Videos

1 expert is featured in this series.

A panelist discusses how both the ARCHES and ARANOTE trials demonstrated significant improvements in radiographic progression-free survival with their respective novel hormonal therapies (enzalutamide in ARCHES and apalutamide in ARANOTE) when added to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, with consistent benefits observed across key subgroups and generally manageable safety profiles.

1 expert is featured in this series.

A panelist discusses how the ARCHES and ARANOTE trials differ in their fundamental design elements, with ARCHES evaluating enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) vs placebo plus ADT in both metastatic and nonmetastatic patients, whereas ARANOTE specifically studied darolutamide and ADT vs ADT alone in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

1 expert in this video

A panelist discusses how benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treatment has evolved to include a spectrum of minimally invasive and surgical interventions, ranging from emerging technologies like prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) to more established resective surgical techniques such as transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP), Aquablation, and Greenlight XPS, providing urologists with a diverse array of options tailored to individual patient characteristics, prostate size, and specific clinical needs.

1 expert is featured in this series.

A panelist discusses how Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison (MAIC) analyses are limited by potential unmeasured confounding factors, small effective sample sizes after matching, and reliance on published aggregate data, which should be carefully considered when interpreting findings as complementary rather than definitive evidence for treatment decisions.

1 expert is featured in this series.

A panelist discusses how MAIC (Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison) methodology addresses the lack of head-to-head clinical trials in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) by adjusting for differences in patient characteristics across separate studies to enable more reliable indirect treatment comparisons.