Search

Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-cutaneous tumor among American men. Androgen receptor signaling inhibitors such as abiraterone and enzalutamide have been approved for similar disease states among patients with advanced PCa. Existing data suggest using steroids is associated with an increased risk of infection. Because abiraterone is usually prescribed with prednisone, we sought to compare the risk of septicemia in patients using abiraterone vs. enzalutamide., Materials and Methods: We utilized the SEER-Medicare-linked data and used negative binomial regression models to compare the changes in the rates of septicemia-related hospitalizations six months pre- and post-abiraterone and enzalutamide initiation., Results: We found that the incidence of septicemia-related hospitalizations increased 2.77 fold within six months of initiating abiraterone (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.17-3.53) 1.97 fold within six months of starting enzalutamide (IRR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.43-2.72). However, the difference in the changes did not reach statistical significance (interaction IRR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.48-1.06)., Discussion: The findings suggest that both abiraterone and enzalutamide are associated with an increased risk of septicemia-related hospitalizations. However, the difference in the increase of septicemia risk following the two treatments did not reach statistical significance. Further studies are warranted to understand the mechanisms at play., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: To report the impact of our 25-year multidisciplinary care delivery model experience on patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer treated at our National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Jefferson University. To our knowledge, our multidisciplinary genitourinary cancer clinic (MDC) is the longest continuously operating center of its kind at an NCI Cancer Center in the United States., Materials and Methods: We selected a recent group of patients with cT2-4 N0-1 M0 bladder cancer seen in the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center Genitourinary Oncology MDC from January 2016 to September 2019. These patients were identified retrospectively. SEER-18 (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) database, November 2019 submission was queried to obtain patients with similarly staged disease diagnosed between 2015 and 2017. Completion rates of radical cystectomy, use of neoadjuvant therapies, and survival outcomes were compared between the two cohorts., Results: Ninety-one patients from the MDC form this time period were identified; 65.9% underwent radical cystectomy and 71.8% received neoadjuvant therapy in the form of chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibition or a combination of the two - higher than reported national trends for neoadjuvant therapies. Progression of disease was seen in 24.2% of patients. A total of 8675 patients met inclusion criteria in the SEER database. Rates of radical cystectomy were significantly higher in MCD patients when compared to SEER derived data (65.9% vs. 37.7%, p =< 0.001). MCD patients had significantly better cancer-specific survival (mean 20.4 vs. 18.3 months p = 0.028, median survival not reached)., Conclusion: Our long term experience caring for patients with genitourinary malignancies such as bladder cancer in a uniform multidisciplinary team results in a high utilization of neoadjuvant therapies. When compared to a contemporary SEER-derived cohort, multidisciplinary patients were more likely to undergo radical cystectomy and had longer cancer-specific survival.

Background: The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program study #553 was designed to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy added to the standard of care (SOC) for patients who are at high risk for relapse after prostatectomy., Objective: To test whether addition of chemotherapy to surgery for high-risk prostate cancer improves progression-free survival (PFS)., Design, Setting, and Participants: Eligible patients after prostatectomy were randomized to the SOC group with observation or to the chemotherapy group with docetaxel and prednisone administered every 3 wk for six cycles. Randomization was stratified for prostate-specific antigen, Gleason, tumor stage, and surgical margin status., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints included overall, prostate cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival, and time to androgen deprivation therapy., Results and Limitations: A total of 298 of the planned 636 patients were randomized. The median follow-up was 59.1 mo (0.2-103.7 mo). For the primary endpoint, the two groups did not statistically differ in PFS (median 55.5 mo in the chemotherapy group and 42.2 mo in the SOC group; test adjusted for site via gamma frailty p=0.21; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-1.11; p=0.18). Prespecified subgroup analyses showed benefit in PFS for patients with tumor stage ≥T3b (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.92; p=0.022) and patients with Gleason score ≤7 (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.99; p=0.046). Secondary endpoint analyses are hampered by low event rates. The most common adverse events (≥grade 3 related or possibly related to chemotherapy) included neutropenia (43%), hyperglycemia (20%), and fatigue (5%), with febrile neutropenia in 2%., Conclusions: Adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer using docetaxel and prednisone did not lead to statistically significant improvement in PFS for the intention-to-treat population as a whole. The analysis was challenged by lower power due to accrual limitation. Subgroup analyses suggest potential benefit for patients with Gleason grade ≤7 and stage≥pT3b (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00132301)., Patient Summary: In this randomized trial, we tested whether addition of chemotherapy to surgery for high-risk prostate cancer decreased the risk of prostate-specific antigen rise after surgery. We found no benefit from docetaxel given after radical prostatectomy, although some subgroups of patients may benefit., (Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cixutumumab, a human monoclonal antibody (HuMAb), targets the insulin-like growth factor receptor. Ramucirumab is a recombinant HuMAb that binds to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. A non-comparative randomised phase II study evaluated cixutumumab or ramucirumab plus mitoxantrone and prednisone (MP) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)., Patients and Methods: Men with progressive mCRPC during or after docetaxel therapy received mitoxantrone 12 mg/m(2) on day 1 and prednisone 5mg twice daily and were randomised 1:1 to receive either cixutumumab or ramucirumab 6 mg/kg intravenously weekly in a 21-day cycle. Primary end-point was composite progression-free survival (cPFS). Secondary end-points included safety, response, radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Sample size was based on a 50% increase in median cPFS from 2.6 (MP) to 3.9 months (either combination)., Results: 132 men were treated (66 per arm). Median cPFS was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.2-5.6) for cixutumumab and 6.7 months (95% CI, 4.5-8.3) for ramucirumab. Median time to radiographic progression was 7.5 months for cixutumumab and 10.2 months for ramucirumab, with a median OS of 10.8 and 13.0 months, respectively. Fatigue was the most frequent adverse event (AE). Incidence of most non-haematologic grade 3-4 AEs was <10% on both arms. Grade 3 cardiac dysfunction occurred in 7.6% of patients on ramucirumab., Conclusion: Combinations of cixutumumab or ramucirumab plus MP were feasible and associated with moderate toxicities in docetaxel-pretreated men with mCRPC. Of the two regimens, the ramucirumab regimen is worthy of further testing based on the observed cPFS relative to the historical control., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Enzalutamide (MDV3100, Xtandi, Medivation\Astellas) is an oral inhibitor of androgen receptor signaling that blocks androgen receptor interaction, inhibits translocation of the androgen receptor to the nucleus, impairs androgen receptor binding to DNA, and inhibits coactivator recruitment and receptor-mediated DNA transcription. In a phase III randomized study comparing enzalutamide with placebo in men with progressive castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) who were previously treated with docetaxel, enzalutamide showed an improvement in overall survival (18.4 vs. 13.6 months, HR, 0.63; P < 0.001). In addition, all secondary endpoints including proportion of patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline, soft-tissue response, quality-of-life response, time to PSA progression, radiographic progression-free survival, and the time to the first radiographic skeletal event all significantly favored patients treated with enzalutamide. Fatigue, diarrhea, and hot flashes were common in patients treated with enzalutamide, with seizures reported in 5 (0.6%) of the patients. Enzalutamide is a novel therapy that very potently blocks the androgen signaling pathway, which is unregulated during the development of CRPC. The preclinical studies along with the pivotal trials that led to its approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September 2012 will be reviewed.

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.

Background: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib was approved in the United States based on the phase 2 TRITON2 study of patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA)-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Although genomic screening is recommended as part of a comprehensive assessment of prostate cancer prognosis and treatment options, the best way to select patients with mCRPC for treatment with a PARP inhibitor depends on individual clinical circumstances. For example, assessment of tumor tissue may not always be feasible. Genomic testing of DNA from plasma has become more readily available, providing a minimally invasive option to evaluate DNA from primary and metastatic lesions simultaneously. Case Presentation: A patient from TRITON2 with BRCA-mutated mCRPC had a response to the PARP inhibitor rucaparib and remained on treatment for 32 weeks, which was >2 times longer than the duration of each of his prior therapies (bicalutamide, docetaxel, abiraterone). The patient enrolled in TRITON2 based on results of local genomic testing of an archival biopsy that indicated the presence of a BRCA1 T1399I (allelic fraction, 19%) mutation. Local testing also identified an ATM G1663C mutation, a TP53 P191del mutation, and a BRAF K601E mutation. Analysis of a plasma sample obtained before the patient started rucaparib detected the same alterations as those in the archival biopsy, but it also revealed the presence of a BRCA2 homozygous loss (whole gene, 26 of 26 exons) and several other alterations of unknown functional impact. We hypothesize the response of the patient's tumor to rucaparib was likely driven by DNA damage repair deficiency caused by homozygous loss of all BRCA2 exons. Following discontinuation from rucaparib due to clinical disease progression, the patient received carboplatin and cabazitaxel for -3 weeks. The patient died due to progression of his disease. Conclusions: A notable aspect of this case is the differences in alterations detected in the archival tumor sample and a more recent plasma sample. This highlights the advantages of plasma testing compared with tissue testing when selecting targeted therapies for treatment of mCRPC; however, physicians must determine which tool presents the best solution for each individual case. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer represents one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality in the United States and the most common cancer among men. Treatment paradigms for the management of advanced stages of prostate cancer have continued to evolve in recent years. These advancements in the therapeutic landscape of metastatic prostate cancer and diagnostic imaging modalities have fundamentally changed the treatment of patients with prostate cancer. In this review article we provide a primer for radiologists highlighting the most recent developments in treatment options and imaging techniques utilized in the modern oncologic management of metastatic prostate cancer. We will examine current therapy options and associated toxicities with an emphasis on relevant imaging findings commonly encountered by radiologists. We also summarize the role of modalities including CT, MRI, PET, bone scintigraphy, and PET in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with metastatic prostate cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Numerous treatment breakthroughs for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have been demonstrated in clinical trials in the past 15 years. However, real-world evidence on the changing epidemiology and longevity of this population has not been demonstrated. This study assessed prevalence trends for mCRPC over eight years in a large managed care population.Methods: In a claims database, adult male patients were included with ≥ 1 claim for prostate cancer, pharmacologic/surgical castration, and metastatic disease during the identification period. The index mCRPC date was the first metastatic claim; six months of continuous enrollment before and after was required. Patients with metastatic disease at baseline were excluded. Patients were followed until death, end of study, or disenrollment, whichever was earliest. Total, mCRPC per-prostate cancer, and age-specific prevalence rates were calculated cross-sectionally for each year under study (2010-2017).Results: Of 343,089 patients identified with a claim for prostate cancer, 3690 mCRPC cases (1.1%) were identified. Incidence (new cases per year) remained relatively constant over the study period while prevalence of mCRPC (total cases per year) increased. mCRPC prevalence increased with increasing age. Total and mCRPC per-prostate cancer prevalence rates increased in monotonic, year-over-year trends from 2010 to 2017, while incidence (new cases per year) of mCRPC remained relatively stable.Conclusion: This study found increasing prevalence of mCRPC in an insured patient population during the 8-year period, coupled with stable incidence, validating that patients with the disease are living longer. With the addition of androgen receptor-directed therapies and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in recent years, this trend will likely continue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer incidence and mortality in the United States in African Americans (AA) are higher than in Caucasians. Eastern Cuyahoga County in Ohio is majority AA and is considered an underserved population particularly vulnerable to healthcare disparities. There is a paucity of data about shared decision making among high-risk AA men with regard to prostate cancer screening. This study aims to examine shared versus informed decision making (SDM versus IDM) in a randomized, control trial among a large, high-risk AA population. Patients were included in annual one-day outreach events, each held over 3 years (2017–2019), and were randomized at each event into IDM (control) and SDM (investigational) groups and then were offered screening via prostate specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal exam (DRE). The primary endpoints were proportion of participants over 40 who did not demonstrate decisional conflict about prostate cancer screening measured by the SURE score, as well as change of knowledge score about prostate cancer screening. Overall, 175 patients were enrolled in the trial; 79 in the SDM arm and 96 in the IDM arm. The investigational (SDM) arm had 3/79 (3.9%) conflict versus 6/96 (6.4%) in the control (IDM) arm (p = 0.74). With regard to knowledge improvement, the SDM cohort demonstrated improvement following educational tools for 66/79 (81%) of participants versus 76/96 (79%) in the IDM cohort (p = 0.85). There was no difference in the proportion (63%) of participants in either group who found the information very helpful (using a Likert scale). Our education-based study showed no significant difference between SDM and IDM with regard to decisional conflict about prostate cancer screening. The study also demonstrated significant improvement in knowledge about prostate cancer screening in a high-risk AA population in both groups. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to several limitations; however, the study can serve as a benchmark for future studies in this very important topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the third leading cause of death from cancer in the United States. We aimed to disclose the prognostic values of examined (dissected) lymph node (ELN), negative lymph node (NLN), and positive (metastatic) lymph node (PLN) counts and lymph node (LNs) ratio in PCa patients. Methods: We extracted data of PCa patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. We included patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis having at least one ELN and with the PCa as the primary tumor only. Results: We have included 96,064 patients. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modelsdisclosed that patients having more ELNs were associated with better survival. However, we demonstrated that patients having more PLNs were associated with worse survival. Additionally, older age, unmarried patients, with Gleason's score of 8–10, T4 and M1 stages and those who received chemotherapy and/or radiation but did not receive surgery were significantly associated with worse PCa survival. Conclusions: We have disclosed several independent predictors affecting PCa patients including age, marital status, Gleason's score, T and N stages, having received therapy, surgery, and ELN and PLN counts. Moreover, we demonstrated that patients with lower ELN and higher PLN counts were a high-risk group. We strongly recommend adding the ELN and/or PLN counts into consideration during patient staging/treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent approvals of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) have changed the treatment landscape for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). These SGARIs have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment to explore how United States physicians make treatment decisions between adverse events (AEs) and survival gains in nmCRPC, a largely asymptomatic disease.Methods: Treating physicians (n = 149) participated in an online survey that included 14 treatment choice questions, each comparing 2 hypothetical treatment profiles, which varied in terms of 5 safety and 2 efficacy attributes. We described safety attributes (fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, falls, and fractures) in terms of severity and frequency, and efficacy attributes (overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression) in terms of duration of effect. We used a random parameters logit model to estimate preference weights and importance scores for each attribute. We also estimated the amount of survival gain physicians were willing to trade for a reduction in specific AEs between treatment options.Results: Physicians placed more importance on survival than on time to pain progression, and viewed a reduction in cognitive problems from severe to none, a reduction in risk of a serious fracture from 8% to none, and a reduction in fatigue from severe to none as the most important safety attributes. Physicians were willing to forego 9.1 and 6.6 months of OS, respectively, to reduce cognitive problems and fatigue from severe to mild-to-moderate. To reduce the risk of a serious fracture from 8 to 5% and 5% to none, physicians were willing to trade 3.9 and 5.3 months of OS, respectively.Conclusions: Physicians were willing to trade substantial amounts of survival to avoid AEs between hypothetical treatments. These results emphasize the importance of carefully balancing therapies' benefits and risks to ultimately optimize the overall quality of nmCRPC patients' survival. Nonetheless, it is noted that the results from the study sample of 149 physicans may not be representative of the viewpoints of all nmCRPC-treating physicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Germline testing is becoming increasingly relevant in prostate cancer (PCa) screening, prognosis, and management. A subset of patients with PCa harbor pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (P/LPVs) in genes mediating DNA-repair processes, and these P/LPVs have implications for cancer screening, treatment, and cascade testing. As a result, it is recommended that all men with high-risk localized and metastatic PCa undergo routine germline testing. As more PCa patients undergo germline testing, it is important that clinicians and genetics experts recognize current disparities in germline testing rates among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States. The reasons for these disparities are multiple and require similarly manifold consideration to close the germline testing gap and reduce inequities in PCa screening, management, and treatment., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Introduction: The treatment landscape for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) continues to evolve. Sipuleucel-T was the first immunotherapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC. The androgen receptor-targeting agents (ARTAs) abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide were initially approved to treat mCRPC. Looking at chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC, we compared survival outcomes between the sipuleucel-T + ARTA cohort (men who received either sipuleucel-T or an ARTA in the first line, and then the other in the second line within 6 months) and the ARTA monotherapy cohort (men who only received ARTA monotherapy)., Methods: This retrospective cohort analysis used longitudinal, adjudicated claims data from the US Medicare Fee-for-Service 100% research identifiable dataset that includes both urologic and oncologic practice settings. Eligible men started their first mCRPC treatment with either sipuleucel-T or ARTA in either 2014 or 2015 and had continuous Medicare Parts A, B, and D eligibility for the subsequent 3 years. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to analyze overall survival (OS), both overall and by index year, and to control for differences., Results: The sipuleucel-T + ARTA and ARTA monotherapy cohorts comprised 773 and 4642 men, respectively, with different characteristics at treatment start. The most commonly used ARTAs were enzalutamide in the former and abiraterone in the latter cohort. Median OS was 30.4 and 14.3 months in the sipuleucel-T + ARTA and ARTA monotherapy cohorts, respectively, with the sipuleucel-T + ARTA cohort having a 28.3% lower risk of death than the ARTA monotherapy cohort (hazard ratio 0.717; 95% CI 0.648, 0.793; p < 0.01)., Conclusions: This real-world study of mCRPC treatment indicates that men receiving sipuleucel-T and ARTAs had a longer median OS than patients receiving treatment with an ARTA alone, suggesting that leveraging mechanisms of action can be beneficial in treating patients with mCRPC., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Cancer is a major public health problem and is the second leading cause of death in the United States and worldwide; nearly one in six deaths are attributable to cancer. Approximately 20% of all cancers diagnosed in the United States are attributable to unhealthy diet, excessive alcohol consumption, physical inactivity, and body fatness. Individual cancers are distinct disease states that are multifactorial in their causation, making them exceedingly cumbersome to study from a nutrition standpoint. Genetic influences are a major piece of the puzzle and personalized nutrition is likely to be most effective in disrupting cancer during all stages. Increasing evidence shows that after a cancer diagnosis, continuing standard dietary recommendations may not be appropriate. This is because powerful dietary interventions such as short-term fasting and carbohydrate restriction can disrupt tumor metabolism, synergizing with standard therapies such as radiation and drug therapy to improve efficacy and ultimately, cancer survival. The importance of identifying dietary interventions cannot be overstated, and the American College of Nutrition's commitment to advancing knowledge and research is evidenced by dedication of the 2017 ACN Annual Meeting to "Disrupting Cancer: The Role of Personalized Nutrition" and this resulting proceedings manuscript, which summarizes the meeting's findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most professional organizations, including the American College of Physicians and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, emphasize that screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test should only occur after a detailed discussion between the health-care provider and patient about the known risks and potential benefits of the test. In fact, guidelines strongly advise health-care providers to involve patients, particularly those at elevated risk of prostate cancer, in a "shared decision making" (SDM) process about PSA testing. We analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey 2011-2012-a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey-to examine the extent to which health professionals provided men with information critical to SDM prior to PSA testing, including (1) that patients had a choice about whether or not to undergo PSA testing, (2) that not all doctors recommend PSA testing, and (3) that no one is sure if PSA testing saves lives. Over half (55 %) of men between the ages of 50 and 74 reported ever having had a PSA test. However, only 10 % of men, regardless of screening status, reported receiving all three pieces of information: 55 % reported being informed that they could choose whether or not to undergo testing, 22 % reported being informed that some doctors recommend PSA testing and others do not, and 14 % reported being informed that no one is sure if PSA testing actually saves lives. Black men and men with lower levels of education were less likely to be provided this information. There is a need to improve patient-provider communication about the uncertainties associated with the PSA test. Interventions directed at patients, providers, and practice settings should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Docetaxel-prednisone (DP) is an approved therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Orteronel (TAK-700) is an investigational, selective, non-steroidal inhibitor of 17,20-lyase, a key enzyme in androgenic hormone production. This phase 1/2 study evaluated orteronel plus DP in mCRPC patients. Methods: Adult men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥5 ng/mL, and serum testosterone <50 ng/dL received oral orteronel 200 or 400 mg twice-daily (BID) in phase 1 to determine the recommended dose for phase 2, plus intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m every 3 weeks, and oral prednisone 5 mg BID. Phase 2 objectives included safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy. Results: In phase 1 ( n = 6, orteronel 200 mg; n = 8, orteronel 400 mg), there was one dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 febrile neutropenia at 400 mg BID. This dose was evaluated further in phase 2 ( n = 23). After 4 cycles, 68, 59, and 23 % of patients achieved ≥30, ≥50, and ≥90 % PSA reductions, respectively; median best PSA response was −77 %. Seven of 10 (70 %) RECIST-evaluable patients achieved objective partial responses. Median time to PSA progression and radiographic disease progression was 6.7 and 12.9 months, respectively. Dehydroepiandrosterone-sulfate (DHEA-S) and testosterone levels were rapidly and durably reduced. Common adverse events were fatigue (78 %), alopecia (61 %), diarrhea (48 %), nausea (43 %), dysgeusia (39 %), and neutropenia (39 %). Orteronel and docetaxel pharmacokinetics were similar alone and in combination. Conclusions: Orteronel plus DP was tolerable, with substantial reductions in PSA, DHEA-S, and testosterone levels, and evidence for measurable disease responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chemotherapy is an important treatment modality in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Extensive clinical research for more than 3 decades has shown only a handful of chemotherapeutic agents to be active in metastatic prostate cancer. In this article, we aim to review the role of chemotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer, focusing on historical studies, landmark trials, and the latest advancements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and the oncogenic Src pathway has been implicated in the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in preclinical models. Cediranib and dasatinib are multi-kinase inhibitors targeting VEGFR and Src respectively. Phase II studies of cediranib and dasatinib in CRPC have shown single agent activity. Methods Docetaxel-pretreated CRPC patients were randomized to arm A: cediranib alone (20 mg/day) versus arm B: cediranib (20 mg/day) plus dasatinib (100 mg/day) given orally on 4-week cycles. Primary endpoint was 12-week progression-free survival (PFS) as per the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2). Patient reported outcomes were evaluated using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scales. Correlative studies of bone turnover markers (BTM), including bone alkaline phosphate (BAP) and serum beta-C telopeptide (B-CTx) were serially assayed. Results A total of 22 patients, 11 per arm, were enrolled. Baseline demographics were similar in both arms. Median number of cycles =4 in arm A (range 1-12) and 2 in arm B (range 1-9). Twelve-week PFS was 73 % in arm A versus 18 % in arm B ( p = 0.03). Median PFS in months (arm A versus B) was: 5.2 versus 2.6 (95 % CI: 1.9-6.5 versus 1.4-not reached). Most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension, anemia and thrombocytopenia in arm A and hypertension, diarrhea and fatigue in arm B. One treatment-related death (retroperitoneal hemorrhage) was seen in arm A. FACT-P and PPI scores did not significantly change in either arm. No correlation between BTM and PFS was seen in either arm. Conclusions Although limited by small numbers, this randomized study showed that the combination of VEGFR and Src targeted therapy did not result in improved efficacy and may be associated with a worse outcome than VEGFR targeted therapy alone in patients with CRPC. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01260688. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For men with prostate cancer (PC), patient care and treatment recommendations should not focus solely on the disease but should also take into account the views of the patient. The diagnosis and consequences of monitoring or treatment should be fully explained. Recommending Active Surveillance (AS) for the monitoring of a proven low-risk, low-volume prostate cancer should ensure that the psychological impact of AS is taken into account and included in a holistic approach to patient and disease management. This article is a rapid literature search relating to AS, and how the psychological impact of a cancer diagnosis may influence patient choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase due to the aging and growth of the population and improvements in early detection and treatment. In order for the public health community to better serve these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborated to estimate the number of current and future cancer survivors using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program registries. In addition, current treatment patterns for the most common cancer types are described based on information in the National Cancer Data Base and the SEER and SEER-Medicare linked databases; treatment-related side effects are also briefly described. Nearly 14.5 million Americans with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2014; by January 1, 2024, that number will increase to nearly 19 million. The 3 most common prevalent cancers among males are prostate cancer (43%), colorectal cancer (9%), and melanoma (8%), and those among females are cancers of the breast (41%), uterine corpus (8%), and colon and rectum (8%). The age distribution of survivors varies substantially by cancer type. For example, the majority of prostate cancer survivors (62%) are aged 70 years or older, whereas less than one-third (32%) of melanoma survivors are in this older age group. It is important for clinicians to understand the unique medical and psychosocial needs of cancer survivors and to proactively assess and manage these issues. There are a growing number of resources that can assist patients, caregivers, and health care providers in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:252-271. © 2014 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There have been more drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer in the past 3 years than in the prior 3 decades, with additional drugs on the verge of approval based on the results of recently reported randomized trials. While an improvement in the understanding of the pathogenesis of castration-resistant prostate cancer has undeniably accelerated the transition of novel approaches from 'bench to bedside,' the recent successes in the treatment of prostate cancer are also a result of the efforts of clinical investigators to redefine the framework in which drugs for castration-resistant disease are evaluated. This review will explore the shifting paradigm in drug development for castration-resistant prostate cancer over the past several decades, and highlight how new definitions, trial designs, and endpoints have facilitated the emergence of new therapies for this challenging disease. CA Cancer J Clin 2012;. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer remains a significant public health problem, with limited therapeutic options in the setting of castrate- resistant metastatic disease. Angiogenesis inhibition is a relatively novel antineoplastic approach, which targets the reliance of tumor growth on the formation of new blood vessels. This strategy has been used successfully in other solid tumor types, with the FDA approval of anti-angiogenic agents in breast, lung, colon, brain, and kidney cancer. The application of anti-angiogenic therapy to prostate cancer is reviewed in this article, with attention to efficacy and toxicity results from several classes of anti-angiogenic agents. Ultimately, the fate of anti-angiogenic agents in prostate cancer rests on the eagerly anticipated results of several key phase III studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The successful management of prostate cancer requires early detection, appropriate risk assessment and optimum treatment. To this end, much research has been conducted over many years with the goal of identifying a reliable and easily measurable tumour marker that could be used on a large scale for the diagnosis, staging and monitoring of the disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was independently discovered by two groups in the 1960s and 1970s, in semen and prostate tissue, and given different names. It later became evident that these proteins were encoded by the same gene and were the same protein. PSA was then identified as a useful marker for assessing patients with prostate cancer during their follow-up. In 1986, PSA was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration to monitor prostate cancer, and in 1994 approved as a tool for detecting the disease in men aged ≥50 years. PSA is now the most widely used serum marker for detecting and monitoring prostate cancer, but its use as a diagnostic marker is controversial because it has several limitations, including its low specificity (PSA levels are also increased in benign prostatic hyperplasia, and in general inflammatory responses) and low sensitivity. Furthermore, PSA levels are highly variable over time, and PSA poorly distinguishes indolent from aggressive cancers. As such, the use of PSA level as a diagnostic tool can lead to over-detection of cancers that pose little threat to health and/or life. Moreover, the impact of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality rates remains controversial, and will do so until the results of currently ongoing randomized controlled studies in Europe and the USA become available. To overcome the limitations of using PSA, research on PSA kinetics has developed considerably in the last decade. We review publications on the added value of PSA kinetics compared with single PSA measurements in the early detection of prostate cancer, and in predicting the outcome of patients with localized and advanced disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer is among the most common types of cancer and cause of cancer-related deaths among men in the USA and Europe. Despite improvements in early detection and treatment for localized disease, many patients still present with advanced disease, or attempted curative local therapy fails. Although hormone therapy is successful initially in the vast majority of patients, most develop hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) after 18–24 months. In the past, the use of chemotherapy in the management of prostate cancer has been limited, but recent evidence of its efficacy in HRPC has prompted further research to determine if it could have a more extensive role in the treatment of this disease. Data from several studies have highlighted the possible beneficial effects of incorporating chemotherapeutic agents in treatment regimens for HRPC, showing evidence of a survival advantage. One of the goals of research now is to determine optimal management strategies for different patient populations with prostate cancer. Preliminary data suggest that further improvements in efficacy might be achieved with multi-agent chemotherapy or by treating patients earlier in the disease process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chemotherapy efficacy in patients with solid tumors is influenced by primary and acquired multidrug resistance (MDR). Epothilones represent a novel class of microtubule inhibitors with lower susceptibility to drug resistance and efficacy in taxane-resistant tumors. While other epothilones are currently under investigation, ixabepilone is the first epothilone B analogue approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Ixabepilone has been shown to have preclinical activity in chemotherapy-sensitive and chemotherapy-resistant tumor models, and synergistic antitumor activity with other chemotherapeutic and targeted agents. Single-agent ixabepilone has demonstrated clinical activity in multiple solid tumors including advanced breast, lung, prostate, pancreatic, renal cell, and ovarian cancers. Most notably, efficacy has been demonstrated in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) progressing after treatment with anthracyclines and taxanes. A phase III trial in anthracycline- and taxane-resistant MBC showed superior disease control with ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine monotherapy, resulting in its approval. Ixabepilone is also active in chemotherapy-naïve and taxane-resistant hormone-refractory prostate cancer and platinum-resistant nonsmall cell lung cancer. Neutropenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy are the most common adverse events associated with treatment. This review discusses the challenges of MDR and the data that support the use of epothilones in this setting, focusing on ixabepilone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On October 6, 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted regular approval to vorinostat (Zolinza®; Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ), a histone deacetylase inhibitor, for the treatment of cutaneous manifestations of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in patients with progressive, persistent, or recurrent disease on or following two systemic therapies. The pivotal study supporting approval was a single-arm open-label phase II trial that enrolled 74 patients with stage IB and higher CTCL who had failed two systemic therapies (one of which must have contained bexarotene). Patients received vorinostat at a dose of 400 mg orally once daily, which could be reduced for toxicity to 300 mg daily or 300 mg 5 days a week. The median age of patients was 61 years. Sixty-one patients (82%) had stage IIB or higher CTCL and 30 patients (41%) had Sézary syndrome. The median duration of protocol treatment was 118 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response assessed by the Severity-Weighted Assessment Tool. The objective response rate was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.7%-41.5%), the estimated median response duration was 168 days, and the median time to tumor progression was 202 days. An additional single-center study enrolled 33 patients with similar baseline and demographic features as the pivotal trial. Thirteen of the 33 received vorinostat (400 mg/day). The response rate in these 13 patients was 31% (95% CI, 9.1%-61.4%). The most common clinical adverse events (AEs) of any grade were diarrhea (52%), fatigue (52%), nausea (41%), and anorexia (24%). Grade 3 or 4 clinical AEs included fatigue (4%) and pulmonary embolism (5%). Hematologic laboratory abnormalities included thrombocytopenia (26%) and anemia (14%). Chemistry laboratory abnormalities included increased creatinine (16%), increased serum glucose (69%), and proteinuria (51%). Most abnormalities were National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 or greater chemistry abnormalities included hyperglycemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and hyperuricemia, hypoglycemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, hyperkalemia, hypercholesterolemia, hypophosphatemia, and increased creatinine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate cancer remains a significant health concern for men in the USA as it is a leading cancer diagnosis and a cause of death. With the use of prostate-specific antigen or screening, a stage migration has occurred with an increase in the number of men diagnosed with early-stage disease. The optimal primary management of these men is evolving, but despite adequate local treatment a significant percentage will develop either biochemical or clinical evidence of recurrent disease. Several criteria for risk stratification have been developed, thus, improving the ability to identify a high-risk population. Small studies have been reported demonstrating the feasibility of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy in conjunction with either radiation or radical prostatectomy in this high-risk population, and large phase III studies are ongoing. With the advent of life-prolonging chemotherapy in the hormone-refractory setting, attention must now also be given to early-stage disease so as to develop multi-modality approaches with the hope of increasing survival and ultimately providing a cure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on two hallmark studies that demonstrates a survival advantage in androgen-independent prostate cancer patients utilizing docetaxel chemotherapy in the U.S. Multiple mechanisms of androgen independence have now been documented including amplification of the androgen receptor as well as signal transduction pathways that bypass the androgen receptor completely.

Presents the findings of clinical trials in relapsed prostate cancer. Factors to consider in developing alternative treatment for the condition; Components of the clinical trial; Parameters of treatment success.