Experts discuss strengths and limits of real-world studies for prostate cancer drug comparisons

Experts highlighted that observational and propensity-matched analyses are increasingly used to compare treatments for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.

They noted that such real-world evidence can fill gaps left by randomized trials, but warned about biases from patient selection, data completeness, and confounding factors.

The panel suggested that rigorous data curation and statistical adjustment improve reliability, and that regulators and clinicians should view these studies as complementary to trial data rather than replacements.