Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 23, 2026
A Bioluminescent and Fluorescent Orthotopic Syngeneic Murine Model of Androgen-dependent and Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer
Published on: March 6, 2018
The impact of prostate volume and neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy on urinary function following prostate
Gregory S Merrick1, Wayne M Butler, Kent E Wallner
1Schiffler Cancer Center, Wheeling Hospital, 1 Medical Park, Wheeling, WV 26003-6300, USA. gmerrick@wheelinghospital.com
Purpose:
The purpose of this article is to evaluate the impact of prostate size and the magnitude of cytoreduction after neoadjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) on catheter dependency, urinary symptomatology, and need for postbrachytherapy surgical intervention.
Materials And Methods:
From February 1998 to August 2002, 186 consecutive patients under went monotherapeutic brachytherapy (no supplemental external-beam radiotherapy or ADT), and 101 consecutive patients received < or = 6 months of ADT (a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist and an anti-androgen) in conjunction with brachytherapy without supplemental external-beam radiotherapy for clinical Tlc-T2b (2002 American Joint Committee on Cancer) prostate cancer. ADT was initiated approximately 3 months before brachytherapy. The median follow-up was 38.6 months. An alpha-blocker was initiated before implantation and continued at least until the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) returned to baseline levels. Evaluated parameters included patient age, pretreatment prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, clinical T stage, preimplantation IPSS, ultrasound volume, hormonal status, isotope, D(90), V(100/150/200), and urethral dose (average and maximum).
Results:
Patients receiving neoadjuvant ADT were statistically older, presented with higher preimplantation IPSS scores, and larger prostate volumes. Patients receiving ADT were likelier to require a urinary catheter for the first 3 days after implantation; however, by day 4, no statistical difference in catheter dependency could be discerned between the two cohorts. Hormonal status did not predict for postbrachytherapy surgical intervention. IPSS returned to baseline at a mean of 1.8 and 1.7 months in hormone-naive and ADT patients, respectively. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the preimplantation IPSS and the maximum postimplantation IPSS predicted for IPSS normalization overall and in both cohorts. Ultrasound prostate volume did not predict for IPSS normalization, catheter dependency, or need for postimplantation surgical intervention.
Conclusion:
Although patients receiving ADT were likelier to require a urinary catheter for the first three days after implantation, hormonal manipulation did not affect IPSS normalization, prolonged catheter dependency, or need for postbrachytherapy surgical intervention in these patients treated with brachytherapy without supplemental external-beam radiotherapy.
