
Opinion|Videos|May 2, 2025
Treatment Decisions in Patients With Low- vs High-Volume Disease
Author(s)Arun Azad, PhD, MBBS
A panelist discusses how these comparative results could influence clinical decision-making by suggesting potentially different magnitudes of benefit between enzalutamide and darolutamide depending on disease volume, with the treatment effect differences possibly being more pronounced in high-volume disease patients, although individual patient factors should still guide personalized therapy selection.
Advertisement
Episodes in this series

Summary for Physicians: Treatment Decisions Based on Disease Volume
The impact of disease volume (high vs low) on treatment selection:
- Both androgen receptor (AR) pathway inhibitors (enzalutamide and darolutamide) demonstrate benefit regardless of disease volume.
- The magnitude of benefit may differ between high-volume and low-volume disease subgroups.
- In high-volume disease: Consider more aggressive approaches; combination therapy may provide more substantial benefits.
- In low-volume disease: AR pathway inhibitors show particularly favorable outcomes, potentially allowing some patients to delay chemotherapy.
Clinical decision-making implications:
- Disease volume should be 1 factor among several in treatment selection.
- Individual patient characteristics (age, comorbidities, performance status) remain critical considerations.
- Treatment goals (rapid disease control vs quality-of-life prioritization) may vary based on disease burden.
- Regular reassessment of disease status is important as volume can change over time.
Treatment decisions should be individualized through shared decision-making that considers disease volume alongside other patient-specific factors.
Advertisement
Related to this article

Jessica Rett, PhD, joins Adam B. Weiner, MD, to discuss how medical terminology and common metaphors shape patient understanding and communication in cancer care.

Aaron Berger, MD, discusses testosterone recovery after prostate cancer therapy interruption and its implications for quality of life, PSA kinetics, and treatment decisions.

Kiran Sury, MD, discusses patient selection, durability, and adverse events with ProACT for male stress urinary incontinence.

The designation was supported by findings from the phase 2 Co-PSMA trial, the phase 1/2 COBRA trial, and real-world evidence.

American Cancer Society updates prostate cancer screening guidelines, recommends regular PSA testing
The updated guidance recommends routine PSA-based screening every 2 years for average-risk men aged 50 to 69 years and annual screening beginning at age 45 for Black men or men with a strong family history of prostate cancer.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Trending on Urology Times
1
Treatment interruptions in prostate cancer: Balancing PSA kinetics and quality of life
2
FDA approves durvalumab plus enfortumab vedotin for cisplatin-ineligible MIBC
3
American Cancer Society updates prostate cancer screening guidelines, recommends regular PSA testing
4
The UroOnc Minute: The Role of Language in Cancer Care, With Jessica Rett, PhD
5


