Volume 39, Issue 4 pp. 234-239

Effect of finasteride and/or terazosin on serum PSA: Results of VA cooperative study #359

Michael K. Brawer

Corresponding Author

Michael K. Brawer

Northwest Prostate Institute and Pacific Northwest Cancer Foundation, Seattle, Washington

Northwest Prostate Institute, Pacific Northwest Cancer Foundation, 1560 North 115th St., Suite 209, Seattle, WA 98133Search for more papers by this author
Daniel W. Lin

Daniel W. Lin

Department of Urology, University of Washington Medical Center and Section of Urology, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington

Search for more papers by this author
William O. Williford

William O. Williford

Cooperative Studies Program Coodinating Center, Perry Point VA Medical Center, Perry Point, Maryland

Search for more papers by this author
Karen Jones

Karen Jones

Cooperative Studies Program Coodinating Center, Perry Point VA Medical Center, Perry Point, Maryland

Search for more papers by this author
Herbert Lepor

Herbert Lepor

Department of Urology, New York University Medical Center, New York, New York

Search for more papers by this author

For the Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Study Group

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Medical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) giving rise to lower urinary tract symptomatology (LUTS) has emerged as the mainstay for first-line therapy. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the most important method of detecting prostate carcinoma. The effect of finasteride on PSA has been widely reported. Little data exist with respect to alpha-adrenergic blocking therapy in men treated for BPH. In the present investigation we set out to evaluate the effect of these two forms of therapy.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the VA Cooperative Study #359 trial were evaluated. This study evaluated men with moderate LUTS owing to BPH in four treatment groups: placebo (P), finasteride (F), terazosin (T), and combination of finasteride plus terazosin (C). Men were recruited at 31 VA medical centers and had a baseline in 52-week PSA determination at the respective sites.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in baseline PSA between four groups (mean range, 2.0–2.9 ng/ml). Statistically significant reduction in PSA levels was observed at 52 weeks in the F and C arms (P < 0.001), whereas significant increases were observed in the T and P arms (P < 0.01). Additionally, there was no significant difference in PSA response between the T and P arms. Thirty percent of men in the C or F arms had more than 40–60% reduction of PSA. In contrast, the majority of men on T or P had less than 40% change in PSA. Only 35% of men on F or C had the expected 40–60% reduction in PSA level.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate no clinically significant effect of T on PSA level. The heterogeneity of PSA response to F may make monitoring patients for the development of prostate cancer problematic. Prostate 39:234–239, 1999. © 1999 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.