Ed that anything similar between Clofarabine DNA/RNA synthesis inhibitor arms.70 other big e randomized Intergroup 1386 M Men with biochemical progression.1 year after the first or salvage RT IAD or continuous treatment to test the non-inferiority of IAS in terms of OS. SAI was prescribed for 8 months in each cycle, and was subsequently The end for the initiation of the subsequent Re ADT at PSA reaches 10 ng treatment au Arrested OUTSIDE ML21. After a median follow-up period of 6.9 Years was the median overall survival 8.8 years vs. 9.1 years for the arms of the IAD and continuous respectively. More illness and less Todesf Ll have occurred in non-arm of the IAD. Moreover, the development time of castration resistance statistically significant l singer on the arm of the IAD. The only difference in adverse events between the arms of the study was the reduced H FREQUENCY of hot flashes in patients who IAD.71 need during the phase III studies will attempt to Ren, the small matter, Also at M Nnern with advanced prostate cancer. Based on the results of two large randomized studies suggest s that the IAD can not survive less than a continuous therapeutic approach to the progression of prostate cancer and that, and is profitable definitelymore. These questions relate to whether a specific population of patients who benefit most from this approach should be the optimal therapy that should be used, and the PSA value at which the treatment is interrupted and then resumed. Furthermore, if the administration kardiovaskul Ren effects of ADT may cancel the survival equivalence between the IAD and continuous ADT are unclear. Patterns of ADT prescription patterns for the use of ADT for different indications have changed since its launch time. The verst Markets use of ADT in the 1990s was found to occur at all stages and histological types of prostate cancer, and was the gr Th in patients aged 80 years or greater.72 Another study using SEER Medicare Data from 1991 to 2005 found a widespread use of ADT increase in the 1990s and peaked in 2000 and the fall in W 2005.73 during a period of relative stability t in the Besch EMPLOYMENT 2000-2002, 44 , 8% of men with prostate cancer, ADT M w incident prescribed during the first year after diagnosis: h ufigsten the indications being with RT as an adjuvant and as a primary treatment re. Pr Exposed predictors of ADT with a lower risk were age, stage and grade h Ago, and obtained Hten PSA levels.73 alarming Ver Modification of these models has been shown to Ver Changes to be associated Ver Changes in the reimbursement policy policies.74 may affect the financial incentives for doctors with the prescription of ADT and connected, the determination of ADT use in R fill benefit.75 uncertain effect on the m adjusted effects of the introduction of the GMG, Medicare, leading to a reduction in the reimbursement of ADT for prostate Abiraterone P450 inhibitor cancer, was developed by using SEER Medicare data for 2003 to 2005. This law reduced reimbursement for GnRH agonistsmoderately in 2004, but dramatically in 2005 for a total reduction of 50% between 2003 and 2005. In this analysis, the use of ADT as a primary Re treatment at M Nnern with localized low-grade carcinomas tomoderate was considered inappropriate, but it was considered appropriate as adjunctive therapy at RT for M Men with locally advanced cancers. The use of ADT was as.