[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
Process of Cohort Selection

ADT indicates androgen deprivation therapy.

Graphic Jump Location
Process of Cohort Selection
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.
Survival Curve for Alzheimer Disease

Patients exposed to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) had a higher hazard of diagnosis of Alzheimer disease compared with those not exposed to ADT.

Graphic Jump Location
Survival Curve for Alzheimer Disease
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3.
Survival Curve for Dementia

A significantly higher hazard of diagnosis of dementia was observed for patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) vs those not treated with ADT.

Graphic Jump Location
Survival Curve for Dementia
Table 1.
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Men Aged 66 Years and Older Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer Between 1996 and 2003, According to ADT Status

Abbreviation: ADT, androgen deprivation therapy.

a Adjusted for age at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, geographic area, marital status, comorbidity score, cancer stage, and socioeconomic status.

b Numbers are synthetic values derived from weights.

Table 2.
Association Between ADT and Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease or Dementia

Abbreviation: ADT, androgen deprivation therapy.

a Adjusted for age at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, geographic area, marital status, comorbidity score, cancer stage, and socioeconomic status.

b Inverse probability of treatment weighting.

cP values for trend are <.001.

1.
Siegel  RL, Miller  KD, Jemal  A.  Cancer statistics, 2018.  CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7-30. doi:10.3322/caac.21442PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Bolla  M, Gonzalez  D, Warde  P,  et al.  Improved survival in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy and goserelin.  N Engl J Med. 1997;337(5):295-300. doi:10.1056/NEJM199707313370502PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
D’Amico  AV, Manola  J, Loffredo  M, Renshaw  AA, DellaCroce  A, Kantoff  PW.  6-month androgen suppression plus radiation therapy vs radiation therapy alone for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2004;292(7):821-827. doi:10.1001/jama.292.7.821PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Shipley  WU, Seiferheld  W, Lukka  HR,  et al; NRG Oncology RTOG.  Radiation with or without antiandrogen therapy in recurrent prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2017;376(5):417-428. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1607529PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Roach  M  III, DeSilvio  M, Lawton  C,  et al; Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413.  Phase III trial comparing whole-pelvic versus prostate-only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant versus adjuvant combined androgen suppression: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413.  J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(10):1904-1911. doi:10.1200/JCO.2003.05.004PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Sharifi  N, Gulley  JL, Dahut  WL.  Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.  JAMA. 2005;294(2):238-244. doi:10.1001/jama.294.2.238PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Beer  TM, Armstrong  AJ, Rathkopf  DE,  et al; PREVAIL Investigators.  Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy.  N Engl J Med. 2014;371(5):424-433. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1405095PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Ryan  CJ, Smith  MR, de Bono  JS,  et al; COU-AA-302 Investigators.  Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy.  N Engl J Med. 2013;368(2):138-148. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1209096PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Scher  HI, Fizazi  K, Saad  F,  et al; AFFIRM Investigators.  Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy.  N Engl J Med. 2012;367(13):1187-1197. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1207506PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Khosrow-Khavar  F, Rej  S, Yin  H, Aprikian  A, Azoulay  L.  Androgen deprivation therapy and the risk of dementia in patients with prostate cancer.  J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(2):201-207. doi:10.1200/JCO.2016.69.6203PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Jhan  JH, Yang  YH, Chang  YH, Guu  SJ, Tsai  CC.  Hormone therapy for prostate cancer increases the risk of Alzheimer’s disease: a nationwide 4-year longitudinal cohort study.  Aging Male. 2017;20(1):33-38. doi:10.1080/13685538.2016.1271782PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
McGinty  HL, Phillips  KM, Jim  HS,  et al.  Cognitive functioning in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(8):2271-2280. doi:10.1007/s00520-014-2285-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Holland  J, Bandelow  S, Hogervorst  E.  Testosterone levels and cognition in elderly men: a review.  Maturitas. 2011;69(4):322-337. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2011.05.012PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Vest  RS, Pike  CJ.  Gender, sex steroid hormones, and Alzheimer’s disease.  Horm Behav. 2013;63(2):301-307. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.04.006PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Huggins  C, Hodges  CU.  Studies on prostate cancer, I: the effect of castration, of estrogen and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate.  Cancer Res. 1941;1:293.Google Scholar
16.
Yang  DD, Muralidhar  V, Mahal  BA,  et al.  National trends and predictors of androgen deprivation therapy use in low-risk prostate cancer.  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98(2):338-343. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.020PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
D’Amico  AV, Denham  JW, Crook  J,  et al.  Influence of androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer on the frequency and timing of fatal myocardial infarctions.  J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(17):2420-2425. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.09.3369PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Donovan  KA, Walker  LM, Wassersug  RJ, Thompson  LMA, Robinson  JW.  Psychological effects of androgen-deprivation therapy on men with prostate cancer and their partners.  Cancer. 2015;121(24):4286-4299. doi:10.1002/cncr.29672PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Gandy  S, Almeida  OP, Fonte  J,  et al.  Chemical andropause and amyloid-β peptide.  JAMA. 2001;285(17):2195-2196. doi:10.1001/jama.285.17.2195-aPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Levine  GN, D’Amico  AV, Berger  P,  et al; American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, the American Cancer Society, and the American Urological Association.  Androgen-deprivation therapy in prostate cancer and cardiovascular risk: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and American Urological Association: endorsed by the American Society for Radiation Oncology.  CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60(3):194-201. doi:10.3322/caac.20061PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Scailteux  L-M, Naudet  F, Alimi  Q, Vincendeau  S, Oger  E.  Mortality, cardiovascular risk, and androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review with direct and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.  Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(24):e3873. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003873PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Taylor  LG, Canfield  SE, Du  XL.  Review of major adverse effects of androgen-deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer.  Cancer. 2009;115(11):2388-2399. doi:10.1002/cncr.24283PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Gaztañaga  M, Crook  J.  Androgen deprivation therapy: minimizing exposure and mitigating side effects.  J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012;10(9):1088-1095. doi:10.6004/jnccn.2012.0115PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Warren  JL, Klabunder  CN, Schrag  D, Bach  PB, Riley  GF.  Overview of the SEER-Medicare data-content, research application and generalizability to the United States elderly population.  Med Care. 2002;40(8):3-18. doi:10.1097/00005650-200208001-00002PubMedGoogle Scholar
25.
Shahinian  VB, Kuo  YF, Freeman  JL, Goodwin  JS.  Risk of fracture after androgen deprivation for prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2005;352(2):154-164. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041943PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Klabunde  C, Warren  J, Legler  J.  Assessing comorbidity using claims data-an overview.  Med Care. 2002;40(8):26-35. doi:10.1097/00005650-200208001-00004PubMedGoogle Scholar
27.
Allison  PD.  Logistic Regression—Using the SAS System: Theory and Application. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1999.
28.
Spreeuwenberg  MD, Bartak  A, Croon  MA,  et al.  The multiple propensity score as control for bias in the comparison of more than two treatment arms: an introduction from a case study in mental health.  Med Care. 2010;48(2):166-174. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181c1328fPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Green  WH.  Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2000.
30.
Johnston  KM, Gustafson  P, Levy  AR, Grootendorst  P.  Use of instrumental variables in the analysis of generalized linear models in the presence of unmeasured confounding with applications to epidemiological research.  Stat Med. 2008;27(9):1539-1556. doi:10.1002/sim.3036PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Schmid  M, Sammon  JD, Reznor  G,  et al.  Dose-dependent effect of androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer on adverse cardiac events.  BJU Int. 2016;118(2):221-229. doi:10.1111/bju.13203PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Gonzalez  BD, Jim  HSL, Booth-Jones  M,  et al.  Course and predictors of cognitive function in patients with prostate cancer receiving androgen-deprivation therapy: a controlled comparison.  J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(18):2021-2027. doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.60.1963PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Keating  NL, O’Malley  AJ, Smith  MR.  Diabetes and cardiovascular disease during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.  J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(27):4448-4456. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.06.2497PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Gandaglia  G, Sun  M, Popa  I,  et al.  The impact of the androgen deprivation therapy on the risk of coronary heart disease in patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer: a population-based study.  BJU Int. 2014;114(6b):E82-E89. doi:10.1111/bju.12732PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Nead  KT, Gaskin  G, Chester  C,  et al.  Androgen deprivation therapy and future Alzheimer’s disease risk.  J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(6):566-571. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.63.6266PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
Nead  KT, Gaskin  G, Chester  C, Swisher-McClure  S, Leeper  NJ, Shah  NH.  Association between androgen deprivation therapy and risk of dementia.  JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(1):49-55. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3662PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
37.
Kao  LT, Lin  HC, Chung  SD,  et al.  No increased risk of dementia in patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a 5-year follow-up study.  Asian J Androl. 2017;19(4):414-417.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
38.
Blennow  K, de Leon  MJ, Zetterberg  H.  Alzheimer’s disease.  Lancet. 2006;368(9533):387-403. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69113-7PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
39.
Berg  D. Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases: progress and new perspectives. Paper presented at: Eighth International Conference on AD/PD; March 14-18, 2007; Salzburg, Austria.
40.
Rost  K, Smith  R, Matthews  DB, Guise  B.  The deliberate misdiagnosis of major depression in primary care.  Arch Fam Med. 1994;3(4):333-337. doi:10.1001/archfami.3.4.333PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
41.
Smith  MR, Saad  F, Chowdhury  S,  et al; SPARTAN Investigators.  Apalutamide treatment and metastasis-free survival in prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2018;378(15):1408-1418. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1715546PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
42.
Hussain  M, Fizazi  K, Saad  F,  et al.  Enzalutamide in men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2018;378(26):2465-2474. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1800536PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Views 21,008
    Original Investigation
    Oncology
    July 3, 2019

    Association Between Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use and Diagnosis of Dementia in Men With Prostate Cancer

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Perlman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
    • 2Perlman School of Medicine, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
    • 3Perlman School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
    • 4Perlman School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
    JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(7):e196562. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.6562
    Key Points español 中文 (chinese)

    Question  Is androgen deprivation therapy exposure associated with dementia among elderly patients with prostate cancer?

    Findings  In this cohort study of 154 089 elderly men with prostate cancer, androgen deprivation therapy exposure was associated with subsequent diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia over a follow-up period of at least 10 years.

    Meaning  Clinicians must carefully weigh the long-term risks and benefits of exposure to androgen deprivation therapy in patients with a prolonged life expectancy and stratify patients by dementia risk prior to androgen deprivation therapy initiation.

    Abstract

    Importance  The association between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) exposure and dementia is uncertain.

    Objective  To analyze the association between ADT exposure and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia among elderly men with prostate cancer.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  This retrospective cohort study used data from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare linked database. Participants were 154 089 elderly men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1996 and 2003. The analyses were conducted between November 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018.

    Exposure  Androgen deprivation therapy.

    Main Outcomes and Measures  Patients receiving ADT within 2 years of prostate cancer diagnosis were identified. Survival analysis was used to determine the association between ADT exposure and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia in the follow-up period. Propensity score and instrumental variable approaches were used to minimize measured and unmeasured selection bias. The association by dose of ADT was also examined.

    Results  Of the 295 733 men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1996 and 2003, 154 089 met the study criteria. Of these, 62 330 (mean [SD] age, 76.0 [6.0] years) received ADT within 2 years of prostate cancer diagnosis, and 91 759 (mean [SD] age, 74.3 [6.0] years) did not receive ADT. Mean (SD) follow-up was 8.3 (4.7) years. Exposure to ADT, compared with no ADT exposure, was associated with a diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (13.1% vs 9.4%; difference, 3.7%; 95% CI, 3.3%-3.9%; P < .001; hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.18) and dementia (21.6% vs 15.8%; difference, 5.8%; 95% CI, 5.4%-6.2%; P < .001; HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.17-1.24). For 1 to 4 doses of ADT, the HR was 1.19 (95% CI, 1.15-1.24) for Alzheimer disease and 1.19 (95% CI, 1.15-1.23) for dementia. For 5 to 8 doses of ADT, the HR was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.22-1.35) for Alzheimer disease and 1.24 (95% CI, 1.19-1.29) for dementia. For more than 8 doses of ADT, the HR was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.16-1.34) for Alzheimer disease and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.15-1.28) for dementia. The number needed to harm was 18 patients (95% CI, 17-19 patients) and 10 patients (95% CI, 9.5-11 patients) for Alzheimer disease and dementia, respectively.

    Conclusions and Relevance  Among elderly patients with prostate cancer, ADT exposure was associated with subsequent diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia over a follow-up period of at least 10 years.

    Introduction

    Prostate cancer is the most common nonskin cancer among men in the United States.1 Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), alone or as part of multimodal therapy, reduces the likelihood of cancer progression and/or mortality in high-risk localized, locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic prostate cancer.2-9 Despite these benefits, ADT may have long-term effects on bone, sexual, and cardiovascular health that influence prostate cancer–related quality of life, functional status, and health care utilization.10-19

    The possible association between ADT exposure and cognitive dysfunction represents a growing concern. There are several purported mechanisms behind this association. Decreasing androgen levels may increase risk factors for Alzheimer disease and dementia, including loss of lean body mass, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and depression.11 There may be a causative relationship between lower testosterone levels and impaired cognitive function, perhaps via impaired neuron growth and axonal regeneration or accumulation of abnormally folded β-amyloid protein.10,12-14,19 Studies using national samples have reported conflicting results regarding the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia among older patients with prostate cancer exposed to ADT.17,18,20-23 Limitations of these studies include inadequate adjustment for cancer stage, ADT dose, and duration; reliance on single-institution data; lack of generalizability to the US population; and measured and unmeasured bias associated with cohort studies. Clarifying the association between ADT and dementia could improve shared decision making around the risks and benefits of ADT in prostate cancer. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between exposure to ADT and subsequent diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia among elderly men with prostate cancer. We hypothesized that, after adjusting for relevant covariates, ADT exposure is associated with an increased hazard of subsequent dementia.

    Methods
    Data Sources

    The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)–Medicare linked database of the National Cancer Institute brings together Medicare administrative claims data and clinical tumor registry data for Medicare recipients who reside in the SEER region.24 The SEER program collects data on cancer incidence, treatment, and mortality from 18 SEER sites and encompasses 28% of the US population. Of persons diagnosed with cancer aged 65 years and older enrolled in SEER registries, 93% have been matched with Medicare enrollment records.

    For our retrospective cohort study, we obtained data from a sample of men aged 66 years and older and diagnosed with localized or advanced prostate cancer between 1996 and 2003 from the SEER-Medicare database. This cohort was followed up until 2013; thus, each patient potentially had at least 10 years of follow-up after diagnosis of prostate cancer. Patients who were younger than 66 years at the time of diagnosis were excluded to ensure that the data file included sufficient claims for medical care prior to the diagnosis of prostate cancer to allow the adjustment for prediagnosis comorbidity. The 2-year period after diagnosis was considered the treatment phase, and the following years were considered the follow-up phase. Patients who received orchiectomy within 2 years of prostate cancer diagnosis were included. To analyze the association with dose, ADT was stratified according to the number of doses received within 2 years of prostate cancer diagnosis (1-4, 5-8, and >8 doses).25 The analyses were conducted between November 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018, and all data were deidentified. This report follows the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) reporting guideline. This study was approved by the University of Pennsylvania institutional review board. Requirements for informed consent were waived because the data were deidentified.

    Measurements
    Diagnosis of Dementia and Alzheimer Disease

    Diagnosis of dementia and Alzheimer disease were the key outcome variables in our analyses. Diagnostic codes included in Medicare inpatient, outpatient, and provider claims (provider claims is the term used by Medicare to indicate claims filed by health care professionals in the Medicare system) were used to identify patients with a diagnosis of dementia (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 290, 29420, 29411, 29282, 2912, and 29421) or Alzheimer disease (ICD-9-CM code 3310) after diagnosis of prostate cancer. We excluded patients with a preexisting diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia.

    Covariates

    We obtained sociodemographic, disease severity, medical comorbidity, and prostate cancer treatment characteristics for use in adjusting our measures of association for potentially influential covariates. Age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic stats (SES), and geographic location data were obtained from the SEER-Medicare Patient Entitlement and Diagnosis Summary File. Prostate cancer severity was assessed with information on prostate cancer grade and histology provided in SEER. Charlson Comorbidity Indexes were generated for each patient using the inpatient, outpatient, and provider claims in the 1-year period prior to the diagnosis of prostate cancer.26 In addition to treatment information from the Patient Entitlement and Diagnosis Summary File, procedure codes were used to identify prostate cancer treatments. Treatments were surgery, radiation therapy (external beam or brachytherapy), chemotherapy, ADT, or no treatment.

    Statistical Analysis

    We used unpaired 2-tailed t tests, or χ2 tests, as appropriate, to test the significance of the differences between continuous and categorical variables. In all analyses, 2-sided P < .05 was considered statistically significant. We used 3 sequential models to analyze the association between ADT and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (or dementia).27-29 The key independent variable was exposure to ADT. We operationalized exposure to ADT in 2 ways: as a binary variable and as intensity of use. Survival analysis was used to study the association between ADT and Alzheimer disease (or dementia). Model 1 estimated the unadjusted association of ADT with Alzheimer disease (or dementia). To minimize confounding by indication, we used propensity score analysis (model 2) and instrumental variable analysis (data not shown) to examine the relationship between ADT and subsequent Alzheimer disease (or dementia). For model 2, using logistic regression, we first estimated for each participant the probability (ie, the propensity) of receiving ADT based on age, race/ethnicity, geographic location, SES, marital status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score.28 Next, in model 2, we modeled the associations between Alzheimer disease (or dementia) and ADT, weighted by the inverse propensity score, after adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, geographic location, SES, marital status, Charlson comorbidity score, stage, treatment, and year of diagnosis. To examine the effect of weighting, we compared the covariates before and after adjustment for propensity score.

    We used an instrumental variable approach to address unmeasured bias, relying on an instrumental variable that is associated with the likelihood of receiving a type of treatment but is independent of diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia.30 An appropriate instrument is one that is associated with the exposure (ADT treatment) but not with the outcome(s). There exists variation in treatment across regions, and therefore patients from these regions may be more likely to receive ADT treatment for prostate cancer. Therefore, for each hospital referral region in our study, we determined the proportion of patients who received ADT treatment. We categorized hospital referral regions as high- or low-treatment regions using the median as a cutoff and used this variable as an instrument. Our instrument satisfied 2 criteria for being a useful instrument. First, the Hausman test of endogeneity showed that an instrumental variable approach was necessary for our model. Second, our instrument fulfilled a rule of thumb in the literature that the weak instruments problem is a nonissue if the F statistic of the regression in the reduced form equation exceeds 10.

    We also conducted 4 types of sensitivity analysis: (1) timing of ADT use—narrowing the primary treatment phase from 2 years to 6 months after diagnosis; (2) subgroups of comorbidity—those with no comorbidity, those with 1 to 2 comorbidities, and those with more than 2 comorbidities; (3) stage of cancer—localized vs advanced; and (4) other treatment groups. We used SAS statistical software version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc) for analysis.

    Results
    Sample Characteristics

    Of the 295 733 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries newly diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1996 and 2003, 154 089 met our study criteria (Figure 1). Of these, 62 330 received ADT within 2 years of prostate cancer diagnosis and 91 759 did not receive ADT by the end of the study (December 31, 2013). A list of diagnosis and procedure codes used is presented in eTable 1 in the Supplement. As shown in Table 1, those who received ADT were older at diagnosis of prostate cancer (mean [SD] age, 76.0 [6.0] years) compared with those who did not receive ADT (mean [SD] age, 74.3 [6.0] years). Men receiving ADT were more likely than men not receiving ADT to live in nonmetropolitan areas (16.7% vs 10.4%; difference, 6.3%; 95% CI, 5.9%-6.7%; P < .001), to be unmarried (33.7% vs 30.4%; difference, 3.3%; 95% CI, 2.9%-3.8%; P < .001), and to have lower SES (38.8% vs 33.4%; difference, 5.3%; 95% CI, 4.8%-5.8%; P < .001). Men receiving ADT were more likely to have at least 1 comorbidity (32.0% vs 17.4%; difference, 14.6%; 95% CI, 14.1%-15.1%; P < .001) and have more aggressive cancer than those not receiving ADT (34.3% vs 17.8%; difference, 16.5%; 95% CI, 16.1%-16.9%; P < .001). Those receiving ADT were less likely to have undergone radical prostatectomy compared with those not receiving ADT (18.9% vs 26.4%; difference, 7.3%; 95% CI, 6.9%-7.8%; P < .001). Mean (SD) follow-up was 8.3 (4.7) years.

    Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease

    As reported in Table 1, patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT were more likely to be diagnosed with Alzheimer disease compared with those not treated with ADT (13.1% vs 9.4%; difference, 3.7%; 95% CI, 3.3%-3.9%; P < .001). Survival analyses evaluated the hazard of Alzheimer disease diagnosis and ADT exposure (Table 2). Overall, patients with prostate cancer receiving ADT had a higher hazard of Alzheimer disease (hazard ratio [HR] for propensity score approach, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.18). The instrumental variable model yielded comparable results (data not shown). The experience with Alzheimer disease diagnosis differed between the ADT and non-ADT groups (log-rank P < .001) (Figure 2).

    Diagnosis of Dementia

    Similar to Alzheimer disease, patients with prostate cancer exposed to ADT experienced a higher likelihood of dementia diagnosis compared with patients who were not exposed to ADT (21.6% vs 15.8%; difference, 5.8%; 95% CI, 5.4%-6.2%; P < .001), as reported in Table 1. Survival analyses evaluated the association between exposure to ADT and hazard of diagnosis of dementia after adjusting for inversely weighted propensity score (Table 2). Overall, patients receiving ADT had a higher hazard of being diagnosed with dementia (HR for propensity score approach, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.17-1.24). Comparable results were observed with instrumental variable analysis (data not shown). The experience with dementia differed between the ADT group and the non-ADT group (log-rank P < .001) (Figure 3).

    Dose Effect and Numbers Needed to Harm

    As shown in Table 2, the association between prolonged ADT use (5-8 doses) and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.22-1.35) was consistent with results for overall exposure to ADT. Similarly, prolonged ADT was associated with an increased hazard of dementia (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.19-1.29). For 1 to 4 doses of ADT, the HR was 1.19 (95% CI, 1.15-1.24) for Alzheimer disease and 1.19 (95% CI, 1.15-1.23) for dementia. For 5 to 8 doses of ADT, the HR was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.22-1.35) for Alzheimer disease and 1.24 (95% CI, 1.19-1.29) for dementia. For more than 8 doses of ADT, the HR was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.16-1.34) for Alzheimer disease and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.15-1.28) for dementia. All P values for trend were less than .001. The number needed to harm was 18 patients (95% CI, 17-19 patients) for Alzheimer disease and 10 patients (95% CI, 9.5-11 patients) for dementia.

    Sensitivity Analyses

    We conducted several types of sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the association between ADT and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (or dementia). First we analyzed the association for 3 subgroups of comorbidity (0 comorbidities, 1-2 comorbidities, and >2 comorbidities) (eTable 2 in the Supplement). Only the group with 0 comorbidities showed an association between exposure to ADT and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.17-1.27) or dementia (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.24-1.32). Next, we analyzed subgroups of treatment combination. Among the surgery group, ADT use had a lower hazard of diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98) and a higher hazard of dementia (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.10-1.23) (eTable 3 in the Supplement). For the radiation and chemotherapy groups, the association between exposure to ADT and diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (or dementia) was higher than that observed in Table 2 (eTable 4 in the Supplement). Additionally, for the localized and advanced stage subgroups, the association between ADT and Alzheimer disease (or dementia) was comparable to that observed in Table 2. Varying primary treatment period for ADT of 6 months showed similar results (data not reported).

    Discussion

    Using SEER-Medicare linked data, we demonstrated that exposure to ADT was associated with an increased hazard of subsequent Alzheimer disease or dementia among patients with prostate cancer over a mean follow-up of 8.3 years after prostate cancer diagnosis. This association continued with different treatment groups. Additionally, we observed a dose-response relationship: patients who received more than 8 doses of ADT were at a significantly higher hazard of diagnosis of both dementia and Alzheimer disease than those receiving fewer doses ADT.

    To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date examining the association between exposure to ADT and subsequent dementia in a US cohort of elderly patients with prostate cancer. There has been conflicting evidence in studies examining association between ADT use and dementia diagnosis.10,25,31-36 Prior observational studies that did not observe an association between ADT and dementia may have been limited by varying inclusion criteria, inability to account for duration of ADT, and short follow-up time. Our accounting for these factors may explain the discrepancies in findings between these studies and ours.10,11,35-37 A meta-analysis12 revealed an association between ADT exposure and poorer performance on testing of several cognitive domains; however, the studies that were included were limited by heterogeneity in study population. Strengths of our study include its large sample of elderly US men, long follow-up time, establishment of a dose-response association, adjustment for unmeasured and measured confounding by indication, and consistent association across treatment, comorbidity, and cancer grade subgroups.

    While our study suggests an association between ADT and subsequent dementia diagnosis, we were unable to further investigate possible biological mechanisms of this association. It is important to note that dementia may have a latency period of 1 decade or more prior to cognitive manifestations,38 with some cerebrospinal fluid, serum, and neuroimaging biomarkers present many years before diagnosis.39 Hence, it is possible that ADT has a modifying or augmenting, rather than de novo, effect on development of dementia. Further work could be done to characterize individuals undergoing ADT who are at high risk of developing earlier dementia.

    Limitations

    We note some limitations to our study. Our sample was limited to male fee-for-service Medicare enrollees aged 66 years or older who lived in a SEER region and were not enrolled in a health maintenance organization; thus, the results may not be generalizable to other populations. Furthermore, while the age and sex distribution for persons aged 66 years and older is comparable with that of older adults in the United States, SEER regions have a higher proportion of nonwhite individuals. Mortality rates derived from SEER data may not be representative of national data on cancer mortality rates.24 While the threshold for Alzheimer disease or dementia diagnosis may vary from physician to physician,40 studies of claims data for Alzheimer disease or dementia have shown generally good agreement between physicians and practices.10 Nevertheless, Alzheimer disease or dementia may be a challenge to diagnose in older men, and physicians may vary widely in recognition of and inclination to code for Alzheimer disease or dementia.40 Our estimates of the association of ADT with diagnosis of Alzheimer disease or dementia may be conservative because men with Alzheimer disease or dementia may be misclassified into the comparison group in the absence of a diagnostic code for dementia.

    Future research should attempt to elucidate a possible biological mechanism between exposure to ADT and development of dementia and study this association prospectively. It is crucial to establish whether this association is mediated by long-term androgen suppression, especially as dual androgen blockade with second-generation antiandrogens moves earlier in the treatment course of prostate cancer.41,42 It is unclear whether prolonged exposure to dual androgen blockade increases the risk of subsequent dementia.

    Conclusions

    In summary, our population-based study spanning 10 years or more following the diagnosis of prostate cancer shows that exposure to ADT was associated with increased hazard of both Alzheimer disease and dementia among elderly fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer. The list of effective ADT agents has recently grown with the addition of androgen synthesis inhibitors and second-generation antiandrogens. Furthermore, data are accumulating for the use of such agents earlier in the course of disease progression. Our results suggest that clinicians need to carefully weigh the long-term risks and benefits of exposure to ADT in patients with a prolonged life expectancy and stratify patients based on dementia risk prior to ADT initiation.

    Back to top
    Article Information

    Accepted for Publication: May 14, 2019.

    Published: July 3, 2019. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.6562

    Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2019 Jayadevappa R et al. JAMA Network Open.

    Corresponding Author: Ravishankar Jayadevappa, PhD, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3615 Chestnut St, Room 224, Philadelphia, PA 19104 (jravi@pennmedicine.upenn.edu).

    Author Contributions: Dr Jayadevappa had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

    Concept and design: Jayadevappa, Chhatre, Malkowicz, Guzzo, Wein.

    Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Jayadevappa, Chhatre, Malkowicz, Parikh.

    Drafting of the manuscript: All authors.

    Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Jayadevappa, Chhatre, Malkowicz, Parikh.

    Statistical analysis: Jayadevappa, Chhatre, Parikh.

    Obtained funding: Jayadevappa.

    Administrative, technical, or material support: Jayadevappa, Chhatre, Malkowicz, Guzzo.

    Supervision: Jayadevappa, Chhatre, Guzzo, Wein.

    Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Malkowicz reported grants from the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of the study. Dr Wein reported personal fees from Avadel, Serenity, Urovant, Valencia, and Velicept outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

    Funding/Support: The study was supported by Agency for Healthcare and Research Quality grant 1R01HS024106-01.

    Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The Agency for Healthcare and Research Quality had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

    Additional Contributions: We acknowledge the efforts of the Applied Research Program, National Cancer Institute; the Office of Research, Development and Information, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Information Management Services; and the SEER program tumor registries in the creation of the SEER-Medicare database.

    Additional Information: This study used the linked SEER-Medicare database. The interpretation and reporting of these data are the sole responsibility of the authors.

    References
    References
    1.
    Siegel  RL, Miller  KD, Jemal  A.  Cancer statistics, 2018.  CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7-30. doi:10.3322/caac.21442PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    2.
    Bolla  M, Gonzalez  D, Warde  P,  et al.  Improved survival in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy and goserelin.  N Engl J Med. 1997;337(5):295-300. doi:10.1056/NEJM199707313370502PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    3.
    D’Amico  AV, Manola  J, Loffredo  M, Renshaw  AA, DellaCroce  A, Kantoff  PW.  6-month androgen suppression plus radiation therapy vs radiation therapy alone for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2004;292(7):821-827. doi:10.1001/jama.292.7.821PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    4.
    Shipley  WU, Seiferheld  W, Lukka  HR,  et al; NRG Oncology RTOG.  Radiation with or without antiandrogen therapy in recurrent prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2017;376(5):417-428. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1607529PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    5.
    Roach  M  III, DeSilvio  M, Lawton  C,  et al; Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413.  Phase III trial comparing whole-pelvic versus prostate-only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant versus adjuvant combined androgen suppression: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413.  J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(10):1904-1911. doi:10.1200/JCO.2003.05.004PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    6.
    Sharifi  N, Gulley  JL, Dahut  WL.  Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.  JAMA. 2005;294(2):238-244. doi:10.1001/jama.294.2.238PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    7.
    Beer  TM, Armstrong  AJ, Rathkopf  DE,  et al; PREVAIL Investigators.  Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy.  N Engl J Med. 2014;371(5):424-433. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1405095PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    8.
    Ryan  CJ, Smith  MR, de Bono  JS,  et al; COU-AA-302 Investigators.  Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy.  N Engl J Med. 2013;368(2):138-148. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1209096PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    9.
    Scher  HI, Fizazi  K, Saad  F,  et al; AFFIRM Investigators.  Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy.  N Engl J Med. 2012;367(13):1187-1197. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1207506PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    10.
    Khosrow-Khavar  F, Rej  S, Yin  H, Aprikian  A, Azoulay  L.  Androgen deprivation therapy and the risk of dementia in patients with prostate cancer.  J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(2):201-207. doi:10.1200/JCO.2016.69.6203PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    11.
    Jhan  JH, Yang  YH, Chang  YH, Guu  SJ, Tsai  CC.  Hormone therapy for prostate cancer increases the risk of Alzheimer’s disease: a nationwide 4-year longitudinal cohort study.  Aging Male. 2017;20(1):33-38. doi:10.1080/13685538.2016.1271782PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    12.
    McGinty  HL, Phillips  KM, Jim  HS,  et al.  Cognitive functioning in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(8):2271-2280. doi:10.1007/s00520-014-2285-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    13.
    Holland  J, Bandelow  S, Hogervorst  E.  Testosterone levels and cognition in elderly men: a review.  Maturitas. 2011;69(4):322-337. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2011.05.012PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    14.
    Vest  RS, Pike  CJ.  Gender, sex steroid hormones, and Alzheimer’s disease.  Horm Behav. 2013;63(2):301-307. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.04.006PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    15.
    Huggins  C, Hodges  CU.  Studies on prostate cancer, I: the effect of castration, of estrogen and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate.  Cancer Res. 1941;1:293.Google Scholar
    16.
    Yang  DD, Muralidhar  V, Mahal  BA,  et al.  National trends and predictors of androgen deprivation therapy use in low-risk prostate cancer.  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98(2):338-343. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.020PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    17.
    D’Amico  AV, Denham  JW, Crook  J,  et al.  Influence of androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer on the frequency and timing of fatal myocardial infarctions.  J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(17):2420-2425. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.09.3369PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    18.
    Donovan  KA, Walker  LM, Wassersug  RJ, Thompson  LMA, Robinson  JW.  Psychological effects of androgen-deprivation therapy on men with prostate cancer and their partners.  Cancer. 2015;121(24):4286-4299. doi:10.1002/cncr.29672PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    19.
    Gandy  S, Almeida  OP, Fonte  J,  et al.  Chemical andropause and amyloid-β peptide.  JAMA. 2001;285(17):2195-2196. doi:10.1001/jama.285.17.2195-aPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    20.
    Levine  GN, D’Amico  AV, Berger  P,  et al; American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, the American Cancer Society, and the American Urological Association.  Androgen-deprivation therapy in prostate cancer and cardiovascular risk: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and American Urological Association: endorsed by the American Society for Radiation Oncology.  CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60(3):194-201. doi:10.3322/caac.20061PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    21.
    Scailteux  L-M, Naudet  F, Alimi  Q, Vincendeau  S, Oger  E.  Mortality, cardiovascular risk, and androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic review with direct and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.  Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(24):e3873. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003873PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    22.
    Taylor  LG, Canfield  SE, Du  XL.  Review of major adverse effects of androgen-deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer.  Cancer. 2009;115(11):2388-2399. doi:10.1002/cncr.24283PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    23.
    Gaztañaga  M, Crook  J.  Androgen deprivation therapy: minimizing exposure and mitigating side effects.  J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012;10(9):1088-1095. doi:10.6004/jnccn.2012.0115PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    24.
    Warren  JL, Klabunder  CN, Schrag  D, Bach  PB, Riley  GF.  Overview of the SEER-Medicare data-content, research application and generalizability to the United States elderly population.  Med Care. 2002;40(8):3-18. doi:10.1097/00005650-200208001-00002PubMedGoogle Scholar
    25.
    Shahinian  VB, Kuo  YF, Freeman  JL, Goodwin  JS.  Risk of fracture after androgen deprivation for prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2005;352(2):154-164. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041943PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    26.
    Klabunde  C, Warren  J, Legler  J.  Assessing comorbidity using claims data-an overview.  Med Care. 2002;40(8):26-35. doi:10.1097/00005650-200208001-00004PubMedGoogle Scholar
    27.
    Allison  PD.  Logistic Regression—Using the SAS System: Theory and Application. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1999.
    28.
    Spreeuwenberg  MD, Bartak  A, Croon  MA,  et al.  The multiple propensity score as control for bias in the comparison of more than two treatment arms: an introduction from a case study in mental health.  Med Care. 2010;48(2):166-174. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181c1328fPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    29.
    Green  WH.  Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2000.
    30.
    Johnston  KM, Gustafson  P, Levy  AR, Grootendorst  P.  Use of instrumental variables in the analysis of generalized linear models in the presence of unmeasured confounding with applications to epidemiological research.  Stat Med. 2008;27(9):1539-1556. doi:10.1002/sim.3036PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    31.
    Schmid  M, Sammon  JD, Reznor  G,  et al.  Dose-dependent effect of androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer on adverse cardiac events.  BJU Int. 2016;118(2):221-229. doi:10.1111/bju.13203PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    32.
    Gonzalez  BD, Jim  HSL, Booth-Jones  M,  et al.  Course and predictors of cognitive function in patients with prostate cancer receiving androgen-deprivation therapy: a controlled comparison.  J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(18):2021-2027. doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.60.1963PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    33.
    Keating  NL, O’Malley  AJ, Smith  MR.  Diabetes and cardiovascular disease during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.  J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(27):4448-4456. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.06.2497PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    34.
    Gandaglia  G, Sun  M, Popa  I,  et al.  The impact of the androgen deprivation therapy on the risk of coronary heart disease in patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer: a population-based study.  BJU Int. 2014;114(6b):E82-E89. doi:10.1111/bju.12732PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    35.
    Nead  KT, Gaskin  G, Chester  C,  et al.  Androgen deprivation therapy and future Alzheimer’s disease risk.  J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(6):566-571. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.63.6266PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    36.
    Nead  KT, Gaskin  G, Chester  C, Swisher-McClure  S, Leeper  NJ, Shah  NH.  Association between androgen deprivation therapy and risk of dementia.  JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(1):49-55. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3662PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    37.
    Kao  LT, Lin  HC, Chung  SD,  et al.  No increased risk of dementia in patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a 5-year follow-up study.  Asian J Androl. 2017;19(4):414-417.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    38.
    Blennow  K, de Leon  MJ, Zetterberg  H.  Alzheimer’s disease.  Lancet. 2006;368(9533):387-403. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69113-7PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    39.
    Berg  D. Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases: progress and new perspectives. Paper presented at: Eighth International Conference on AD/PD; March 14-18, 2007; Salzburg, Austria.
    40.
    Rost  K, Smith  R, Matthews  DB, Guise  B.  The deliberate misdiagnosis of major depression in primary care.  Arch Fam Med. 1994;3(4):333-337. doi:10.1001/archfami.3.4.333PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    41.
    Smith  MR, Saad  F, Chowdhury  S,  et al; SPARTAN Investigators.  Apalutamide treatment and metastasis-free survival in prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2018;378(15):1408-1418. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1715546PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    42.
    Hussain  M, Fizazi  K, Saad  F,  et al.  Enzalutamide in men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2018;378(26):2465-2474. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1800536PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
    ×