Search

Purpose: We have previously developed and externally validated a prognostic model of overall survival (OS) in men with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with docetaxel. We sought to externally validate this model in a broader group of men with docetaxel-naïve mCRPC and in specific subgroups (White, Black, Asian patients, different age groups, and specific treatments) and to classify patients into validated two and three prognostic risk groupings on the basis of the model., Methods: Data from 8,083 docetaxel-naïve mCRPC men randomly assigned on seven phase III trials were used to validate the prognostic model of OS. We assessed the predictive performance of the model by computing the time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (tAUC) and validated the two-risk (low and high) and three-risk prognostic groups (low, intermediate, and high)., Results: The tAUC was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.75), and when adjusting for the first-line androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor trial status, the tAUC was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.76). Similar results were observed by the different racial, age, and treatment subgroups. In patients enrolled on first-line AR inhibitor trials, the median OS (months) in the low-, intermediate-, and high-prognostic risk groups were 43.3 (95% CI, 40.7 to 45.8), 27.7 (95% CI, 25.8 to 31.3), and 15.4 (95% CI, 14.0 to 17.9), respectively. Compared with the low-risk prognostic group, the hazard ratios for the high- and intermediate-risk groups were 4.3 (95% CI, 3.6 to 5.1; P < .0001) and 1.9 (95% CI, 1.7 to 2.1; P < .0001)., Conclusion: This prognostic model for OS in docetaxel-naïve men with mCRPC has been validated using data from seven trials and yields similar results overall and across race, age, and different treatment classes. The prognostic risk groups are robust and can be used to identify groups of patients for enrichment designs and for stratification in randomized clinical trials.

Purpose: As prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) becomes increasingly available in the United States, the greater sensitivity of the technology in comparison to conventional imaging poses challenges for clinical trials. The NCI Clinical Imaging Steering Committee (CISC) PSMA PET Working Group was convened to coordinate the identification of these challenges in various clinical scenarios and to develop consensus recommendations on how best to integrate PSMA PET into ongoing and upcoming National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) trials., Methods: NCI CISC and NCI Genitourinary Steering Committee members and leadership nominated clinicians, biostatisticians, patient advocates, and other imaging experts for inclusion in the PSMA PET Working Group. From April to July 2021, the working group met independently and in conjunction with the CISC to frame challenges, including stage migration, response assessment, trial logistics, and statistical challenges, and to discuss proposed solutions. An anonymous, open-ended survey was distributed to members to collect feedback on challenges faced. Representatives from each NCTN group were invited to present an overview of affected trials. From these discussions, the consensus document was developed and circulated for the inclusion of multiple rounds of feedback from both the Working Group and CISC., Results: The current consensus document outlines the key challenges for clinical prostate cancer trials resulting from the increasing availability of PSMA PET. We discuss implications for patient selection and definition of end points and provide guidance and potential solutions for different clinical scenarios, particularly with regard to best practices in defining eligibility criteria and outcome measures., Recommendations: This article provides guidance regarding clinical trial design and conduct, and the interpretation of trial results., Competing Interests: Thomas A. HopeStock and Other Ownership Interests: RayzeBioHonoraria: GE HealthcareConsulting or Advisory Role: Ipsen, Curium Pharma, Blue Earth DiagnosticsResearch Funding: Philipps Healthcare, GE Healthcare, Advanced Accelerator Applications, Clovis OncologyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: GE Healthcare William K. KellyHonoraria: Janssen OncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & DohmeResearch Funding: Sanofi, Novartis, Janssen Oncology, Bayer, Exelixis, Seattle Genetics, Endocyte, Amgen, BioClin Therapeutics, Sarah Cannon Research Institute, RocheTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme Jeff M. MichalskiStock and Other Ownership Interests: ViewRay (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: Mevion Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Blue Earth DiagnosticsResearch Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Boston Scientific, Merck Sharp & DohmeOpen Payment Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/221723 Seth P. LernerStock and Other Ownership Interests: C2i genomicsHonoraria: Annenberg Center for Health Sciences, at Eisenhower (ACHS), UroToday, Grand Rounds in Urology, Ology Medical Education, Clinical Care OptionsConsulting or Advisory Role: Vaxiion, Urogen Pharma, Verity Pharmaceuticals, Roche/Genentech, Ferring, Merck Sharp & Dohme, FerGene, Pfizer/EMD Serono, C2i genomics, Aura Biosciences, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Endo Pharmaceuticals, FKD Therapies, Viventia Biotech, Roche/Genentech, Japan BCG Laboratory, Urogen Pharma, Vaxiion, QED TherapeuticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: TCGA expression subtype single patient classifierOther Relationship: UpToDate, Bladder Cancer Journal Daniel W. LinConsulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma, Lantheus Medical Imaging, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: GenomeDx (Inst), MDxHealth (Inst), Magforce (Inst) Evan Y. YuConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Bayer, Merck, Clovis Oncology, Advanced Accelerator Applications, ExelixisResearch Funding: Dendreon (Inst), Merck (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Daiichi Sankyo (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Blue Earth Diagnostics (Inst), Bayer (Inst), Lantheus Medical Imaging (Inst) Ronald C. ChenConsulting or Advisory Role: Medivation/Astellas, Accuray, Bayer, Blue Earth Diagnostics, AbbVie, Myovant Sciences, Genentech, PfizerResearch Funding: Accuray Gillian C. BeachEmployment: Emmes Company, LLCNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Germline testing (GT) is a central feature of prostate cancer (PCA) treatment, management, and hereditary cancer assessment. Critical needs include optimized multigene testing strategies that incorporate evolving genetic data, consistency in GT indications and management, and alternate genetic evaluation models that address the rising demand for genetic services., Methods: A multidisciplinary consensus conference that included experts, stakeholders, and national organization leaders was convened in response to current practice challenges and to develop a genetic implementation framework. Evidence review informed questions using the modified Delphi model. The final framework included criteria with strong (> 75%) agreement (Recommend) or moderate (50% to 74%) agreement (Consider)., Results: Large germline panels and somatic testing were recommended for metastatic PCA. Reflex testing-initial testing of priority genes followed by expanded testing-was suggested for multiple scenarios. Metastatic disease or family history suggestive of hereditary PCA was recommended for GT. Additional family history and pathologic criteria garnered moderate consensus. Priority genes to test for metastatic disease treatment included BRCA2, BRCA1, and mismatch repair genes, with broader testing, such as ATM , for clinical trial eligibility. BRCA2 was recommended for active surveillance discussions. Screening starting at age 40 years or 10 years before the youngest PCA diagnosis in a family was recommended for BRCA2 carriers, with consideration in HOXB13, BRCA1, ATM , and mismatch repair carriers. Collaborative (point-of-care) evaluation models between health care and genetic providers was endorsed to address the genetic counseling shortage. The genetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade testing, and technology-based approaches., Conclusion: This multidisciplinary, consensus-driven PCA genetic implementation framework provides novel guidance to clinicians and patients tailored to the precision era. Multiple research, education, and policy needs remain of importance.

Purpose: Several studies have reported that among patients with localized prostate cancer, black men have a shorter overall survival (OS) time than white men, but few data exist for men with advanced prostate cancer. The primary goal of this analysis was to compare the OS in black and white men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who were treated in phase III clinical trials with docetaxel plus prednisone (DP) or a DP-containing regimen., Methods: Individual participant data from 8,820 men with mCRPC randomly assigned in nine phase III trials to DP or a DP-containing regimen were combined. Race was based on self-report. The primary end point was OS. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess the prognostic importance of race (black v white) adjusted for established risk factors common across the trials (age, prostate-specific antigen, performance status, alkaline phosphatase, hemoglobin, and sites of metastases)., Results: Of 8,820 men, 7,528 (85%) were white, 500 (6%) were black, 424 (5%) were Asian, and 368 (4%) were of unknown race. Black men were younger and had worse performance status, higher testosterone and prostate-specific antigen, and lower hemoglobin than white men. Despite these differences, the median OS was 21.0 months (95% CI, 19.4 to 22.5 months) versus 21.2 months (95% CI, 20.8 to 21.7 months) in black and white men, respectively. The pooled multivariable hazard ratio of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.91) demonstrates that overall, black men have a statistically significant decreased risk of death compared with white men ( P < .001)., Conclusion: When adjusted for known prognostic factors, we observed a statistically significant increased OS in black versus white men with mCRPC who were enrolled in these clinical trials. The mechanism for these differences is not known.

Purpose Guidelines are limited for genetic testing for prostate cancer (PCA). The goal of this conference was to develop an expert consensus-driven working framework for comprehensive genetic evaluation of inherited PCA in the multigene testing era addressing genetic counseling, testing, and genetically informed management. Methods An expert consensus conference was convened including key stakeholders to address genetic counseling and testing, PCA screening, and management informed by evidence review. Results Consensus was strong that patients should engage in shared decision making for genetic testing. There was strong consensus to test HOXB13 for suspected hereditary PCA, BRCA1/2 for suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and DNA mismatch repair genes for suspected Lynch syndrome. There was strong consensus to factor BRCA2 mutations into PCA screening discussions. BRCA2 achieved moderate consensus for factoring into early-stage management discussion, with stronger consensus in high-risk/advanced and metastatic setting. Agreement was moderate to test all men with metastatic castration-resistant PCA, regardless of family history, with stronger agreement to test BRCA1/2 and moderate agreement to test ATM to inform prognosis and targeted therapy. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive, multidisciplinary consensus statement to address a genetic evaluation framework for inherited PCA in the multigene testing era. Future research should focus on developing a working definition of familial PCA for clinical genetic testing, expanding understanding of genetic contribution to aggressive PCA, exploring clinical use of genetic testing for PCA management, genetic testing of African American males, and addressing the value framework of genetic evaluation and testing men at risk for PCA-a clinically heterogeneous disease.

Purpose: Reports have suggested that metastatic site is an important predictor of overall survival (OS) in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), but these were based on a limited number of patients. We investigate the impact of site of metastases on OS of a substantial sample of men with mCRPC who received docetaxel chemotherapy in nine phase III trials., Patients and Methods: Individual patient data from 8,820 men with mCRPC enrolled onto nine phase III trials were combined. Site of metastases was categorized as lymph node (LN) only, bone with or without LN (with no visceral metastases), any lung metastases (but no liver), and any liver metastases., Results: Most patients had bone with or without LN metastases (72.8%), followed by visceral disease (20.8%) and LN-only disease (6.4%). Men with liver metastases had the worst median OS (13.5 months). Although men with lung metastases had better median OS (19.4 months) compared with men with liver metastases, they had significantly worse median survival duration than men with nonvisceral bone metastases (21.3 months). Men with LN-only disease had a median OS of 31.6 months. The pooled hazard ratios for death in men with lung metastases compared with men with bone with or without LN metastases and in men with any liver metastases compared with men with lung metastases were 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.25; P = .007) and 1.52 (95% CI, 1.35 to 1.73; P < .0001), respectively., Conclusion: Specific sites of metastases in men with mCRPC are associated with differential OS, with successive increased lethality for lung and liver metastases compared with bone and nonvisceral involvement. These data may help in treatment decisions, the design of future clinical trials, and understanding the variation in biology of different sites of metastases in men with mCRPC., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Evolving treatments, disease phenotypes, and biology, together with a changing drug development environment, have created the need to revise castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) clinical trial recommendations to succeed those from prior Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Groups., Methods: An international expert committee of prostate cancer clinical investigators (the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 [PCWG3]) was reconvened and expanded and met in 2012-2015 to formulate updated criteria on the basis of emerging trial data and validation studies of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 recommendations., Results: PCWG3 recommends that baseline patient assessment include tumor histology, detailed records of prior systemic treatments and responses, and a detailed reporting of disease subtypes based on an anatomic pattern of metastatic spread. New recommendations for trial outcome measures include the time to event end point of symptomatic skeletal events, as well as time to first metastasis and time to progression for trials in the nonmetastatic CRPC state. PCWG3 introduces the concept of no longer clinically benefiting to underscore the distinction between first evidence of progression and the clinical need to terminate or change treatment, and the importance of documenting progression in existing lesions as distinct from the development of new lesions. Serial biologic profiling using tumor samples from biopsies, blood-based diagnostics, and/or imaging is also recommended to gain insight into mechanisms of resistance and to identify predictive biomarkers of sensitivity for use in prospective trials., Conclusion: PCWG3 moves drug development closer to unmet needs in clinical practice by focusing on disease manifestations most likely to affect prognosis adversely for therapeutics tested in both nonmetastatic and metastatic CRPC populations. Consultation with regulatory authorities is recommended if a trial is intended to seek support for drug approval., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC); however, it is infrequently adopted in practice because of concerns regarding toxicity and delay to cystectomy. We hypothesized that three cycles of neoadjuvant accelerated methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (AMVAC) would be safe, shorten the time to surgery, and yield similar pathologic complete response (pT0) rates compared with historical controls., Patients and Methods: Patients with cT2-T4a and N0-N1 MIBC were eligible and received three cycles of AMVAC with pegfilgrastim followed by radical cystectomy with lymph node dissection. The primary end point was pT0 rate. Telomere length (TL) and p53 mutation status were correlated with response and toxicity., Results: Forty-four patients were accrued; 60% had stage III to IV disease; median age was 64 years. Forty patients were evaluable for response, with 15 (38%; 95% CI, 23% to 53%) showing pT0 at cystectomy, meeting the primary end point of the study. Another six patients (14%) were downstaged to non-muscle invasive disease. Most (82%) experienced only grade 1 to 2 treatment-related toxicities. There were no grade 3 or 4 renal toxicities and no treatment-related deaths. One patient developed metastases and thus did not undergo cystectomy; all others (n = 43) proceeded to cystectomy within 8 weeks after last chemotherapy administration. Median time from start of chemotherapy to cystectomy was 9.7 weeks. TL and p53 mutation did not predict response or toxicity., Conclusion: AMVAC is well tolerated and results in similar pT0 rates with 6 weeks of treatment compared with standard 12-week regimens. Further analysis is ongoing to ascertain whether molecular alterations in tumor samples can predict response to chemotherapy., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Zoledronic acid decreases the risk for skeletal-related events (SREs) in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases but its role earlier in the natural history of the disease is unknown. This phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of earlier treatment with zoledronic acid in men with castration-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: Men with castration-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases whose androgen-deprivation therapy was initiated within 6 months of study entry were randomly assigned in a blinded 1:1 ratio to receive zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 4 weeks) or a placebo. After their disease progressed to castration-resistant status, all patients received open-label treatment with zoledronic acid. The primary end point was time to first SRE, defined as radiation to bone, clinical fracture, spinal cord compression, surgery to bone, or death as a result of prostate cancer. Target accrual was 680 patients. Primary analysis was planned after 470 SREs. The study was discontinued prematurely (645 patients; 299 SREs) after the corporate supporter withdrew study drug supply., Results: Early zoledronic acid was not associated with increased time to first SRE. The median time to first SRE was 31.9 months in the zoledronic acid group (95% CI, 24.2 to 40.3) and 29.8 months in the placebo group (95% CI, 25.3 to 37.2; hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0 to 1.17; one-sided stratified log-rank P = .39). Overall survival was similar between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.12; P = .29). Rates of adverse events were similar between the groups., Conclusion: In men with castration-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases, early treatment with zoledronic acid was not associated with lower risk for SREs.

Purpose: Prognostic models for overall survival (OS) for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are dated and do not reflect significant advances in treatment options available for these patients. This work developed and validated an updated prognostic model to predict OS in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy., Methods: Data from a phase III trial of 1,050 patients with mCRPC were used (Cancer and Leukemia Group B CALGB-90401 [Alliance]). The data were randomly split into training and testing sets. A separate phase III trial served as an independent validation set. Adaptive least absolute shrinkage and selection operator selected eight factors prognostic for OS. A predictive score was computed from the regression coefficients and used to classify patients into low- and high-risk groups. The model was assessed for its predictive accuracy using the time-dependent area under the curve (tAUC)., Results: The model included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease site, lactate dehydrogenase, opioid analgesic use, albumin, hemoglobin, prostate-specific antigen, and alkaline phosphatase. Median OS values in the high- and low-risk groups, respectively, in the testing set were 17 and 30 months (hazard ratio [HR], 2.2; P < .001); in the validation set they were 14 and 26 months (HR, 2.9; P < .001). The tAUCs were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.73) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.76) in the testing and validation sets, respectively., Conclusion: An updated prognostic model for OS in patients with mCRPC receiving first-line chemotherapy was developed and validated on an external set. This model can be used to predict OS, as well as to better select patients to participate in trials on the basis of their prognosis.

Purpose: A randomized, placebo-controlled study based on preclinical and clinical data that supports the potential role of vascular endothelial growth factor in prostate cancer was performed to evaluate the addition of bevacizumab to standard docetaxel and prednisone therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)., Patients and Methods: Patients with chemotherapy-naive progressive mCRPC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) over 1 hour for 21 days plus prednisone 5 mg orally twice per day (DP) with either bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks (DP + B) or placebo. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen, objective response (OR), and toxicity., Results: In total, 1,050 patients were randomly assigned. The median OS for patients given DP + B was 22.6 months compared with 21.5 months for patients treated with DP (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.05; stratified log-rank P = .181). The median PFS time was superior in the DP + B arm (9.9 v 7.5 months, stratified log-rank P < .001) as was the proportion of patients with OR (49.4% v 35.5%; P = .0013). Grade 3 or greater treatment-related toxicity was more common with DP + B (75.4% v 56.2%; P ≤ .001), as was the number of treatment-related deaths (4.0% v 1.2%; P = .005)., Conclusion: Despite an improvement in PFS and OR, the addition of bevacizumab to docetaxel and prednisone did not improve OS in men with mCRPC and was associated with greater toxicity.

Purpose: Early studies of patients with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer (CRMPC) suggest that chemotherapy administered with a dose of a bone-seeking radiopharmaceutical is superior to chemotherapy alone. To build on this strategy and fully integrate a repetitively dosed bone-seeking radiopharmaceutical into a contemporary chemotherapy regimen, we conducted a phase I study of docetaxel and samarium-153 ((153)Sm) lexidronam., Patients and Methods: Men with progressive CRMPC were eligible. Cohorts of three to six patients were defined by dose escalations as follows: docetaxel 65, 70, 75, 75, 75 mg/m(2) and (153)Sm ethylenediaminetetramethylenephosphonate (EDTMP) 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.75, 1 mCi/kg. Each cycle lasted a minimum of 6 (cohorts 1 through 5) or 9 (cohort 6) weeks. Docetaxel was administered on days 1 and 22 (and day 43 for cohort 6), and (153)Sm-EDTMP was administered on day -1 to 1 of each cycle. Patients with acceptable hematologic toxicities were eligible to receive additional cycles until progression., Results: Twenty-eight men were treated in six cohorts. Maximum-tolerated dose was not reached, because full doses of both agents were well tolerated, even using an every-6-week dosing schedule of (153)Sm-EDTMP. Patients received an average of 5.6 docetaxel doses (range, one to 13 doses) and 2.9 (153)Sm-EDTMP doses (range, one to six doses). Fifteen patients demonstrated a more than 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen. Treatment significantly reduced indices of bone deposition and resorption., Conclusion: Docetaxel and (153)Sm-EDTMP can be combined safely at full doses over repeated cycles. Responses were seen in the small group of patients with taxane-resistant disease tested. The optimal phase II doses for patients with taxane-naïve disease may differ from those optimal for patients with taxane-resistant disease.

Purpose: MLN2704 is an immunoconjugate designed to deliver the maytansinoid antimicrotubule agent drug maytansinoid-1 directly to prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-expressing cells via the PSMA-targeted monoclonal antibody MLN591. This novel immunoconjugate has shown cytotoxic anti-prostate cancer activity. This study investigated the safety profile, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and preliminary antitumor activity of MLN2704., Patients and Methods: Patients with progressive, metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer received MLN2704 intravenously over 2.5 hours. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and antitumor activity were assessed., Results: Twenty-three patients received MLN2704 at doses of 18 to 343 mg/m(2). Eighteen of these patients received >or= three doses at 4-week intervals. Pharmacokinetics of conjugate levels were dose proportional. There was no correlation between clearance and body-surface area. MLN2704 was nonimmunogenic. Study drug-related grade 3 toxicities occurred in three (13%) of 23 patients, including uncomplicated febrile neutropenia (the only DLT) in one patient, reversible elevations in hepatic transaminases, leukopenia, and lymphopenia. No grade 4 toxicities were observed. The most frequent grade 1 or 2 toxicities included fatigue, nausea, and diarrhea. Neuropathy occurred in eight (35%) of 23 patients, including five of six patients treated at 343 mg/m(2). Two (22%) of the nine patients treated at 264 or 343 mg/m(2) had sustained a more than 50% decrease in prostate-specific antigen versus baseline, accompanied by measurable tumor regression in the patient treated at 264 mg/m(2)., Conclusion: Therapeutic doses of MLN2704 can be administered safely on a repetitive basis. An MTD was not defined. MLN2704 is being administered at more frequent intervals in ongoing trials to determine an optimal dosing schedule.

Purpose: To update eligibility and outcome measures in trials that evaluate systemic treatment for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone., Methods: A committee of investigators experienced in conducting trials for prostate cancer defined new consensus criteria by reviewing previous criteria, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), and emerging trial data., Results: The Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2) recommends a two-objective paradigm: (1) controlling, relieving, or eliminating disease manifestations that are present when treatment is initiated and (2) preventing or delaying disease manifestations expected to occur. Prostate cancers progressing despite castrate levels of testosterone are considered castration resistant and not hormone refractory. Eligibility is defined using standard disease assessments to authenticate disease progression, prior treatment, distinct clinical subtypes, and predictive models. Outcomes are reported independently for prostate-specific antigen (PSA), imaging, and clinical measures, avoiding grouped categorizations such as complete or partial response. In most trials, early changes in PSA and/or pain are not acted on without other evidence of disease progression, and treatment should be continued for at least 12 weeks to ensure adequate drug exposure. Bone scans are reported as "new lesions" or "no new lesions," changes in soft-tissue disease assessed by RECIST, and pain using validated scales. Defining eligibility for prevent/delay end points requires attention to estimated event frequency and/or random assignment to a control group., Conclusion: PCWG2 recommends increasing emphasis on time-to-event end points (ie, failure to progress) as decision aids in proceeding from phase II to phase III trials. Recommendations will evolve as data are generated on the utility of intermediate end points to predict clinical benefit.

Purpose: To document the toxicity and activity of the histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) in patients with pretreated hematologic malignancies., Patients and Methods: Two formulations of SAHA (intravenous [IV] and oral) have been assessed in two consecutive phase I trials. In both trials, dose escalation was performed in parallel and independently in patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies. Eligible patients were required to have adequate hepatic and renal function, an absolute neutrophil count > or = 500/microL and a platelet count more than 25,000/mL. All patients provided informed consent for study inclusion., Results: A total of 39 patients with hematologic malignancy were enrolled (14 on IV SAHA and 25 on oral SAHA), of whom 35 were treated. The spectrum of diseases included patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n = 12), Hodgkin's disease (HD; n = 12), multiple myeloma (n = 2), T-cell lymphoma (n = 3), mantle cell lymphoma (n = 2), small lymphocytic lymphoma (n = 2), and myeloid leukemia (n = 2). Major adverse events with the oral formulation included fatigue, diarrhea, anorexia, and dehydration, whereas myelosuppression and thrombocytopenia were more prominent with the IV formulation. Typically, the hematologic toxicities resolved shortly after SAHA was stopped. There was no neutropenic fever or neutropenic sepsis. Reduction in measurable tumor was observed in five patients. One patient with transformed small lymphocytic lymphoma met criteria for complete response, whereas another met the criteria for partial response (PR). One patient with refractory HD had a PR, whereas three patients had stable disease for up to 9 months., Conclusion: These results suggest that SAHA has activity in hematologic malignancies including HD and select subtypes of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

High-risk tumors exhibit a more aggressive natural history and have higher positive margin and recurrence rates after radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy alone, where unimodality therapy likely represents undertreatment. Hence, the therapeutic ratio (patients who actually realize a survival benefit from a therapeutic intervention) may, therefore, be greater in high-risk disease if its natural history can be altered by multimodality therapy. It is, thus, important to investigate therapies that optimize complete extirpation of all cancer cells and reduce the incidence of positive surgical margins and disease recurrence. Neoadjuvant therapy extends the logic of early adjuvant therapy further by applying systemic therapy earlier in the course of the disease before definitive locoregional therapy. In prostate cancer, outcomes have not been improved significantly when neoadjuvant hormone therapy is used before surgery; although outcomes are improved when androgen ablation is combined with radiotherapy, many patients remain at risk for systemic recurrence. With recent data confirming improved survival data with docetaxel chemotherapy in metastatic disease, future trials are now focusing on earlier combinations of chemohormonal or biologic therapies in high-risk patients.

Purpose: To determine the safety, dosing schedules, pharmacokinetic profile, and biologic effect of orally administered histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) in patients with advanced cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with solid and hematologic malignancies were treated with oral SAHA administered once or twice a day on a continuous basis or twice daily for 3 consecutive days per week. Pharmacokinetic profile and bioavailibity of oral SAHA were determined. Western blots and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays of histones isolated from peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMNCs) pre and post-therapy were performed to evaluate target inhibition., Results: Seventy-three patients were treated with oral SAHA and major dose-limiting toxicities were anorexia, dehydration, diarrhea, and fatigue. The maximum tolerated dose was 400 mg qd and 200 mg bid for continuous daily dosing and 300 mg bid for 3 consecutive days per week dosing. Oral SAHA had linear pharmacokinetics from 200 to 600 mg, with an apparent half-life ranging from 91 to 127 minutes and 43% oral bioavailability. Histones isolated from PBMNCs showed consistent accumulation of acetylated histones post-therapy, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay demonstrated a trend towards a dose-dependent accumulation of acetylated histones from 200 to 600 mg of oral SAHA. There was one complete response, three partial responses, two unconfirmed partial responses, and 22 (30%) patients remained on study for 4 to 37+ months., Conclusions: Oral SAHA has linear pharmacokinetics and good bioavailability, inhibits histone deacetylase activity in PBMNCs, can be safely administered chronically, and has a broad range of antitumor activity.

Purpose: To evaluate the antitumor activity and safety of the epothilone B analog, ixabepilone, with or without estramustine phosphate (EMP), in chemotherapy-naive patients with progressive castrate metastatic prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ixabepilone (35 mg/m(2)) by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks with or without EMP 280 mg orally three times daily on days 1 to 5., Results: Between December 2001 and October 2003, 92 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment with ixabepilone alone (45 patients) or in combination with EMP (47 patients). Grades 3 and 4 toxicities experienced by more than 5% of patients included neutropenia (22%), fatigue (9%), and neuropathy (13%) on the ixabepilone arm, and neutropenia (29%), febrile neutropenia (9%), fatigue (9%), neuropathy (7%), and thrombosis (6%) on the ixabepilone + EMP arm. Post-treatment declines in prostate-specific antigen of > or = 50% were achieved in 21 of 44 patients (48%; 95% CI, 33% to 64%) on the ixabepilone arm, and 31 of 45 patients (69%; 95% CI, 55% to 82%) on the ixabepilone + EMP arm. In patients with measurable disease, partial responses were observed in eight of 25 patients (32%; 95% CI, 14% to 50%) on the ixabepilone arm, and 11 of 23 (48%; 95% CI, 27% to 68%) on the ixabepilone + EMP arm. Time to prostate-specific antigen progression was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 6.9 months) on the ixabepilone-alone arm and 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.5 to 6.8 months) on the combination arm., Conclusion: Ixabepilone, with or without estramustine phosphate, is well tolerated and has antitumor activity in patients with castrate metastatic prostate cancer.

Purpose: To define methodology to show clinical benefit for patients in the state of a rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA)., Hypothesis: A clinical states framework was used to address the hypothesis that definitive phase III trials could not be conducted in this patient population., Patient Population: The Group focused on men with systemic (nonlocalized) recurrence and a defined risk of developing clinically detectable metastases. Models to define systemic versus local recurrence, and risk of metastatic progression were discussed., Intervention: Therapies that have shown favorable effects in more advanced clinical states; meaningful biologic surrogates of activity linked with efficacy in other tumor types; and/or effects on a target or pathway known to contribute to prostate cancer progression in this state can be considered for evaluation., Outcomes: An intervention-specific posttherapy PSA-based outcome definition that would justify further testing should be described at the outset. Reporting: Trial reports should include a table showing the number of patients who achieve a specific PSA-based outcome, the number who remain enrolled onto the trial, and the number who came off study at different time points. The term PSA response should be abandoned., Trial Design: The phases of drug development for this state are optimizing dose and schedule, demonstration of a treatment effect, and clinical benefit. To move a drug forward should require a high bar that includes no rise in PSA in a defined proportion of patients for a specified period of time at a minimum. Agents that do not produce this effect can only be tested in combination. The preferred end point of clinical benefit is prostate cancer-specific survival; the time to development of metastatic disease is an alternative., Conclusion: Methodology to show that an intervention alters the natural history of prostate cancer is described. At each stage of development, only agents with sufficient activity should be moved forward.

Purpose: To develop a pretreatment prognostic model for survival of patients with progressive metastatic prostate cancer after castration using parameters that are measured during routine clinical management., Patients and Methods: Pretreatment clinical and biochemical determinants from 409 patients enrolled onto 19 consecutive therapeutic protocols from June 1989 through January 2000 were evaluated. The factors selected were age, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), hemoglobin (HGB), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), alkaline phosphatase (ALK), and albumin. These factors were combined in an accelerated failure time regression model to produce a nomogram to predict median, 1-year, and 2-year survival. The nomogram was validated internally and externally using data from a multicenter randomized trial of suramin plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone., Results: The median survival of the entire group was 15.8 months (range, 0.9 to 77.8 months); 87% have died. In multivariable analysis, KPS, HGB, ALK, albumin, and LDH were significantly associated with survival (P <.05), whereas age and PSA were not. All seven factors were included in the nomogram. When applied to the external validation data set, the nomogram achieved a concordance index of 0.67. Calibration plots suggested that the nomogram was well calibrated for all predictions., Conclusion: A nomogram derived from pretreatment parameters that are measured on a routine basis was constructed. It can be used to predict the median, 1-year, and 2-year survival of patients with progressive castrate metastatic disease with reasonable accuracy. The information is useful to assess prognosis, guide treatment selection, and design clinical trials.

Purpose: To determine the safety and activity of weekly paclitaxel in combination with estramustine and carboplatin (TEC) in patients with advanced prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: In a dose-escalation study, patients with advanced prostate cancer were administered paclitaxel (weekly 1-hour infusions of 60 to 100 mg/m(2)), oral estramustine (10 mg/kg), and carboplatin (area under the curve, 6 mg/mL-min every 4 weeks). Paclitaxel levels were determined 0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes and 18 hours after infusion, and a concentration-time curve was estimated. Once a safe dose was established, a multi-institutional phase II trial was conducted in patients with progressive androgen-independent disease., Results: Fifty-six patients with progressive androgen-independent disease were treated for a median of four cycles. The dose of paclitaxel was escalated from 60 to 100 mg/m(2) without the occurrence of DLT. Posttherapy decreases in serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 50%, 80%, and 90% were seen in 67%, 48%, and 39% (95% confidence interval, 55% to 79%, 35% to 61%, 26% to 52%) of the patients, respectively. Of the 33 patients with measurable disease, two (6%) had a complete response and 13 (39%) had a partial response. The overall median time to progression was 21 weeks, and the median survival time for all patients was 19.9 months. Major grade 3 or 4 adverse effects were thromboembolic disease (in 25% of patients), hyperglycemia (in 38%), and hypophosphatemia (in 42%). Significant leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and peripheral neuropathy were not observed., Conclusion: TEC has significant antitumor activity and is well tolerated in patients with progressive androgen-independent prostate cancer.

Purpose: PC-SPES is an herbal supplement for which there are anecdotal reports of anti-prostate cancer activity. This phase II study was undertaken to assess the efficacy and toxicity of PC-SPES in prostate cancer patients., Patients and Methods: Thirty-three patients with androgen-dependent prostate cancer (ADPCa) and 37 patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer (AIPCa) were treated with PC-SPES at a dose of nine capsules daily. Clinical outcome was assessed with serial serum prostate-specific androgen (PSA) level measurement and imaging studies., Results: One hundred percent of ADPCa patients experienced a PSA decline of >/= 80%, with a median duration of 57+ weeks. No patient has developed PSA progression. Thirty-one patients (97%) had declines of testosterone to the anorchid range. Two ADPCa patients had positive bone scans; both improved. One patient with a bladder mass measurable on computed tomography scan experienced disappearance of this mass. Nineteen (54%) of 35 AIPCa patients had a PSA decline of >/= 50%, including eight (50%) of 16 patients who had received prior ketoconazole therapy. Median time to PSA progression was 16 weeks (range, 2 to 69+ weeks). Of 25 patients with positive bone scans, two had improvement, seven had stable disease, 11 had progressive disease, and five did not have a repeat bone scan because of PSA progression. Severe toxicities included thromboembolic events (n = 3) and allergic reactions (n = 3). Other frequent toxicities included gynecomastia/gynecodynia, leg cramps, and grade 1 or 2 diarrhea., Conclusion: PC-SPES seems to have activity in the treatment of both ADPCa and AIPCa and has acceptable toxicity. Further study is required to determine whether its effects exceed those expected with estrogen therapy.

Purpose: To assess the feasibility and tolerance of neoadjuvant and concomitant estramustine phosphate and vinblastine (EV) with high-dose three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: Twenty-seven patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer were enrolled onto a prospective study to determine the feasibility of combining EV with 3D-CRT. Patients were eligible if any of the following requirements were satisfied: (1) Gleason score > or =8 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 10 ng/mL; (2) Gleason score of 7 and PSA > 20 ng/mL; (3) clinical stage T3N0M0 disease with PSA > 20 ng/mL; (4) any patient with T4N0M0 disease; or (5) patients with TXN1MO disease. Therapy consisted of three 8-week cycles of EV and 8 weeks of 3D-CRT. Estramustine phosphate was given orally beginning on week 1 and continued until the completion of 3D-CRT. Each 8-week cycle of vinblastine consisted of 6 weekly intravenous injections followed by a 2-week rest period. Radiation therapy was administered using a three-dimensional conformal approach to a prescription dose of 75.6 Gy. The median follow-up was 26 months (range, 6 to 40 months)., Results: Twenty-three (85%) of 27 patients completed the entire course of therapy and were assessable for toxicities and biochemical outcome. Two patients (7%) developed grade 3 hematologic toxicity that resolved, and two patients (7%) developed grade 3 hepatoxicity, manifesting as persistent elevation of serum transaminase levels, necessitating discontinuation of the chemotherapy and withdrawal from the treatment program. The most prominent adverse effects from this regimen were mild to moderate (grade 1 to 2) nausea and fatigue related to estramustine. Mild peripheral edema was seen in 15% of patients and was treated with diuresis. 3D-CRT was tolerated well in these patients. Medications were required for relief of acute grade 2 rectal (gastrointestinal [GI]) and urinary (genitourinary [GU]) symptoms in 35% and 48% of patients, respectively. Three patients developed acute grade 3 GU toxicities. The 2-year actuarial likelihood of late grade 2 GI toxicity was 20%. No late grade 3 or 4 GI toxicities were observed. The 2-year actuarial likelihoods of late grade 2 and 3 GU toxicities were 25% and 12%, respectively. No grade 4 GU toxicity was observed., Conclusion: Neoadjuvant and concomitant EV with high-dose 3D-CRT is well tolerated in patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Although the incidence of modest (grade 2) late GI and GU toxicities seem to be increased compared with 3D-CRT alone or in combination with androgen ablation therapy, no severe toxicities were encountered with this regimen.

Purpose: This phase I trial sought to evaluate the toxicity of and determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) for the two-drug regimen doxorubicin and gemcitabine (AG) followed by the three-drug regimen of ifosfamide, paclitaxel, and cisplatin (ITP) in patients with unresectable or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma., Patients and Methods: Patients received AG every other week for six cycles followed by ITP every 3 weeks for four cycles. Five AG dose levels were investigated, up to doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) and gemcitabine 2, 000 mg/m(2), to determine the MTD of the regimen. The dose and schedule of ITP were constant: ifosfamide 1,500 mg/m(2) (days 1 to 3); paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) (day 1); and cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) (day 1). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given between all cycles of therapy., Results: Fifteen patients enrolled onto this phase I trial. AG was well tolerated at all dose levels, with no grade 3 or 4 myelosuppression. Toxicity experienced with ITP included grade 3 and 4 granulocytopenia in four patients and grade 3 nausea/vomiting in three patients. No grade 3 and 4 neurotoxicity was observed. Eight of 14 assessable patients experienced a major response to AG, including five of six patients treated at the two highest AG dose levels. After completion of AG-ITP, nine of 14 assessable patients had a major response (three complete responses and six partial responses)., Conclusion: AG is a well-tolerated and active regimen. Sequential chemotherapy with AG-ITP is also well tolerated, and phase II investigation at the highest dose level is ongoing.

Purpose: To evaluate the prognostic significance of a bone scan index (BSI) based on the weighted proportion of tumor involvement in individual bones, in relation to other factors and to survival in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: Baseline radionuclide bone scans were reviewed in 191 assessable patients with androgen-independent disease who were enrolled onto an open, randomized trial of liarozole versus prednisone. The extent of skeletal involvement was assessed by scoring each scan using the BSI and independently according to the number of metastatic lesions. The relationship of the scored bone involvement to other known prognostic factors was explored in single- and multiple-variable analyses., Results: In single-variable analyses, the pretreatment factors found to be associated with survival were age (P = .0446), performance status (P = .0005), baseline prostate-specific antigen (P = .0001), hemoglobin (P = .0001), alkaline phosphatase (P = .0002), AST (P = .0021), lactate dehydrogenase (P = .0001), and treatment (P = .0098). The extent of osseous disease was significant using both the BSI (P = .0001) and the number of lesions present (P = .0001). In multiple-variable proportional hazards analyses, only BSI, age, hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, and treatment arm were associated with survival. When the patient population was divided into three equal groups, with BSI values of < 1.4%, 1.4% to 5.1%, and > 5.1%, median survivals of 18.3, 15.5, and 8.1 months, respectively, were observed (P = .0079)., Conclusion: The BSI quantifies the extent of skeletal involvement by tumor. It allows the identification of patients with distinct prognoses for stratification in clinical trials. Further study is needed to assess the utility of serial BSI determinations in monitoring treatment effects. The BSI may be particularly useful in the evaluation of agents for which prostate-specific antigen changes do not reflect clinical outcomes accurately.

Purpose: A phase II trial of ifosfamide, paclitaxel, and cisplatin (ITP) was conducted in previously untreated patients with advanced transitional-cell carcinoma (TCC) to assess its efficacy and toxicity., Patients and Methods: Thirty patients with metastatic or unresectable TCC were treated with ifosfamide 1.5 g/m2/d for 3 days with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 over 3 hours and cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1 of each 28-day treatment cycle. Therapy was continued for a maximum of six cycles. Prophylactic hematopoietic growth factor (recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [rhG-CSF]) was given on days 6 to 17 of each cycle., Results: Twenty-three of 29 assessable patients (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 60% to 92%) demonstrated a major response (six complete [CR] and 17 partial [PR]) with response durations that ranged from 5 to 24+ months. Five patients with T4 bladder primary tumors had a major response, two with pathologic CR. At a median follow-up duration of 17.9 months, nine (31%) patients remain disease-free (range, 10+ to 24+). Hematologic toxicity included anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia; febrile neutropenia was observed in 17% of patients and 4% of cycles. No grade 4 nonhematologic toxicity was observed. Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity included alopecia, allergy (3%), renal insufficiency (13%), and neuropathy (10%). Dose reductions or drug omissions were necessary for adverse events in seven (23%) patients., Conclusion: ITP is an active, well-tolerated regimen in previously untreated patients with TCC of the urothelial tract. Further study of this regimen in patients with both TCC and non-transitional-cell urothelial tumors is ongoing.

Purpose: To determine the therapeutic effects of bicalutamide 200 mg in patients with prostate cancers of different hormone sensitivities., Methods: Patients with progressive prostate cancer were treated with bicalutamide 200 mg daily. Before treatment, patients' tumors were classified on the basis of prior hormone exposure and by serum testosterone levels into androgen-dependent and androgen-independent groups. Prior exposure to flutamide and response to flutamide withdrawal was also considered. Outcomes were reported independently on the basis of posttherapy changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA), measurable disease, and radionuclide bone scans., Results: Outcomes varied by prior hormone exposure as a higher proportion of patients with progression of androgen-dependent tumors showed posttherapy PSA decreases of more than 50% or more than 80%, measurable disease regression, and improvement on radionuclide bone scans than did patients with androgen-independent progression. Within the category of androgen-independent progression, clinical benefit was observed in patients who had previously progressed on flutamide, independent of the response to flutamide withdrawal. Patients who had progressed on a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analog alone had a low response proportion, whereas those who progressed after two or more hormone therapies did not respond. Overall, the drug was well tolerated. After progression on bicalutamide monotherapy, one third of patients with androgen-dependent progression responded to medical castration with a GnRH analog., Conclusion: Classifying patient tumors on the basis of prior hormone exposure permits a more precise estimate of the potential benefit of a specific hormone therapy for the individual patient. The precision is further increased by reporting the effects of a drug on each parameter of disease independently. The difference in outcomes for patients with androgen-independent progression suggests that the specific hormone therapy administered and the response to that therapy can influence the biology of the relapsing tumor and the sensitivity to subsequent therapies. The sensitivity to bicalutamide after progression on flutamide deserves further study.

Purpose: A phase II randomized trial of gallium nitrate/fluorouracil (5-FU) versus dose-intense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (M-VAC) was performed in poor-risk patients with advanced urothelial tract tumors. The efficacy and toxicity of these regimens were compared. Assessment of dose-intense M-VAC as salvage treatment in patients who failed to respond to the gallium nitrate/5-FU regimen was also performed., Patients and Methods: Thirty-four patients who had not received prior systemic chemotherapy were randomized to either arm of the study. All patients had one or more clinical features predicting a low likelihood of durable complete response to standard chemotherapy, ie, weight loss, visceral metastases, and low performance status. Gallium nitrate and 5-FU were each administered by continuous 5-day infusions every 28 days. M-VAC was recycled every 21 days, with prophylactic recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rh-G-CSF)., Results: Two of 17 patients (12%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4% to 36.4%) had a major response to gallium nitrate/5-FU. Sixteen of 17 patients treated with M-VAC (94%; 95% CI, 71.3% to 99.8%) demonstrated a major response. Five of 12 patients who failed to respond to the gallium nitrate/5-FU combination responded to M-VAC as second-line therapy (42%; 95% CI, 15.2% to 72.3%). Median survival for the gallium nitrate and 5-FU arm was 19 versus 17 months for the M-VAC arm, with a median follow-up duration of 35 months (range, 2 to 51) for all patients. Dose-intense M-VAC was associated with a greater incidence of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia., Conclusion: Dose-intense M-VAC is superior to gallium nitrate/5-FU in poor-risk patients (P < .0001). Despite the overall high response rate, the median survival for patients with M-VAC remained unsatisfactory. Similar survival distributions were observed for patients who received investigational therapy followed by cisplatin-based therapy and patients treated with initial cisplatin-based therapy.

Purpose: A phase II trial of docetaxel was conducted to assess its efficacy and toxicity in patients with advanced transitional-cell carcinoma (TCC) who had failed to respond to prior cisplatin-based therapy., Patients and Methods: Thirty assessable patients who had failed to respond to or relapsed after one prior cisplatin-containing regimen were treated with docetaxel 100 mg/m2 over 1 hour, every 21 days. All patients were premedicated with dexamethasone and diphenhydramine to reduce allergic reactions. Reductions of subsequent doses were made for severe hematologic toxicity. Prophylactic hematopoietic growth factors were not used., Results: Four of 30 patients (13.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.8% to 30.7%) demonstrated a partial response (PR), with durations of response ranging from 3 to 8 months. The estimated median survival duration for all patients is 9 months (95% CI, 6 to 12 months) with a median follow-up time of 14 months (range, 1 to 27). Hematologic toxicity included anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and febrile neutropenia. Nonhematologic toxicity included alopecia and mucositis. Fluid retention was not observed and cutaneous toxicity was mild and infrequent. Dose reductions were necessary for adverse events in 18 patients (60%)., Conclusion: Docetaxel is an active single agent in previously treated patients with TCC of the urothelial tract. Therapy was well tolerated in this patient population but myelosuppression was frequent. Further study in previously untreated patients, both alone and in combination, is warranted.

Purpose: The combination of suramin and hydrocortisone has shown clinical benefit in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer. Widespread use was limited by the complex dose schedules and the need for pharmacologic monitoring. This study reports three sequential pharmacokinetically derived treatment regimens that simplified the administration of suramin and hydrocortisone with reduced toxicity., Patients and Methods: Three cohorts of patients with advanced prostate cancer that progressed despite castrate levels of testosterone received oral hydrocortisone plus suramin administered in the following manners: (1) a loading dose of suramin followed by a continuous infusion using an adaptive control program (cohort A); (2) an intermittent schedule using a simplified adaptive control schedule (cohort B); and (3) an empiric dosing regimen (cohort C). Drug concentrations were monitored along with the toxicities associated with each regimen. Efficacy was assessed using measurable-disease criteria, radionuclide scans, and posttherapy changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels., Results: Fifty-six patients were treated and plasma suramin concentrations were similar for each regimen. A partial response was observed in 4% (one of 28; 95% confidence interval, 0% to 18.4%) of patients with measurable disease, while 12% (six of 50; 95% confidence interval, 4.5% to 24.3%) had a greater than 80% decline in the baseline PSA level. The median duration of response was 12 months. No responses on radionuclide scans were seen. Anemia and lymphocytopenia were the most common toxicities, while 7% of patients developed a sensory or motor neurotoxicity. In the sequential regimens, the frequency of renal insufficiency (P = .04) and coagulopathy (P < .0001) decreased, while transaminase elevations (P = .05) were more common using intermittent infusions (cohorts B and C) versus continuous infusion schedules (cohort A)., Conclusion: The administration of suramin was simplified and the drug concentrations were maintained. In this cohort of patients with advanced prostate cancer, the clinical activity of suramin using these dosing schedules was limited. Pharmacodynamic issues, patients selection, and criteria to assess efficacy could have effected the clinical outcome.

Purpose: To assess efficacy of intermittent infusion of suramin in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer who have had disease progression on hydrocortisone., Patients and Methods: Chemotherapy-naive patients with progressive androgen-independent prostate cancer were given hydrocortisone 40 mg/d and monitored for treatment effect. At the time of disease progression, suramin was administered on a pharmacokinetically derived, 2-week dosing schedule., Results: Thirty patients with a median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of 90% were treated with hydrocortisone. No responses were seen in 12 patients with measurable disease or 29 patients with abnormal bone scans. Thirty patients had an increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level before treatment and six (20%) had a more than 50% decline in PSA from the baseline value for a median of 16 weeks (range, 12 to 52+). Twenty-eight patients had disease progression after a median of 7 weeks (range, 3 to 23), and two patients have continued to receive hydrocortisone for 44 and 52 weeks. Twenty-eight patients received hydrocortisone and suramin, with median suramin concentrations of 97 to 170 micrograms/mL for 4 weeks. No responses in measurable disease and no improvements in bone scans were seen. Five patients (18%) showed a more than 50% decline in PSA levels from baseline, of whom three had previously responded to hydrocortisone. Only two of 24 patients who did not show a posttherapy decline in PSA levels after hydrocortisone had a reduction in PSA levels with the addition of suramin. Toxicity profiles were acceptable with each agent, although a higher proportion of subjects showed hematologic, cardiac, and neurologic events when suramin was added., Conclusion: Suramin has limited efficacy in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer who have had disease progression after hydrocortisone.

Purpose: To determine the frequency with which prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-positive cells can be detected in the peripheral blood of patients with prostatic cancer in different stages and with different sensitivities to hormonal therapy., Patients and Methods: Peripheral blood from 107 men with prostatic cancer and 27 non-prostate cancer controls was analyzed for PSA mRNA using reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Southern blotting., Results: The lower limit of detection was one PSA-producing cell diluted into 1 x 10(6) blood mononuclear cells. The test detected PSA mRNA in four of 25 patients (16%) with clinically organ-confined (T1-2) disease, three of 10 (30%) with T3-4 or N+ tumors, and 25 of 72 (35%) with distant metastases. None of the control samples were positive. An increase in positivity was observed with increasing PSA levels. Within the subgroup of patients with distant metastases, positivity was observed in six of 16 patients (38%) with normal or undetectable PSA levels after hormonal therapy and, overall, in 37% of patients (21 of 57) with androgen-independent disease., Conclusion: An RT-PCR-based assay for PSA mRNA can detect circulating cells in the peripheral blood of patients with prostatic cancer. The frequency of positivity increases with tumor stage. A unique observation was the detection of cells in patients with no measurable PSA on hormonal therapy. This suggests that continued seeding of distant sites may still be occurring in these patients, despite seemingly successful therapy. The relationship between continued seeding, disease progression, and survival will require further study.

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of discontinuation of the antiandrogen, flutamide, in patients with metastatic prostate cancer who are progressing on hormonal therapy., Patients and Methods: Thirty-six patients with progressive disease on hormonal treatment that included flutamide had discontinuation of the antiandrogen. Thirty-five (95%) had progressive increases in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, despite castrate levels of testosterone. Twenty-five patients (69%) were treated with combined androgen blockade (orchiectomy or gonadotropin-releasing hormone [GnRH] analog plus flutamide) as initial therapy and 11 (31%) were started on monotherapy alone. Patients who had not undergone a previous orchiectomy were continued on the GnRH analog. Patients were monitored clinically and with serial PSA measurements, radionuclide scans, and radiographs as indicated to assess response., Results: Considering the 35 patients with increasing PSA values, 10 (29%) showed a significant decline (> or = 80% in seven, and > or = 50% in three) in PSA from baseline. All 10 had received combined androgen blockade as initial therapy. The duration of decline was short (median, 5+ months; range, 2 to 10+), but was associated with improvement in clinical symptoms, while one patient had a partial response in an epidural mass with parallel decline in PSA. None of the patients started on single hormone therapies responded., Conclusion: Discontinuation of flutamide was associated with a significant decrease in PSA values in 10 of 25 patients (40%; 95% confidence interval, 21% to 59%) and clinical improvement in a subset of patients who had an initial response, but later progressive disease on combined androgen blockade. A trial of flutamide withdrawal should be considered in patients progressing on total androgen blockade before the initiation of more toxic therapies. It is likely that flutamide withdrawal has contributed to the observed responses in phase II trials of both second-line hormonal therapies and new cytotoxic agents. Future phase II trials in hormone-refractory prostatic cancer must control for this observation, and insure that progression off flutamide is documented before initiation of alternative treatment.

Purpose: To evaluate the prognostic significance of pretreatment parameters and posttherapy declines in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in relation to the survival of patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: One hundred ten assessable patients treated on seven sequential protocols at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) for hormone-refractory prostate cancer were evaluated for 29 different pretherapy and posttherapy parameters, including a posttherapy decline in PSA of 50% and 80% from baseline., Results: In the univariate analysis, initial Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or = 80% was associated with a favorable outcome (P = .005), while age, extent of disease on bone scan, and individual sites of metastatic disease were not significant. No difference in survival was observed between patients with measurable or assessable (bone only) disease. Initial hemoglobin (HGB; P = .0012), alkaline phosphatase (ALK; P = .0015), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH; P = .0002) levels were significant discriminators, while the initial PSA was not. Using a landmark analysis, a significantly longer median survival rate was observed for patients with a > or = 50% decline in PSA (median not reached) versus patients with a less than 50% decline in PSA (median, 8.6 months; P = .0001). Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model showed that a > or = 50% decline in PSA (P = .0004) and the natural log of LDH (P = .0001) were the two most significant variables predicting survival. The model was confirmed on an independent data set from the Norwegian Radium Hospital (NRH) in Oslo, Norway., Conclusion: The results suggest that posttherapy PSA declines can be used as a surrogate end point to evaluate new agents in hormone-refractory prostate cancer. The criteria for response need prospective validation in phase III trials.