Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Clinical Trial

Efficacy and safety of finasteride therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a 2-year randomized controlled trial (the PROSPECT study). PROscar Safety Plus Efficacy Canadian Two year Study

J. C. Nickel, Y. Fradet, R. C. Boake, P. J. Pommerville, J. P. Perreault, S. K. Afridi and M. M. Elhilali
CMAJ November 01, 1996 155 (9) 1251-1259;
J. C. Nickel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Y. Fradet
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. C. Boake
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P. J. Pommerville
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. P. Perreault
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. K. Afridi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M. M. Elhilali
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 years' treatment of moderate benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with finasteride. DESIGN: Double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicentre, prospective randomized study. SETTING: Outpatient care in 28 centres across Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Men aged 45 to 80, in good health, with moderate BPH and no evidence of prostate cancer. A total of 613 men were entered into the study; 472 completed the 2 years of treatment. INTERVENTION: After 1 month of receiving a placebo (run-in period), patients were given either finasteride (5 mg/d) or a placebo for 2 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: Efficacy: changes from baseline in BPH symptom scores, maximum urinary flow rates and prostate volume. Safety: onset, course and resolution of all adverse events during the treatment period. RESULTS: In the efficacy analyses the mean BPH symptom scores decreased 2.1 points (from 15.8 to 13.7) in the finasteride group, as compared with a decrease of 0.7 points (from 16.6 to 15.9) in the placebo group (P < or = 0.01). The maximum urinary flow rate increased by a mean of 1.4 mL/s (from 11.1 to 12.5 mL/s) in the finasteride group, as compared with an increase of 0.3 mL/s (from 10.9 to 11.2 mL/s) in the placebo group (p < or = 0.01). The mean prostate volume decreased by 21% (from a mean volume of 44.1 cm3 at baseline) in the treatment group; it increased by 8.4% (from a mean volume of 45.8 cm3 at baseline) in the placebo group (p < or = 0.01). In the safety analysis, the proportion of patients who experienced any adverse event was similar in the two groups (81.0% in the treatment group and 81.2% in the placebo group). However, the incidence of adverse events related to sexual dysfunction were significantly higher in the finasteride group than in the placebo group (ejaculation disorder 7.7% v. 1.7% and impotence 15.8% v. 6.3%; p < or = 0.01 for both parameters). CONCLUSION: Finasteride is a well-tolerated and effective alternative to watchful waiting in the treatment of moderate BPH.

  • Copyright © 1996 by Canadian Medical Association
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 155, Issue 9
1 Nov 1996
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Efficacy and safety of finasteride therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a 2-year randomized controlled trial (the PROSPECT study). PROscar Safety Plus Efficacy Canadian Two year Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Efficacy and safety of finasteride therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a 2-year randomized controlled trial (the PROSPECT study). PROscar Safety Plus Efficacy Canadian Two year Study
J. C. Nickel, Y. Fradet, R. C. Boake, P. J. Pommerville, J. P. Perreault, S. K. Afridi, M. M. Elhilali
CMAJ Nov 1996, 155 (9) 1251-1259;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Efficacy and safety of finasteride therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a 2-year randomized controlled trial (the PROSPECT study). PROscar Safety Plus Efficacy Canadian Two year Study
J. C. Nickel, Y. Fradet, R. C. Boake, P. J. Pommerville, J. P. Perreault, S. K. Afridi, M. M. Elhilali
CMAJ Nov 1996, 155 (9) 1251-1259;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Measuring symptomatic relief in men with lower urinary tract symptoms
  • Use of 5-{alpha}-Reductase Inhibitors for Prostate Cancer Chemoprevention: American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Urological Association 2008 Clinical Practice Guideline
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Canadian atrial fibrillation anticoagulation study: were the patients subsequently treated with warfarin? Canadian Atrial Fibrillation Anticoagulation Study Group
  • Factors determining compliance with screening mammography
Show more Clinical Trial

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of the resources on this site in an accessible format, please contact us at cmajgroup@cmaj.ca.

Powered by HighWire