A survey of Canadian urologists’ opinions and prescribing patterns of testosterone replacement therapy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer

Authors

  • Adam C. Millar Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
  • Dean S. Elterman Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, ON
  • Larry Goldenberg Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC
  • Brandon Van Asseldonk Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
  • Ashley Curtis Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, ON
  • Keith Jarvi Department Head, Division of Urology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3608

Abstract

Introduction: Attitudes regarding the safety of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) in hypogonadal men with prostate cancer (PCa) have changed over the past few years with the emergence of case studies suggesting a low risk of cancer progression and a better understanding of the interaction of different levels of androgen with prostate cellular metabolism. This new view has the potential to change clinical practice.

Methods: Active members of the Canadian Urological Association were surveyed about their opinions on the safety of TRT in men with low-risk PCa, as well as their current prescribing habits.

Results: Of 57 responding urologists, 86% actively prescribe TRT in men with testosterone deficiency syndrome (TDS), 93% are involved in the treatment of men with PCa, and 95% offer active surveillance as a management option for low-grade/low-stage disease. Furthermore, 65% stated that they would offer TRT to men with TDS who were on active surveillance for PCa and 63% believed that TRT did not increase the risk of progression of PCa in these men. In terms of treatment methods, 96% believed TRT was safe for men who have undergone radical prostatectomy, while a smaller number felt it was safe for patients who have undergone brachytherapy (86%) or external beam radiation (84%). Despite these figures, only 35% of the surveyed physicians had ever offered TRT for men on active surveillance and only 42% actually had men in their practice who were taking testosterone while on active surveillance.

Conclusions: The discrepancy between urologists’ beliefs about the safety of TRT and their clinical practice patterns may be due to multiple factors, such as hesitation in recommending treatment in real-life practice, low numbers of eligible patients, absence of screening for testosterone deficiency in patients on active surveillance, and patient preference or fears. Furthermore, the difference in perceived safety in men treated by radical prostatectomy vs. radiation therapy suggests that some urologists are concerned that the radiated gland remaining in-situ may be “reactivated” by TRT. The results from this survey will be used as the basis of developing a national Canadian registry of men with low-grade/stage PCa who are receiving TRT while on active surveillance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2016-06-16

How to Cite

Millar, A. C., Elterman, D. S., Goldenberg, L., Van Asseldonk, B., Curtis, A., & Jarvi, K. (2016). A survey of Canadian urologists’ opinions and prescribing patterns of testosterone replacement therapy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 10(5-6), 181–4. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3608

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 5-6 (2016): CUAJ June

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.