Background: Combined long-term androgen deprivation (LTAD) and radiation conveys a prostate cancer-specific survival advantage over combined short-term androgen deprivation (STAD) and radiation. The seminal question is whether or not the gains are worth the adverse effects of LTAD with respect to patient preferences.
Methods: Preferences for LTAD compared with STAD were elicited by direct patient interview using the probability trade-off method. "Time trade-off utilities" (TTOu) for erectile dysfunction and osteoporosis were elicited using the time trade-off method. Participants' current prostate cancer-specific health state was assessed using the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale-Psychometric. Participants' current sexual function was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF).
Results: All participants were willing to trade survival rather than undergo LTAD compared with STAD. The mean minimally required increment in prostate cancer-specific survival (MRIS) was 8.2%. The mean TTOu for impotence was 0.78, and the mean TTOu for osteoporosis was 0.71. The MRIS was correlated with the Sexual Desire domain score of the IIEF (Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, r = 0.50; P<.0001).
Conclusions: Patients desired more prostate cancer-specific survival than what was afforded by LTAD and radiotherapy compared with STAD and radiotherapy.
(c) 2010 American Cancer Society.