Related Articles

Context

Despite a lack of data, increasing numbers of patients are receiving primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) as an alternative to surgery, radiation or conservative management for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

Objective

Evaluate the association between PADT and survival in elderly men with localized prostate cancer.

Main Outcome Measures

Cancer-specific and overall survival.

Design

Population-based cohort study of 19,271 men who did not receive definitive local therapy for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Instrumental variable analysis was used to address potential biases associated with unmeasured confounding variables.

Setting

Medicare patients aged ≥66 years diagnosed in 1992-2002 within predefined US geographical areas.

Results

Even though 41% of the population (median age 77) received PADT, PADT was associated with somewhat worse 10-year prostate cancer-specific survival (80.1% vs. 82.6%, hazard ratio [HR] 1.17; 95% CI 1.03–1.33) and no improvement in 10-year overall survival (30.2% vs. 30.3%,, HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.96–1.05) compared to conservative management. However, in a pre-specified subset analysis, PADT use in men with poorly-differentiated cancer was associated with marginally improved prostate cancer-specific survival (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.70–1.00, P =0.05) but not overall survival (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.84 – 1.01).

Conclusions

Primary androgen deprivation therapy is not associated with improved survival among the majority of elderly men with localized prostate cancer when compared with conservative management.

Background

Recent reports have suggested that growing numbers of patients with localized prostate cancer are receiving androgen deprivation therapy as primary or neoadjuvant treatment, yet sparse clinical evidence supports the use of such treatment in some contexts. We describe national trends in the use of androgen deprivation therapy for localized disease and identify sociodemographic variables that are associated with its use.

Methods

CaPSURE™ is an observational database of 7195 patients with prostate cancer. For this study, 3439 of these patients were included who were diagnosed since 1989, had clinical staging information available, and were treated with radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, or primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT). High-, intermediate-, or low-risk groups were defined by serum prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason sum, and clinical tumor stage. Time trends in use of PADT and neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (NADT) were analyzed, and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify sociodemographic factors associated with various treatments. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

Rates of PADT use have risen sharply from 4.6% to 14.2%, 8.9% to 19.7%, and 32.8% to 48.2% (all P<.001) in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively. NADT use likewise has increased in association with radical prostatectomy (2.9% to 7.8% of patients, P = .003) and external-beam radiotherapy (9.8% to 74.6%, P<.001) across all risk levels combined. Rates among patients treated with brachytherapy also have risen but the rise was not statistically significant. (7.4% to 24.6%, P = .100).

Conclusions

Rates of both PADT and NADT are increasing across risk groups and treatment types. Additional clinical trials must define more clearly the appropriate role of hormonal therapy in localized prostate cancer, and future results should shape updated practice guidelines.

Purpose

Prostate cancer epidemiology has been marked overall by a downward risk migration over time. However, in some populations, both in the United States and abroad, many men are still diagnosed with high-risk and/or advanced disease. Primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) is frequently offered to these patients, and disease risk prediction is not well-established in this context. We compared risk features between large disease registries from the United States and Japan, and aimed to build and validate a risk prediction model applicable to PADT patients.

Methods

Data were analyzed from 13,740 men in the United States community-based Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry and 19,265 men in the Japan Study Group of Prostate Cancer (J-CaP) database, a national Japanese registry of men receiving androgen deprivation therapy. Risk distribution was compared between the two datasets using three well-described multivariable instruments. A novel instrument (Japan Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment [J-CAPRA]) was designed and validated to be specifically applicable to PADT patients, and more relevant to high-risk patients than existing instruments.

Results

J-CaP patients are more likely than CaPSURE patients to be diagnosed with high-risk features; 43% of J-CaP versus 5% of CaPSURE patients had locally advanced or metastatic disease that could not be stratified with the standard risk assessment tools. J-CAPRA—scored 0 to 12 based on Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen level, and clinical stage—predicts progression-free survival among PADT patients in J-CaP with a c-index of 0.71, and cancer-specific survival among PADT patients in CaPSURE with a c-index of 0.84.

Conclusion

The novel J-CAPRA is the first risk instrument developed and validated for patients undergoing PADT. It is applicable to those with both localized and advanced disease, and performs well in diverse populations.

Background

Primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) is frequently used as a sole modality of treatment in men with localized prostate cancer, despite a lack of clinical trial data supporting its use.

Objective

To measure the impact of treatment with PADT compared to observation on overall survival in men with organ-confined prostate cancer.

Design, setting, and participants

The design was for an observational cohort from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Medicare data. The cohort consisted of 16 535 men aged 65–80 yr at diagnosis with organ-confined well-differentiated or moderately differentiated prostate cancer who survived >1 yr past diagnosis and did not undergo treatment with prostatectomy or radiation therapy within 6 mo of diagnosis. They were diagnosed between 1991 and 1999 and followed until death or until the end of the study period (December 31, 2002).

Intervention

Study subjects were selected to receive PADT alone if they received luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists or bilateral orchiectomy in the first 6 mo after diagnosis, and they were selected to be observed if they did not have claims for PADT during the same interval.

Measurements

Overall survival.

Results and limitations

After adjusting for potential confounders (ie, tumor characteristics, comorbidities, and demographics), patients who received ADT had a worse overall survival rate than patients who were observed (hazard ratio: 1.20; 95% confidence interval: 1.13–1.27).

In observational studies there may be unmeasured differences between the treated and untreated groups. The SEER database does not provide information on prostate-specific antigen levels.

Conclusions

This large, population-based study suggests that PADT did not improve survival in men with localized prostate cancer, but it suggests that PADT may instead result in worse outcomes compared with observation. Patients and physicians should be cognizant of the potential long-term side effects of ADT in a patient population for which expectant observation is an acceptable treatment strategy.

Purpose

Men with high-risk features (extraprostatic extension or high Gleason grade) face a high risk of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Clinical trials of adjuvant systemic therapy for such patients have been limited.

Patients and Methods

The SWOG (Southwest Oncology Group) S9921 study randomly assigned 983 men with high-risk features at prostatectomy to receive adjuvant therapy with androgen deprivation (ADT) alone or in combination with mitoxantrone chemotherapy. ADT consisted of goserelin and bicalutamide for 2 years.

Results

Although the final primary treatment comparison results are not ready for publication, this article reports results in the ADT-alone control arm with a median follow-up of 4.4 years. For these 481 men, the estimated 5-year biochemical failure-free survival is 92.5% (95% CI, 90 to 95), and 5-year overall survival is 95.9% (95% CI, 93.9 to 97.9).

Conclusion

The results of this trial, taken in context, make a compelling argument for counseling all high-risk patients with prostate cancer about adjuvant ADT. This article discusses the challenges in the design and implementation of clinical trials to take the next step forward in adjuvant therapy for prostate cancer because of the excellent survival achieved with currently available therapies and highlights the need for better molecular markers to personalize care.

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of primary Gleason grade in Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancer on biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy in Korean men.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed records of 1,026 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital between November 2003 and June 2009. We excluded patients who had received neoadjuvant therapy and had positive resection margins. Finally, 295 and 113 patients with GS 3+4 and GS 4+3, respectively, were included in this study. All patients were followed for at least 2 years.

Results

Of the 408 GS 7 patients, 295 (72.3%) were 3+4 and 113 (27.7%) were 4+3. Mean serum prostate specific antigen level in primary Gleason 3 was 8.99 ng/ml and primary Gleason 4 was 11.11 ng/ml. Patients with GS 4+3 were more likely to have extracapsular extension (30.1% vs. 17.6%, p<0.010) and lymphatic invasion (16.8% vs. 7.1%, p<0.005). After 2 years follow up BCR was detected in a total of 40 patients. In GS 7 with primary Gleason 3, BCR occurred in 15 (5.08%) patients while 20 (17.70%) showed BCR in GS 7 with primary Gleason 4.

Conclusions

In this study of a large, single center cohort of Korean men with GS 7 prostate cancer a noticeable difference in BCR was seen. Primary Gleason grade 4 have a higher risk of BCR compared to primary Gleason grade 3. This information may be useful when counseling patients on their prognosis and further management options.

Objective. As recent participants in an integrated prostate cancer (PCa) care center, we sought to evaluate whether financial investment in an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) center resulted in an increased utilization of radiation therapy in our patients with newly diagnosed PCa. Materials & Methods. Following institutional review board approval, we retrospectively reviewed the records of all consecutive patients who were diagnosed with prostate cancer in the 12 months prior to and after investment in IMRT. Primary treatment modalities included active surveillance (AS), brachytherapy (BT), radiation therapy (XRT), radical prostatectomy (RP), and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Treatment data were available for all patients and were compared between the two groups. Results. A total of 344 patients with newly diagnosed PCa were evaluated over the designated time period. The pre-investment group totaled 198 patients, while 146 patients constituted the post-investment group. Among all patients evaluated, there was a similar rate in the use of XRT (20.71% versus 20.55%, P = 1.000) pre- and post-investment in IMRT. Conclusions. Financial interest in IMRT by urologists does not impact overall utilization rates among patients with newly diagnosed PCa at our center.

Introduction:

The prostate secretes enzymes and nutrients to promote sperm motility. Recent reports suggest that the prostate may also secrete testosterone, which is believed to be a fuel for prostate tumour growth. The aim of this study was to determine if a difference in serum testosterone levels exists between men on luteinizing hormone releasing-hormone (LHRH) agonists who have undergone radical prostatectomy, radiation or hormone therapy as primary prostate cancer treatment.

Methods:

Serum testosterone levels were evaluated in 165 consecutive prostate cancer patients using LHRH analogues for >3 months. We excluded patients receiving either radiation or chemotherapy at time of time of testosterone measurement. Patients were classified based on primary treatment: (1) radical prostatectomy; (2) radiation; or (3) primary hormone therapy. We used one-way ANOVA to compare testosterone levels. Pearson correlation was used to correlate testosterone with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and time on LHRH agonists. Multivariable linear regression was used to predict serum testosterone levels.

Results:

The median (interquartile range) serum testosterone levels were 1.4 (1–1.9), 1.3 (1–1.625) and 1.25 (0.9–1.525) nmol/L for radical prostatectomy, radiation and primary hormone therapy groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in testosterone levels between the groups (p = 0.3). No correlation was found between testosterone and PSA levels or time on LHRH (r = 0.02 and r = 0.01), respectively. Multivariable linear regression showed that none of the clinical variables were predictors of serum testosterone levels.

Conclusion:

Our study suggests that primary treatment does not affect serum testosterone levels among men using LHRH analogues.

Objective

To determine whether higher intensity of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) surveillance was associated with earlier detection of biochemical recurrence (BCR) or survival.

Patients and Methods

We identified a population-based cohort of 832 men diagnosed with nonmetastatic prostate cancer between January 1, 1995, and July 31, 2006. These men were treated with radical prostatectomy (RP), brachytherapy or external beam radiation therapy (RT), or primary androgen deprivation therapy or chose watchful waiting. To test the associations of intensity in PSA surveillance with study outcomes, we used a 2-year landmark analysis to assess whether the number of PSA tests during the first 2 years after treatment was associated with earlier detection of BCR, prostate cancer–related mortality, and all-cause mortality. We used landmark analysis to assess the association of PSA intensity, adjusting for clinicopathologic covariate, with outcome.

Results

Median follow-up time for the entire cohort was 6.7 years. Higher Gleason score was the only clinicopathologic variable associated with higher PSA frequency in multivariable analysis for both the RP and RT groups (P value of .001 and .05, respectively). After adjustment for other covariates, the frequency of PSA tests during the first 2 years after RP did not increase the ability to detect BCR (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.19) or all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.30) in the landmark analysis.

Conclusion

Higher intensity of PSA surveillance during the 2 years after RP or RT did not improve earlier detection of BCR or survival. Evidence-based guidelines for PSA surveillance after primary treatment are needed.

Purpose

Prostate cancer cells uniformly express the immune cell inhibitory B7-H3 ligand. Enhanced B7-H3 expression correlates with increased disease progression and cancer-specific death after radical prostatectomy (RP).

Experimental Design

To further assess whether B7-H3 expression is hormone regulated and persists as a viable target during (or after) androgen-ablative therapy, we examined B7-H3 ligand expression within primary and metastatic cancer lesions in response to neoadjuvant hormone therapy (NHT) or palliative hormone deprivation. Tumor B7-H3 in RP specimens from men treated with ≥3 months of NHT was compared with B7-H3 in tumors from matched patients who received no therapy before RP. Hormone-treated and untreated metastatic lesions involving bone were also compared for levels of B7-H3 expression.

Results

Of 165 consecutive RP specimens in each cohort studied, sufficient tissues were available for 148 patients (89.7%) treated with NHT versus 127 patients (77.0%) treated with surgery alone. B7-H3 was expressed in 142 (95.9%) tumors from NHT patients compared with 122 (96.0%) tumors from patients treated with surgery alone (P = 0.91). B7-H3 expression intensity in RP specimens was not affected by NHT (P = 0.12). Bone metastases from 11 (32.4%) untreated and 23 (67.6%) androgen-ablated patients revealed that B7-H3 expression increased in response to hormone therapy (P = 0.04) relative to untreated lesions.

Conclusions

Taken together, B7-H3 expression seems to remain stable (or may even increase) in response to hormone therapy. As such, B7-H3 may represent an attractive target to improve treatment of men with high-risk hormone-treated or refractory prostate cancer.

Background

Early prostate cancer antigen (EPCA) has been shown a prostate cancer (PCa)-associated nuclear matrix protein, however, its serum status and prognostic power in PCa are unknown. The goals of this study are to measure serum EPCA levels in a cohort of patients with PCa prior to the treatment, and to evaluate the clinical value of serum EPCA.

Methods

Pretreatment serum EPCA levels were determined with an ELISA in 77 patients with clinically localized PCa who underwent radical prostatectomy and 51 patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease who received primary androgen deprivation therapy, and were correlated with clinicopathological variables and disease progression. Serum EPCA levels were also examined in 40 healthy controls.

Results

Pretreatment mean serum EPCA levels were significantly higher in PCa patients than in controls (16.84±7.60 ng/ml vs. 4.12±2.05 ng/ml, P<0.001). Patients with locally advanced and metastatic PCa had significantly higher serum EPCA level than those with clinically localized PCa (22.93±5.28 ng/ml and 29.41±8.47 ng/ml vs. 15.17±6.03 ng/ml, P = 0.014 and P<0.001, respectively). Significantly elevated EPCA level was also found in metastatic PCa compared with locally advanced disease (P<0.001). Increased serum EPCA levels were significantly and positively correlated with Gleason score and clinical stage, but not with PSA levels and age. On multivariate analysis, pretreatment serum EPCA level held the most significantly predictive value for the biochemical recurrence and androgen-independent progression among pretreatment variables (HR = 4.860, P<0.001 and HR = 5.418, P<0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

Serum EPCA level is markedly elevated in PCa. Pretreatment serum EPCA level correlates significantly with the poor prognosis, showing prediction potential for PCa progression.

Background

Primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a treatment option not only for advanced but also for localized prostate cancer. However, the appropriate duration for primary ADT for localized prostate cancer has not been defined and few studies have addressed this issue. In this study, we aimed to determine the appropriate duration of ADT for localized prostate cancer.

Methods

Sixty-eight consecutive patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent a prostatectomy following neoadjuvant ADT were retrospectively reviewed. Factors associated with pT0, which is regarded as serious cancer cell damage or elimination, were investigated.

Results

Of the 68 males, 24 (35.3%) were classified as pT0. The median duration of neoadjuvant ADT in the pT0 and non-pT0 groups was 9 months and 7.5 months, respectively (p = 0.022). The duration of neoadjuvant ADT from when PSA reached < 0.2 ng/ml to surgery was longer in the pT0 group than that in the non-pT0 group (median 5 months against 3 months, p = 0.011). pT0 was achieved in 5 of 6 patients (83.3%) who received ADT for ≥10 months after PSA reached < 0.2 ng/ml. No other clinical characteristics predicted conversion to pT0.

Conclusions

Continuous ADT for ≥10 months after PSA reached < 0.2 ng/ml induced serious prostate cancer cell damage in most patients (> 80%) and may be sufficient to treat localized prostate cancer.

Background

Enthusiasm for laparoscopic surgical approaches to prostate cancer treatment has grown, despite limited evidence of improved outcomes compared with open radical prostatectomy. We compared laparoscopic (with or without robotic assistance) versus open radical prostatectomy in terms of postoperative outcomes and subsequent cancer-directed therapy.

Materials and Methods

Using a population-based cancer registry linked with Medicare claims, we identified men age 66 or older with localized prostate cancer who received a radical prostatectomy from 2003-2005. Outcome measures were general medical/surgical complications and mortality within 90 days following surgery; genitourinary/bowel complications within 365 days; receipt of radiation therapy, androgen deprivation therapy or both within 365 days; length of hospital stay.

Results

Of the 5,923 men,18% received a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, there were no differences in rates of general medical/surgical complications (OR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.77-1.14) or genitourinary/bowel complications (OR 0.96; 95% CI: 0.76-1.22) or in the use of postoperative radiation, androgen deprivation or both (OR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.60-1.08). Laparoscopic prostatectomy was associated with a 35% shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001) and a lower rate of bladder neck/urethral obstruction (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.58-0.94). In laparoscopic patients, surgeon volume was inversely associated with length of hospital stay and the odds of any genitourinary/bowel complication.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy have similar rates of postoperative morbidity and use of additional treatment. Men considering prostate cancer surgery should understand the expected benefits and risks of each technique to facilitate decision-making and to set realistic expectations.

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed non-cutaneous tumor of men in Western countries. While surgery is often successful for organ-confined prostate cancer, androgen ablation therapy is the primary treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. However, this therapy is associated with several undesired side-effects, including increased risk of cardiovascular diseases. Shortening the period of androgen ablation therapy may benefit prostate cancer patients. Intermittent Androgen Deprivation therapy improves quality of life, reduces toxicity and medical costs, and delays disease progression in some patients. Cell culture and xenograft studies using androgen receptor (AR)-positive castration-resistant human prostate cancers cells (LNCaP, ARCaP, and PC-3 cells over-expressing AR) suggest that androgens may suppress the growth of AR-rich prostate cancer cells. Androgens cause growth inhibition and G1 cell cycle arrest in these cells by regulating c-Myc, Skp2, and p27Kip via AR. Higher dosages of testosterone cause greater growth inhibition of relapsed tumors. Manipulating androgen/AR signaling may therefore be a potential therapy for AR-positive advanced prostate cancer.

Objectives

Hot flashes are a common adverse effect of hormonal therapy for prostate cancer. We sought to determine the effect of acupuncture on hot flash frequency and intensity, quality of life, and sleep quality.

Methods

Men who had a hot flash score (HFS) > 4 while on androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer received acupuncture with electrostimulation biweekly for 4 weeks, then weekly for 6 weeks using a predefined treatment plan. The primary endpoint was a 50% reduction in HFS after 4 weeks of therapy, calculated from the patient daily hot flash diary. Hot flash related quality of life and sleep quality, and biomarkers potentially related to hot flashes, including serotonin, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), and urinary 5-HIAA were examined.

Results

Twenty-five men were enrolled between 9/2003 and 4/2007; 22 were eligible and evaluable. After four weeks, 9 of 22 patients (41%, 95%CI 21 to 64%) had a > 50% reduction in HFS. Twelve of 22 patients (55%, 95%CI 32 to 76%) met this response definition at any time during the course of therapy. No patients had a significant increase in HFS on therapy. Reduced HFS was associated with improvement in hot flash related quality of life and sleep quality.

Conclusions

Multiple placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated a 25% response rate to placebo treatment for hot flashes. 41% of patients responded by week 4 and 55% overall in this pilot study providing evidence of a potentially meaningful benefit. Further studies of acupuncture for hot flashes in this population are warranted.

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous neoplasm in the male population worldwide. It is typically diagnosed in its early stages, and the disease exhibits a relatively indolent course in most patients. Despite the curability of localized disease with prostatectomy and radiation therapy, some patients develop metastatic disease and die. Although androgen deprivation is present in the majority of patients with metastatic prostate cancer, a state of androgen resistance eventually develops. Castration-resistant prostate cancer, defined when there is progression of disease despite low levels of testosterone, requires specialized care, and improved communication between medical and urologic oncologists has been identified as a key component in delivering effective therapy. Despite being considered a chemoresistant tumor in the past, the use of a prostate-specific antigen has paved the way for a new generation of trials for castration-resistant prostate cancer. Docetaxel is a life-prolonging chemotherapy that has been established as the standard first-line agent in two phase III clinical trials. Cabazitaxel, a novel taxane with activity in cancer models resistant to paclitaxel and docetaxel, is the only agent that has been compared to a chemotherapy control in a phase III clinical trial as a second-line therapy; it was found to prolong the overall survival of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel when compared to mitoxantrone. Other agents used in this setting include abiraterone and sipuleucel-T, and novel therapies are continually being investigated in an attempt to improve the outcome for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Purpose

To determine the impact of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients who have node-positive prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era.

Patients and Methods

We used linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data to construct a cohort of men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1991 and 1999 and who had positive regional lymph nodes. We classified men as receiving adjuvant ADT if they received ADT within 120 days of RP, and we compared them to the men who had not received adjuvant ADT. We used propensity scores to balance potential confounders of receiving adjuvant ADT (ie, tumor characteristics, extent of nodal disease, demographics, receipt of radiation therapy) and Cox proportional hazard methods to measure the impact of adjuvant ADT on overall survival (OS), stratified by propensity score quintile. We conducted a sensitivity analysis that used 90, 150, 180, and 365 days as the definition for adjuvant ADT.

Results

A total of 731 men were identified, 209 of whom received ADT within 120 days of RP. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between the adjuvant ADT and non-ADT group (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.27). There was no statistically significant survival difference with 90, 150, 180, and 365 days as the adjuvant ADT definition.

Conclusion

Deferring immediate ADT in men with positive lymph nodes after RP may not significantly compromise survival. Because observational studies should be considered hypothesis-generating studies, these results should be validated in a prospective fashion in a similar patient population.

Introduction:

A survey of Canadian uro-oncology specialists was performed to assess practice patterns of patients with recurrent prostate cancer postradiotherapy and to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial in this setting.

Methods:

There were 14 survey questions and 1 demographic question. Responses were reported by frequency.

Results:

There were 96 respondents. Most respondents use both prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSAdt) and PSA level when deciding to start androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in asymptomatic patients. About half of respondents start ADT when PSA is greater than 10 ng/mL or when the PSAdt is less than 6 months. Eighty-six percent felt that the timing of ADT was an important research question. Over 1500 patients per year were estimated as being available for such a trial.

Conclusion:

After radiotherapy failure, respondents initiated ADT about half of the time when PSA is less than 10 ng/mL and/or PSAdt is less than 6 months. A clinical trial examining the timing of ADT has strong support and appears to be feasible.

Purpose

Uncertainty exists about the ideal timing for initiation of androgen deprivation therapy for men with metastatic prostate cancer. We assessed factors associated with early or delayed androgen deprivation therapy among men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer and assessed the relationship between this therapy and overall survival.

Patients and methods

We studied a population-based cohort of American men aged ≥66 years diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer during 1992–2002 and followed through 2003. We assessed receipt of androgen deprivation therapy early (within 4 months of diagnosis), delayed (after 4 months), or not at all, used multinomial logistic regression to identify factors associated with treatment, and used Cox proportional hazards models to assess whether treatment was associated with survival.

Results

Overall, 69.5% of men received early hormonal therapy and 7.3% delayed. Adjusted rates of early therapy were lower for black vs. white men (58.3% vs. 71.0%) and adjusted rates of delayed use were higher for black vs. white men (12.7% vs. 6.2%). Receipt of androgen deprivation therapy was associated with improved survival (adjusted HR=.69 95% CI .66–.73). The benefit for early treatment did not differ from delayed treatment (P=.58)

Conclusions

A large minority of men with metastatic prostate cancer, particularly black men, receive delayed or no hormonal therapy. Receipt of early or delayed hormonal therapy was associated with similarly prolonged survival. After controlling for patient and tumor characteristics, survival did not differ by race, and receipt of hormonal therapy did not contribute to racial differences in survival.

Background

Although many tools for the assessment of prostate cancer risk have been published, most are designed to predict only biochemical recurrence, usually after a single specified treatment. We assessed the accuracy of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score, which was validated previously to predict pathological and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy, to predict metastases, prostate cancer–specific mortality, and all-cause mortality.

Methods

We studied 10 627 men with clinically localized prostate cancer in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor registry, who underwent primary radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy (external beam or interstitial), androgen deprivation monotherapy, or watchful waiting/active surveillance, and had at least 6 months of follow-up after treatment. CAPRA scores were calculated at diagnosis from the prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, percentage of biopsy cores that were positive for cancer, clinical tumor stage, and age at diagnosis. Survival was studied with Kaplan–Meier analyses. Associations between increasing CAPRA scores and bone metastasis, cancer-specific mortality, and all-cause mortality were examined by use of proportional hazards regression, with adjustment for primary treatment; for all-cause mortality, the analysis also included adjustment for age and comorbidity. Accuracy of the CAPRA score was assessed with the concordance (c)-index.

Results

Among the 10 627 patients, 311 (2.9%) men developed bone metastases, 251 (2.4%) died of prostate cancer, and 1582 (14.9%) died of other causes. Each single-point increase in the CAPRA score was associated with increased bone metastases (hazard ratio [HR] for bone metastases = 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.39 to 1.56), cancer-specific mortality (HR for prostate cancer death = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.31 to 1.48), and all-cause mortality (HR for death = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.16). The CAPRA score was accurate for predicting metastases (c-index = 0.78), cancer-specific mortality (c-index = 0.80), and all-cause mortality (c-index = 0.71).

Conclusions

In a large cohort of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who were managed with one of five primary modalities, the CAPRA score predicted clinical prostate cancer endpoints with good accuracy. These results support the value of the CAPRA score as a risk assessment and stratification tool for both research studies and clinical practice.

Purpose

No adequate randomized trials comparing active treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer have been reported. We analyzed risk-adjusted cancer-specific mortality outcomes among men undergoing radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiation therapy, or primary androgen deprivation therapy.

Methods

The CaPSURE registry comprises men from 40 urologic practice sites followed prospectively under uniform protocols, regardless of treatment. 7538 men with localized disease were analyzed. Prostate cancer risk was assessed using the Kattan preoperative nomogram and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score, both well-validated instruments calculated from clinical data at the time of diagnosis. A parametric survival model was constructed to compare outcomes across treatments, adjusting for risk and age.

Results

226 men died of prostate cancer during followup. Adjusting for age and risk, the hazard ratio for cancer-specific mortality relative to prostatectomy was 2.21 (1.50–3.24) for radiation, and 3.22 (2.16–4.81) for androgen deprivation. Absolute differences between prostatectomy and radiation therapy were small for men at low risk, but increased substantially for men at intermediate and high risk. These results were robust to a variety of different analytic techniques including competing risks regression analysis, adjustment by CAPRA rather than Kattan score, and examination of overall survival as the endpoint.

Conclusions

Prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer was associated with a significant and substantial reduction in mortality relative to radiation or androgen deprivation monotherapy. Although not a randomized study, given the multiple adjustments and sensitivity analyses it is unlikely that unmeasured confounding would account for the large observed differences in survival.

A patient who was treated with estrogens for carcinoma of the prostate was later diagnosed with apparent primary cancer of the male breast. He received chest-wall radiation therapy with curative intent. Later, immunodiagnosis by immunoperoxidase staining for human prostate-specific acid phosphatase of the breast tissue revealed that the patient actually had metastatic prostate cancer to the breast rather than primary breast cancer secondary to estrogen therapy. Use of highly specific peroxidase-antiperoxidase tissue staining for human prostate-specific acid phosphatase is recommended to differentiate primary male breast cancer from metastatic prostate cancer.

Images

BACKGROUND

Androgen-deprivation therapy is well-established for treating prostate cancer but is associated with bone loss and an increased risk of fracture. We investigated the effects of denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand, on bone mineral density and fractures in men receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer.

METHODS

In this double-blind, multicenter study, we randomly assigned patients to receive denosumab at a dose of 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months or placebo (734 patients in each group). The primary end point was percent change in bone mineral density at the lumbar spine at 24 months. Key secondary end points included percent change in bone mineral densities at the femoral neck and total hip at 24 months and at all three sites at 36 months, as well as incidence of new vertebral fractures.

RESULTS

At 24 months, bone mineral density of the lumbar spine had increased by 5.6% in the denosumab group as compared with a loss of 1.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001); significant differences between the two groups were seen at as early as 1 month and sustained through 36 months. Denosumab therapy was also associated with significant increases in bone mineral density at the total hip, femoral neck, and distal third of the radius at all time points. Patients who received denosumab had a decreased incidence of new vertebral fractures at 36 months (1.5%, vs. 3.9% with placebo) (relative risk, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.78; P = 0.006). Rates of adverse events were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Denosumab was associated with increased bone mineral density at all sites and a reduction in the incidence of new vertebral fractures among men receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00089674.)

Purpose

To explore whether progression-free survival (PFS) or biochemical PFS can be used as a predictor of overall survival (OS) and to investigate the dependence between PFS and OS in men with castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

Patients and Methods

Data from nine Cancer and Leukemia Group B trials that enrolled 1,296 men from 1991 to 2004 were pooled. Men were eligible if they had prostate cancer that had progressed during androgen deprivation therapy and did not receive prior treatment with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or other nonhormonal therapy. Landmark analyses of PFS at 3 and 6 months from randomization/registration were performed to minimize lead time bias. The proportional hazards model was used to assess the significance effect of PFS rate at 3 and at 6 months in predicting OS. In addition, biochemical progression using the definitions of Prostate-Specific Antigen Working Group (PSAW) Criteria PSAWG1 and PSAWG2 were analyzed as time-dependent covariates in predicting OS.

Results

The median survival time among men who experienced progression at 3 months was 9.2 months (95% CI, 8.0 to 10.0 months) compared with 17.8 months in men who did not experience progression at 3 months (95% CI, 16.2 to 20.4 months; P < .0001). Compared with men who did not progress at 3 and at 6 months, the adjusted hazard ratios for death were 2.0 (95% CI, 1.7 to 2.4; P < .001) and 1.9 (95% CI, 1.6 to 2.4; P < .001) for men who experienced progression at 3 and 6 months, respectively. In addition, biochemical progression at 3 months predicted OS. The association between PFS and OS was 0.30 (95% confidence limits = 0.26, 0.32).

Conclusion

PFS at 3 and 6 months and biochemical progression at 3 months predict OS. These observations require prospective validation.

Background

The identification of surrogate endpoints for prostate cancer–specific survival may shorten the length of clinical trials for prostate cancer. We evaluated distant metastasis and general clinical treatment failure as potential surrogates for prostate cancer–specific survival by use of data from the Radiation Therapy and Oncology Group 92-02 randomized trial.

Methods

Patients (n = 1554 randomly assigned and 1521 evaluable for this analysis) with locally advanced prostate cancer had been treated with 4 months of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy with external beam radiation therapy and then randomly assigned to no additional therapy (control arm) or 24 additional months of androgen deprivation therapy (experimental arm). Data from landmark analyses at 3 and 5 years for general clinical treatment failure (defined as documented local disease progression, regional or distant metastasis, initiation of androgen deprivation therapy, or a prostate-specific antigen level of 25 ng/mL or higher after radiation therapy) and/or distant metastasis were tested as surrogate endpoints for prostate cancer–specific survival at 10 years by use of Prentice’s four criteria. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

At 3 years, 1364 patients were alive and contributed data for analysis. Both distant metastasis and general clinical treatment failure at 3 years were consistent with all four of Prentice's criteria for being surrogate endpoints for prostate cancer–specific survival at 10 years. At 5 years, 1178 patients were alive and contributed data for analysis. Although prostate cancer–specific survival was not statistically significantly different between treatment arms at 5 years (P = .08), both endpoints were consistent with Prentice's remaining criteria.

Conclusions

Distant metastasis and general clinical treatment failure at 3 years may be candidate surrogate endpoints for prostate cancer–specific survival at 10 years. These endpoints, however, must be validated in other datasets.