann Oncol. 2020 Aug;31(8):1040-1045 - PubMed
  18. Neuroimmunomodulation. 2009;16(3):177-84 - PubMed
  19. PLoS One. 2015 Oct 13;10(10):e0139439 - PubMed
  20. Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Jan;21(1):33-34 - PubMed
  21. Am J Epidemiol. 2018 Apr 1;187(4):871-878 - PubMed
  22. J Urol. 2021 Feb;205(2):441-443 - PubMed
  23. Horm Behav. 2017 Feb;88:95-105 - PubMed
  24. Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Aug;8(8):e1018-e1026 - PubMed
  25. Int J Biostat. 2019 Feb 26;15(2): - PubMed
  26. Urol J. 2021 Jul 24;: - PubMed
  27. N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 4;384(5):403-416 - PubMed
  28. Eur J Cancer. 2020 Nov;140:140-146 - PubMed
  29. Commun Biol. 2020 Jul 8;3(1):374 - PubMed
  30. Lancet Oncol. 2020 Oct;21(10):1309-1316 - PubMed
  31. JAMA. 2021 Jan 12;325(2):123-124 - PubMed
  32. JAMA. 2017 Jun 27;317(24):2532-2542 - PubMed
  33. Cancer Res. 2015 Jul 15;75(14):2949-60 - PubMed
  34. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2020 Oct 31;11:2042018820969019 - PubMed
  35. Cancers (Basel). 2020 Nov 24;12(12): - PubMed
  36. BMC Med. 2020 Nov 25;18(1):369 - PubMed
  37. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999 Feb;84(2):743-50 - PubMed
  38. N Engl J Med. 2020 Dec 31;383(27):2603-2615 - PubMed
  39. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020 Dec;23(4):561-563 - PubMed
  40. Front Immunol. 2020 Oct 07;11:576745 - PubMed
  41. Cell Stem Cell. 2020 Dec 3;27(6):876-889.e12 - PubMed
  42. Aging (Albany NY). 2020 Jun 5;12(11):10087-10098 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support