Cited by 96Cancer survivorship and careProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Association of androgen deprivation therapy and depression in the treatment of prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Nead, Kevin T., Sinha, Sumi, Yang, David D., Nguyen, Paul L.·2017·Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

Abstract

Background There is increasing evidence that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may be associated with depression. Existing studies have shown conflicting results.Methods PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and PsycINFO were queried on April 5, 2017. Eligible studies were in English and reported depression among individuals with prostate cancer exposed to a course of ADT vs. a lesser-exposed group (e.g., any-ADT vs. no ADT and continuous ADT vs. intermittent ADT). We used the MOOSE statement guidelines and the Cochrane Review Group's data extraction template. Study quality was evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate summary statistic risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I 2 statistic and prespecified subgroup analysis. Small study effects were evaluated using Begg and Egger statistics.Results A total of 1,128 studies were initially identified and evaluated. A meta-analysis of 18 studies among 168,756 individuals found that ADT use conferred a 41% increased risk of depression (RR = 1.41; 95% CI: 1.18-1.70; P<0.001). We found a consistent strong statistically significant association when limiting our analysis to studies in localized disease (RR = 1.85; 95% CI: 1.20-2.85; P = 0.005) and those using a clinical diagnosis of depression (RR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.08-1.32; P = 0.001). We did not find an association for continuous ADT with depression risk compared to intermittent ADT (RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.50-1.99; P = 0.992). There was no statistically significant evidence of small study effects. Statistically significant heterogeneity in the full analysis (I 2 = 80%; 95% CI: 69-87; P<0.001) resolved when examining studies using a clinical diagnosis of depression (I 2 = 16%; 95% CI: 0-60; P = 0.310).Conclusion The currently available evidence suggests that ADT in the treatment of prostate cancer is associated with an increased risk of depression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.07.016

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nead, K. T., Sinha, S., Yang, D. D., & Nguyen, P. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Nead, Kevin T.
Venue
Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-11
Volume
35
Issue
11
Pages
664.e1-664.e9
ISSN
1078-1439 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2744655382
Cited by
96
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 5
FWCI
1.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Urologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
androgen deprivation therapy, depression, prostate cancer, localized prostate cancer, adverse drug reactions
MeSH terms
Androgen Antagonists, Depression, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Male, Prostatic Neoplasms, Risk Factors, Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review