Gonadotropin-releasing hormone: an update review of the antagonists versus agonists

[Cardiovascular risks with prostate cancer hormonal treatment: rationale for a department of oncocardiology]

Prostate cancer, the most frequent cancer in man, is an adenocarcinoma sensible to chemical castration in more than 80% of cases due to its hormonal dependency. Androgen deprivation is the treatment for advanced cancer and can be associated with radiotherapy locally or in locally advanced situations. Multidisciplinary therapeutic choice depends on patient age and co-morbidities and clinical stage. The impact of hormonal treatment confers varied side effects and cardiovascular effects are now better known. Responsible mechanisms of this cardiotoxicity are at the same time direct but also indirect by metabolic thermogenic effects. Analysis of these clinical or biological effects, their correlations to the used type of hormonal treatment and the possible precautions of prescription will be detailed in this analysis of the literature. The collaboration of the oncologist or the urologist with the cardiologist becomes necessary and the existence of a unit of oncocardiology could improve the evaluation of the risk-benefit balance and the tolerance of the treatment.

Efficacy, safety, and dose comparison of degarelix for the treatment of prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis into the efficacy, safety, and dosage regimens of degarelix for treating prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing degarelix (240/80 mg vs 240/160 mg) to the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, goserelin and leuprolide, for the treatment of PCa. Two independent reviewers screened putative studies, assessed the risk of bias, and then extracted pertinent data. Analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.2.

RESULTS: Seven papers from six RCTs, involving 1204 patients, were identified. The present meta-analysis showed that treatment with 240/160 mg degarelix is more effective and has fewer adverse events (AEs) relative to conventional 240/80 mg regimen. Degarelix significantly decreased International Prostate Symptom Scores [standardized mean differences (SMD) = -0.32, 95%CI: -0.51 to -0.12, P = 0.02] and caused fewer AEs (SMD = -0.28, 95%CI: -0.48 to -0.07, P = 0.008) than goserelin. Degarelix suppressed testosterone and prostate-specific antigen significantly faster than leuprolide.

CONCLUSION: Degarelix is a useful option in the treatment of advanced PCa. Degarelix 240/160 mg regimen was superior to a 240/80 mg regimen. More rigorously designed RCTs are urgently needed to confirm the efficacy of degarelix.

Elucidation of the mechanism of suppressed steroidogenesis during androgen deprivation therapy of prostate cancer patients using a mouse model

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the standard medical approach to the management of prostate cancer. Patients switched from a GnRH antagonist to a GnRH agonist, did not experience a testosterone surge in spite of the occurrence of luteinizing hormone (LH) surge in our protocol of clinical study. To clarify this observation, male mice pre-treated with two different doses of the GnRH antagonist degarelix for 28 days were further administered the GnRH agonist leuprolide or chorionic gonadotropin, and testosterone production of the mice was studied. Serum LH and testosterone levels, the size of Leydig cells, and expression level of steroidogenesis-related genes in the testis were analyzed. Treatment of mice with a high dose of degarelix (0.1 μg/mouse; HDG), but not a low dose (0.05 μg/mouse; LDG), for 28 days reproduced declined steroidogenesis observed in prostate cancer patients during ADT switched from a GnRH antagonist to a GnRH agonist. The size of the Leydig cells in the HDG mice was not significantly different from that in naive mice. Although expression levels of StAR, P450scc, and 17β HSD increased significantly in the LDH testis, those in the HDG testis did not change. Treatment of mice with a high dose of degarelix for 28 days reproduced the decline in steroidogenesis observed in prostate cancer patients during ADT. In this animal model, we demonstrated that initial ADT may inhibit the ability of Leydig cells to produce testosterone by suppressing the expression of genes involved in steroidogenesis, such as StAR, P450scc, and 17βHSD.

Corepressive function of nuclear receptor coactivator 2 in androgen receptor of prostate cancer cells treated with antiandrogen

BACKGROUND

Recruitment of cofactors in the interaction of the androgen receptor (AR) and AR ligands plays a critical role in determining androgenic/antiandrogenic effects of the AR ligand on signaling, but the functions of key cofactors, including nuclear receptor coactivator (NCOA), remain poorly understood in prostate cancer cells treated with AR ligands.

METHODS

We examined prostate cancer cell lines LNCaP and VCaP expressing mutated and wild-type ARs, respectively, to clarify the significance of NCOAs in the effect of antiandrogens. Hydroxyflutamide showed antagonistic activity against VCaP and an agonistic effect on LNCaP. Bicalutamide served as an antagonist for both. We analyzed mRNA transcription and protein expression of NCOAs in these cells pretreated with dihydrotestosterone and thereafter treated with the mentioned antiandrogens. Transcriptional silencing of candidate NCOAs and AR was performed using small interfering RNA (siRNA). Cell proliferation was evaluated with MTT assay.

RESULTS

LNCaP treated with bicalutamide showed an about four-fold increase in the expression of NCOA2 mRNA compared to those pretreated with dihydrotestosterone alone (P <0.01). In VCaP pretreated with dihydrotestosterone, transcriptions of NCOA2 and NCOA7 were slightly increased with bicalutamide (1.96- and 2.42-fold, respectively) and hydroxyflutamide (1.33-fold in both). With Western blotting, the expression of NCOA2 protein also increased in LNCaP cells treated with bicalutamide compared with that in control cells pretreated with dihydrotestosterone alone. Following silencing with siRNA for NCOA2, PSA levels in media with LNCaP receiving bicalutamide were elevated compared with those in non-silencing controls (101.6 ± 4.2 vs. 87.8 ± 1.4 ng/mL, respectively, P =0.0495). In LNCaP cells treated with dihydrotestosterone and bicalutamide, NCOA2-silencing was associated with a higher proliferation activity compared with non-silencing control and AR-silencing.

CONCLUSION

NCOA2, which has been thought to be recruited as a coactivator, possibly plays a corepressive role in AR of prostate cancer cells when treated with antiandrogens, suggesting its potential as a therapeutic target.

De novo steroid biosynthesis in human prostate cell lines and biopsies

BACKGROUND

Intratumoral androgen formation may be a factor in the development of prostate cancer (PCa), particularly castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). To evaluate the ability of the human prostate to synthesize de novo steroids, we examined the expression of key enzymes and proteins involved in steroid biosynthesis and metabolism.

METHODS

Using TissueScan™ Cancer qPCR Arrays and quantitative RT-PCR, we performed comparative gene expression analyses between various prostate cell lines and biopsies, including normal, hyperplastic, cancerous, and androgen-deprived prostate cells lines, as well as normal, benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), PCa, and CRPC human specimens. These studies were complemented with steroid biosynthesis studies in normal and BPH cells.

RESULTS

Normal human prostate WPMY-1 and WPE1-NA22, benign prostate hyperplasia BPH-1, and cancer PC-3, LNCaP, and VCaP cell lines, as well as normal, BPH, PCa, and CRPC specimens, were used. Although all cell lines express mRNA encoding for hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase (HMGCR), the mitochondrial translocator protein TSPO and cholesterol side chain cleavage enzyme CYP11A1 were only observed in WPMY-1, BPH-1, and LNCaP cells. HSD3B1, HSD3B2, and CYP17A1 are involved in androgen formation and were not found in most cell lines. WPE1-NA22 and BPH-1 cells were unable to synthesize de novo steroids from mevalonate. Moreover, androgen-deprived cells did not have alterations in the expression of enzymes that could lead to de novo steroid formation. All prostate specimens expressed TSPO and CYP11A1. HSD3B1/2, CYP17A1, HSD17B5, and CYP19A1 mRNA expression was distinct to the profile observed in cells lines. The majority of BPH (90.9%) and PCa (83.1%) specimens contained CYP17A1, compared to control (normal) specimens (46.7%). BPH (82%), PCa (59%), normal (40%), and CRPC (34%) specimens expressed the four key enzymes that metabolize cholesterol to androgens.

CONCLUSION

These studies question the use of prostate cell lines to study steroid biosynthesis and demonstrate that human prostate samples contain transcripts encoding for key steroidogenic enzymes and proteins indicating that they have the potential to synthesize de novo steroids. We propose CYP17A1 as a candidate enzyme that can be used for patient stratification and treatment in BPH and PCa.

The role of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists in the treatment of patients with advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer in the UK

Purpose

Comparing gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists and agonists as androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer (PC).

Methods

This article stems from a round-table meeting in December 2014 to compare the properties of GnRH agonists and antagonists in the published literature in order to identify the patient groups most likely to benefit from GnRH antagonist therapy. A broad PubMed and congress abstract search was carried out in preparation for the meeting to ensure that the latest data and opinion were available for the discussions.

Results

In randomised, controlled trials, GnRH antagonist therapy provides more rapid suppression of luteinising hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and testosterone than GnRH agonist treatment. Compared with the GnRH agonist, there is evidence of improved disease control by a GnRH antagonist, with longer interval to prostate-specific antigen progression and greater reduction of serum alkaline phosphatase. In a post hoc analysis of six randomised trials, the risk of cardiac events within 1 year of initiating therapy was significantly lower among men receiving GnRH antagonist than agonist. Pre-clinical laboratory data suggest a number of mechanisms whereby GnRH antagonist therapy may benefit men with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD), the most plausible hypothesis being that, unlike GnRH agonists, GnRH antagonists do not activate T lymphocytes, which act to increase atherosclerotic plaque rupture.

Conclusion

When making treatment decisions, clinicians should consider comorbidities, particularly CVD, in addition to effects on PC. GnRH antagonists may be appropriate in patients with significant CV risk, existing osteopenia, lower urinary tract symptoms and significant metastatic disease.

Hormone Receptors in Serous Ovarian Carcinoma: Prognosis, Pathogenesis, and Treatment Considerations

A few breakthroughs have been accomplished for the treatment of ovarian cancer, the most deadly gynecologic carcinoma, in the current era of targeted oncologic treatment. The estrogen receptor was the first target of such treatments with the introduction of tamoxifen four decades ago in breast cancer therapeutics. Attempts to duplicate the success of hormonal therapies in ovarian cancer met with mixed results, which may be due to an inferior degree of hormone dependency in this cancer. Alternatively, this may be due to the failure to clearly identify the subsets of ovarian cancer with hormone sensitivity. This article reviews the expression of hormone receptors by ovarian cancer cells, the prognostic value of these expressions, and their predictive capacity for response to hormonal agents. The possible ways ahead are briefly discussed.

Therapeutic Rationales, Progresses, Failures, and Future Directions for Advanced Prostate Cancer

Patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) have several therapeutic options with good prognosis. However, survival of patients with high-risk, advanced PCa is significantly less than patients with early-stage, organ-confined disease. Testosterone and other androgens have been directly linked to PCa progression since 1941. In this review, we chronicle the discoveries that led to modern therapeutic strategies for PCa. Specifically highlighted is the biology of androgen receptor (AR), the nuclear receptor transcription factor largely responsible for androgen-stimulated and castrate-recurrent (CR) PCa. Current PCa treatment paradigms can be classified into three distinct but interrelated categories: targeting AR at pre-receptor, receptor, or post-receptor signaling. The continuing challenge of disease relapse as CR and/or metastatic tumors, destined to occur within three years of the initial treatment, is also discussed. We conclude that the success of PCa therapies in the future depends on targeting molecular mechanisms underlying tumor recurrence that still may affect AR at pre-receptor, receptor, and post-receptor levels.

Degarelix monotherapy compared with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists plus anti-androgen flare protection in advanced prostate cancer: an analysis of two randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess differences in efficacy outcomes between luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist plus antiandrogen (AA) flare protection and monotherapy with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist degarelix in patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

Data from 1455 patients were pooled from two prospective, phase III randomized 1-year clinical trials of degarelix versus LHRH agonist with or without AA. The AA bicalutamide was administered at the investigator's discretion. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model and a conditional logistic regression model was used for a case-control analysis of odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Patients received degarelix monotherapy (n = 972) or LHRH agonist (n = 483) of whom 57 also received AA. Overall, prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PSA PFS) was improved with degarelix versus LHRH agonist + AA (Cox proportional hazards regression model-adjusted HR for PSA PFS failure was 0.56 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.97, p = 0.038]). To compensate for a higher proportion of patients with metastases, Gleason score 7-10, and PSA >20 ng/ml in the LHRH agonist + AA group, a case-control analysis using a conditional logistic regression model was utilized. This resulted in an OR for PSA PFS of 0.42 (95% CI 0.20-0.89; p = 0.023) in the overall population, and 0.35 (95% CI 0.13-0.96; p = 0.042) in patients with PSA >50 ng/ml at baseline, when treated with degarelix versus LHRH agonists + AA. There were a small number of deaths, 1.9% with degarelix and 7% with LHRH agonists + AA (case-control analysis OR = 0.37; p = 0.085).

CONCLUSIONS

Degarelix monotherapy produced a more favorable effect on PSA PFS outcomes than a LHRH agonist + AA flare protection therapy in patients with prostate cancer when a case-control analysis was used to compensate for differences between treatment groups.

Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer - Current Status in M1 Patients

Androgen deprivation therapy is the cornerstone treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. It can be done either surgically or medically. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists and antagonist are the most effective drugs, with different side effects and modes of action, but no clear efficacy differences. Adding a non-steroidal antiandrogen adds a marginal benefit but also significant side effects and costs. Non-steroidal antiandrogens should not be used as monotherapy. In most patients with metastases, immediate castration is the standard of care. The intermittent modality is apparently non-inferior to the continuous one, with some other benefits. Upfront chemotherapy added to castration should be considered as the new standard of care in many metastatic patients. Castration leads to many adverse effects, some potentially life-threatening such as cardiovascular side effects.

Methodology of patient care for elevated PSA after prostate cancer treatment: A primary care perspective

Prostate cancer (PCa) remains one of the most common cancers in men. Each year there are 230,000 new cases and it causes nearly 30,000 deaths. Elevations in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after treatment with radiation or surgery can indicate the presence of PCa recurrence. About 15-18% of men treated for PCa will have an elevation of their PSA, which is a source of great concern and will lead to a management discussion with the patient. Approximately 25-33% of men with PCa will experience a recurrence of their cancer after surgery or radiation. This article will discuss the different options for men with a rising PSA after definitive therapy or an attempt at curative treatment for PCa. The purpose of this article is to help the primary care doctor, internist and geriatrician to become knowledgeable about the treatment options of recurrent PCa so that they can participate in the discussion with the patient and help the patient reach a decision regarding treatment and management of the elevated PSA levels, which signal recurrent disease.

In search of the molecular mechanisms mediating the inhibitory effect of the GnRH antagonist degarelix on human prostate cell growth

Degarelix is a gonadrotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor (GnRHR) antagonist used in patients with prostate cancer who need androgen deprivation therapy. GnRHRs have been found in extra-pituitary tissues, including prostate, which may be affected by the GnRH and GnRH analogues used in therapy. The direct effect of degarelix on human prostate cell growth was evaluated. Normal prostate myofibroblast WPMY-1 and epithelial WPE1-NA22 cells, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-1 cells, androgen-independent PC-3 and androgen-dependent LNCaP prostate cancer cells, as well as VCaP cells derived from a patient with castration-resistant prostate cancer were used. Discriminatory protein and lipid fingerprints of normal, hyperplastic, and cancer cells were generated by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) mass spectrometry (MS). The investigated cell lines express GNRHR1 and GNRHR2 and their endogenous ligands. Degarelix treatment reduced cell viability in all prostate cell lines tested, with the exception of the PC-3 cells; this can be attributed to increased apoptosis, as indicated by increased caspase 3/7, 8 and 9 levels. WPE1-NA22, BPH-1, LNCaP, and VCaP cell viability was not affected by treatment with the GnRH agonists leuprolide and goserelin. Using MALDI MS, we detected changes in m/z signals that were robust enough to create a complete discriminatory profile induced by degarelix. Transcriptomic analysis of BPH-1 cells provided a global map of genes affected by degarelix and indicated that the biological processes affected were related to cell growth, G-coupled receptors, the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, angiogenesis and cell adhesion. Taken together, these data demonstrate that (i) the GnRH antagonist degarelix exerts a direct effect on prostate cell growth through apoptosis; (ii) MALDI MS analysis provided a basis to fingerprint degarelix-treated prostate cells; and (iii) the clusters of genes affected by degarelix suggest that this compound, in addition to its known use in the treatment of prostate cancer, may be efficacious in BPH.

Efficacy and safety of degarelix in Korean patients with prostate cancer requiring androgen deprivation therapy: Open-label multicenter phase III study

Purpose

To assess the noninferiority, efficacy, and safety of degarelix in achieving and maintaining testosterone at castrate levels (≤0.5 ng/mL) in Korean patients (CS42) versus non-Asian patients with prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

A Phase III, open-label, multicenter, single-arm trial was conducted in Korean patients with PCa. Degarelix was administered at a starting dose of 240 mg followed by monthly (28-day intervals) maintenance doses of 80 mg (240/80 mg dose regimen) for 7 months. The results were compared with non-Asian patients receiving degarelix 240/80 mg in the CS21 study.

Results

The estimated difference in the cumulative probabilities of testosterone ≤0.5 ng/mL from Day 28 to Day 196 between the trials was −2.3% (96.7% in CS42 vs. 99.0% in CS21). The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval was −5.5%, i.e., above the predefined noninferiority limit of −10% and thus noninferiority was established. Decreases in serum testosterone, prostate-specific antigen, and luteinizing hormone over time were similar in CS42 and CS21. There were no clinically significant differences in incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (72% in CS42 vs. 70% in CS21) and changes in clinical chemistry and hematology parameters between the two trials. The most common adverse event was injection-site reaction.

Conclusions

Overall, degarelix was effective and well tolerated in Korean patients. Testosterone suppression was noninferior to that in non-Asian patients and safety findings were as would be expected for elderly men with PCa undergoing androgen deprivation therapy.

Androgen receptor: structure, role in prostate cancer and drug discovery

Androgens and androgen receptors (AR) play a pivotal role in expression of the male phenotype. Several diseases, such as androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) and prostate cancer, are associated with alterations in AR functions. Indeed, androgen blockade by drugs that prevent the production of androgens and/or block the action of the AR inhibits prostate cancer growth. However, resistance to these drugs often occurs after 2–3 years as the patients develop castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). In CRPC, a functional AR remains a key regulator. Early studies focused on the functional domains of the AR and its crucial role in the pathology. The elucidation of the structures of the AR DNA binding domain (DBD) and ligand binding domain (LBD) provides a new framework for understanding the functions of this receptor and leads to the development of rational drug design for the treatment of prostate cancer. An overview of androgen receptor structure and activity, its actions in prostate cancer, and how structural information and high-throughput screening have been or can be used for drug discovery are provided herein.

Disease control outcomes from analysis of pooled individual patient data from five comparative randomised clinical trials of degarelix versus luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, degarelix, with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists indicate differences in outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess differences in efficacy and safety outcomes in a pooled analysis of trials comparing degarelix with LHRH agonists.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Data were pooled from five prospective, phase 3 or 3b randomised trials (n=1925) of degarelix and leuprolide or goserelin in men requiring androgen deprivation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer. Patients received either 3 mo (n=467) or 12 mo (n=1458) of treatment.

INTERVENTION

Men were randomised to receive degarelix (n=1266), leuprolide (n=201), or goserelin (n=458).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analyses were supported by the Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for disease-related baseline factors, to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of efficacy and safety outcomes. The Fisher exact test compared crude incidences of adverse events.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (PFS) was improved in the degarelix group (HR: 0.71; p=0.017). For patients with baseline PSA levels >20 ng/ml, the HR for PSA PFS was 0.74 (p=0.052). Overall survival (OS) was higher in the degarelix group (HR: 0.47; p=0.023). OS was particularly improved with degarelix in patients with baseline testosterone levels >2 ng/ml (HR: 0.36; p=0.006). In terms of disease-related adverse events, there were, overall, fewer joint-related signs and symptoms, musculoskeletal events, and urinary tract events in the degarelix group.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate clinical benefits with degarelix, including a significant improvement in PSA PFS and OS, as well as reduced incidence of joint, musculoskeletal, and urinary tract adverse events, compared with LHRH agonists.

Pituitary apoplexy following gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist administration with gonadotropin-secreting pituitary adenoma

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists are widely used in hormone therapy for prostate cancer. We report a patient with pituitary apoplexy following this therapy as a rare complication and review the related literature. A 62-year-old man presented with elevated prostate specific antigen. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate gland revealed adenocarcinoma. Whole-body (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/CT scan showed FDG-uptake in the pituitary region. MRI also demonstrated a pituitary tumor, diagnosed as an incidental non-functioning adenoma. The patient received his first dose of GnRH agonist (leuprolide 11.25mg) against prostate cancer. He complained of a severe headache 10 minutes after leuprolide administration and suffered from right third nerve palsy in the next 48 hours. MRI demonstrated a high intensity area on T1-weighted images, diagnosed as pituitary apoplexy. The patient underwent transsphenoidal surgery. Pathology revealed predominantly necrotic tissue and a gonadotropin secreting pituitary adenoma. Overall, 15 patients, including ours, have been reported with pituitary apoplexy after GnRH agonists with pathologic gonadotropin secreting adenoma. Fourteen of 15 patients were male. Pituitary apoplexy developed within 4 hours after administration of the agents in 8/15 patients. The combined data suggest that GnRH agonists have the potential to precipitate pituitary apoplexy in men with gonadotropin secreting adenoma. Therefore, prior to GnRH agonist therapy for prostate cancer, a known pituitary adenoma should be treated. Otherwise, the patients should be cautiously observed for any symptomatic change following drug administration.

Safety of antiandrogen therapy for treating prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Antiandrogens are a treatment option in patients with prostate cancer, given either in combination with androgen deprivation or, in selected cases, as monotherapy. New-generation antiandrogens have been recently introduced in clinical practice (enzalutamide) or are under evaluation in clinical trials (ARN-509).

AREAS COVERED

This review elucidates the safety profile of antiandrogens, in particular focusing on the tolerability profile of each drug either when employed in combination with castration or as monotherapy, in hormone-naive or in castration-resistant patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Non-steroidal antiandrogens are widely used in the management of hormone-sensitive disease in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists or in patients failing front-line treatment with androgen-deprivative maneuvers. In selected patients, non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy appears to yield comparable results as castration. Novel non-steroidal antiandrogens have been investigated with promising results in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Beyond the safety profile specific to any individual compound, increased testosterone and 17β-estradiol levels are commonly observed during antiandrogen monotherapy, leading to gynecomastia and breast pain. The safety profile of old and novel antiandrogens should be taken into account by clinicians in decision making and in selecting the most suitable patients. Beyond patient selection, full clinical evaluation of patient co-morbidities that might affect the drug tolerability and clinical monitoring are anyway required.

Targeting the relaxin hormonal pathway in prostate cancer

Targeting the androgen signalling pathway has long been the hallmark of anti-hormonal therapy for prostate cancer. However, development of androgen-independent prostate cancer is an inevitable outcome to therapies targeting this pathway, in part, owing to the shift from cancer dependence on androgen signalling for growth in favor of augmentation of other cellular pathways that provide proliferation-, survival- and angiogenesis-promoting signals. This review focuses on the role of the hormone relaxin in the development and progression of prostate cancer, prior to and after the onset of androgen independence, as well as its role in cancers of other reproductive tissues. As the body of literature expands, examining relaxin expression in cancerous tissues and its role in a growing number of in vitro and in vivo cancer models, our understanding of the important involvement of this hormone in cancer biology is becoming clearer. Specifically, the pleiotropic functions of relaxin affecting cell growth, angiogenesis, blood flow, cell migration and extracellular matrix remodeling are examined in the context of cancer progression. The interactions and intercepts of the intracellular signalling pathways of relaxin with the androgen pathway are explored in the context of progression of castration-resistant and androgen-independent prostate cancers. We provide an overview of current anti-hormonal therapeutic treatment options for prostate cancer and delve into therapeutic approaches and development of agents aimed at specifically antagonizing relaxin signalling to curb tumor growth. We also discuss the rationale and challenges utilizing such agents as novel anti-hormonals in the clinic, and their potential to supplement current therapeutic modalities.

Degarelix as an intermittent androgen deprivation therapy for one or more treatment cycles in patients with prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for prostate cancer treatment suggest that intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) can be considered for certain patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of degarelix as IAD for one or more treatment cycle(s) in prostate cancer patients requiring androgen deprivation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This open-label uncontrolled multicenter study included patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >4 to 50 ng/ml or PSA doubling time <24 mo. Induction included 7-mo treatment. Off-treatment period started when PSA was ≤4 ng/ml and lasted up to 24 mo based on PSA and testosterone levels. Treatment was reinitiated when PSA was >4 ng/ml.

INTERVENTION

Each induction period included a starting dose of degarelix 240mg, and thereafter 80mg once a month for 6 mo, followed by off-treatment periods.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary end point was time to PSA >4 ng/ml. Secondary end points were subgroup analysis of the primary end point, time to testosterone >0.5 and >2.2 ng/ml, quality of life (QoL), and sexual function during the first off-treatment period.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 213 patients in the first induction period, 191 entered the first off-treatment period, 35 patients entered the second induction, and 30 entered the second off-treatment period. Only two patients entered the third cycle. Median time to PSA >4 ng/ml and duration of first off-treatment period was 392 d each. Significant differences in time to PSA >4 ng/ml were observed between subgroups stratified by prognostic factors (previous curative treatment, cancer stage, PSA levels, and Gleason scores). Time to testosterone >0.5 and >2.2 ng/ml was 112 and 168 d, respectively. Change in QoL remained nonsignificant, and sexual function gradually improved during the off-treatment period. Adverse events were fewer during the off-treatment period and subsequent treatment cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

IAD with degarelix resulted in an improvement in sexual function commensurate with increased testosterone levels while PSA remained suppressed. The treatment for one treatment cycle or more was well tolerated.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Guidelines for prostate cancer treatment suggest that intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) can be considered for certain patients. IAD with degarelix resulted in improved sexual function commensurate with increased testosterone levels while prostate-specific antigen remained suppressed. The treatment for one treatment cycle or more was well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00801242.

Current trends for the use of androgen deprivation therapy in conjunction with radiotherapy for patients with unfavorable intermediate-risk, high-risk, localized, and locally advanced prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is now a well-established standard of care in combination with definitive radiotherapy for patients with unfavorable intermediate-risk to high-risk locally advanced prostate cancer. It is also well established that combination modality treatment with ADT and radiotherapy is superior to either of these modalities alone for the treatment of patients with high-risk locally advanced disease. Current treatment guidelines for prostate cancer in the United States are based on the estimated risk of recurrence and death. This review examines the clinical evidence underpinning the use of ADT and radiotherapy among patients with high-risk localized and locally advanced disease in the United States. This review also considers the rationale for moving from traditional luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists to more recently developed gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists.

The hurdle of antiandrogen drug resistance: drug design strategies

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer death in men after lung cancer, due to distant metastases. While distant prostate cancer is typically castrate resistant, it is not necessarily androgen independent. For this reason, a review of the literature regarding the pathways involved in androgen signaling and therapeutic regimens to treat distant metastases is beneficial to increasing the survival rate of prostate cancer patients.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, the author reviews the literature from the past decade covering metastatic hormone refractory prostate cancer with the aim to examine and identify pathways, therapeutic targets and current therapies for treating castrate-resistant disease. As this area is lacking, the author aims to provide the reader with knowledge of the molecular consequences of castrate resistant prostate cancer, the current treatment paradigms and future directions.

EXPERT OPINION

While there have been advances in the treatment of castrate resistant prostate cancer, only minimal advances have been made in overall survival rate. Due to aberrant mutations and activation in the androgen receptor gene, and the complexity of cell signaling within prostate cancer, the androgen receptor should remain a main target for drug discovery efforts. This author believes that designing compounds that will reduce the activation of the androgen receptor may hold the key to a cure in the future.

[Hormonal treatment in prostate cancer]

AIM

To describe drugs used in the hormonal treatment (hormonotherapy) of prostate cancer.

MATERIAL

Bibliographical search was performed from the database Medline (National Library of Medicine, PubMed) and websites of the HAS and the ANSM. The search was focused on the characteristics, the mode of action, the efficiency and the side effects of the various drugs concerned.

RESULTS

LHRH analogs and the antiandrogens remain the cornerstone in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. New therapeutic classes emerged recently (inhibitor of the synthesis of the androgen, the new antiandrogens) and allowed to grow again the limits of the hormone resistance and define the concept castration-resistant prostate cancer.

CONCLUSION

The hormonal treatment of the prostate cancer grew rich of new therapeutic classes which are going to change the medical care of the prostate cancer in the coming years and the urologist must play its full part.

Non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer: have the treatment options changed?

Over the past 7 decades androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the cornerstone of treatment for metastatic non-castrate prostate cancer (NCPC); however, the mechanisms to achieve this goal have evolved over time to include not only bilateral orchiectomy and estrogens, but also gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, antagonists, and the inclusion of androgen receptor (AR) blockade. Despite treatment with ADT, most men will progress to castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Over the last decade many new treatment options for CRPC have emerged. These new treatments also could have a meaningful role earlier in NCPC. In this review, we outline the biologic drivers of NCPC, review current standard therapy available for NCPC, and discuss the evolving role of new therapeutics in metastatic disease.

Agonists of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone in prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the first-line standard of care for treating patients with hormone-sensitive advanced prostate cancer (PCa) for many decades. The agonists of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH), also called gonadotropin-releasing hormone, are still the most frequently used form of medical ADT.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the available data and most recent information concerning the use of LHRH agonists in advanced PCa. This article also reviews the discovery and development of LHRH agonists and summarizes the clinical evidence for their efficacy in PCa.

EXPERT OPINION

The introduction and application of agonists of LHRH has modernized and improved the treatment of advanced PCa. The life-saving benefits of LHRH agonists are well established, yet underestimated. Despite their efficacy, agonists of LHRH have several disadvantages or drawbacks including disease flare. The approach to ADT has been recently further refined with the development of the LHRH antagonist degarelix. Degarelix, a highly clinically effective third-generation LHRH antagonist, is currently available in most countries for therapy of advanced PCa. This new drug offers attractive alternatives to LHRH agonists for treatment of advanced PCa. A therapy for castration-resistant PCa based on a targeted cytotoxic analog of LHRH, AEZS-108, is also emerging.

Dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor NVP-BEZ235 sensitizes docetaxel in castration resistant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Effective therapeutic strategies that can achieve long-term improvement in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer are urgently needed. We recently reported that the activated PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway induced by docetaxel explains resistance to docetaxel in castration resistant prostate cancer. In this study we explored the efficacy of NVP-BEZ235, a dual PI3K and mTORC1/2 inhibitor, for docetaxel resistant castration resistant prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the 2 human castration resistant prostate cancer cell lines C4-2 and C4-2AT6. At our laboratory C4-2AT6 cells were established from C4-2 under androgen ablated treatment for 6 months. We investigated the efficacy of NVP-BEZ235 monotherapy and NVP-BEZ235 combined with docetaxel in vitro and in vivo.

RESULTS

Increased phosphorylated Akt in C4-2AT6 cells was significantly inhibited by NVP-BEZ235 in a dose and time dependent manner. WST cell proliferation assay results in C4-2AT6 cells revealed that combined administration of NVP-BEZ235 and docetaxel had significant, synergistically greater cytotoxicity than NVP-BEZ235 or docetaxel monotherapy. Combined NVP-BEZ235 (40 mg/kg) and docetaxel (4 mg/kg) in vivo in a castrated mouse xenograft model inhibited C4-2AT6 tumor growth to a greater degree than in the monotherapy groups. Also, NVP-BEZ235 showed significant efficacy with docetaxel at a low concentration in vivo, suggesting that NVP-BEZ235 effectively decreased resistance to docetaxel.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that inhibition of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway by NVP-BEZ235 can overcome docetaxel resistance in human castration resistant prostate cancer. Our findings provide a molecular basis for the clinical use of combined administration of NVP-BEZ235 and docetaxel in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer.

Serum testosterone levels after medical or surgical androgen deprivation: a comprehensive review of the literature

Androgens and the androgen receptor play a role in the progression of prostate cancer. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a mainstay in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. ADT is expected to reduce serum testosterone levels from a normal level of about 500 to 600 ng/dl (17.3-20.8 nmol) down to castration levels. Traditionally, castration was considered to be achieved if testosterone levels were lowered to a threshold of 50 ng/dl (1.73 nmol/l), a definition determined more by measurement methods derived from the use of old assay methods than by evidence. Serum testosterone levels in three-quarter patients after surgical castration drop to less than 20 ng/dl (0.69 nmol/l). Ineffective suppression of testosterone is currently poorly recognized and may possibly have an effect of prostate cancer mortality. Persistent levels of serum testosterone after castration are mainly derived from adrenal androgens. Furthermore, the arrival of new therapies targeting androgen synthesis and androgen receptor activity has renewed interest on serum testosterone. This review discusses the biosynthetic pathway for androgen synthesis in humans and provides a comprehensive review of serum testosterone levels after surgical or medical castration. This review assesses serum testosterone levels after surgical castration and different pharmacologic castration in patients with prostate cancer under ADT, and ineffective testosterone suppression. The author proposes methods to better lower serum testosterone levels during ADT.

An update on the use of degarelix in the treatment of advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy remains the mainstay of medical treatment for advanced prostate cancer. Commonly, this is achieved with medical androgen deprivation rather than surgical intervention as the permanence and psychological effects of the latter are unacceptable for most patients. Degarelix is a third generation antagonist of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH, also termed gonadotropin-releasing hormone) for the first-line treatment of androgen-dependent advanced prostate cancer. Degarelix acts directly on the pituitary receptors for LHRH, blocking the action of endogenous LHRH. The use of degarelix eliminates the initial undesirable surge in gonadotropin and testosterone levels, which is produced by agonists of LHRH. Degarelix is the most comprehensively studied and widely available LHRH antagonist worldwide. Clinical trials have demonstrated that degarelix has a long-term efficacy similar to the LHRH agonist leuprolide in achieving testosterone suppression in patients with prostate cancer. Degarelix, however, produces a faster suppression of testosterone and prostate-specific antigen (PSA), with no testosterone surges or microsurges, and thus prevents the risk of clinical flare in advanced disease. Recent clinical trials demonstrated that treatment with degarelix results in improved disease control when compared with an LHRH agonist in terms of superior PSA progression-free survival, suggesting that degarelix likely delays progression to castration-resistant disease and has a more significant impact on bone serum alkaline phosphatase and follicle-stimulating hormone. Degarelix is usually well tolerated, with limited toxicity and no evidence of systemic allergic reactions in clinical studies. Degarelix thus represents an important addition to the hormonal armamentarium for therapy of advanced androgen-dependent prostate cancer.

Experience with degarelix in the treatment of prostate cancer

Degarelix is a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the first-line treatment of androgen-dependent advanced prostate cancer. It has a direct mechanism of action that blocks the action of GnRH on the pituitary with no initial surge in gonadotrophin or testosterone levels. Degarelix is the most extensively studied and widely available GnRH antagonist worldwide. Clinical studies have demonstrated similar efficacy to the GnRH agonist leuprolide in achieving testosterone suppression in patients with prostate cancer. However, degarelix produces a faster suppression of testosterone and prostate-specific antigen (PSA), with no testosterone surge or microsurges, thus preventing the risk of clinical flare in advanced disease. Clinical trials have demonstrated that degarelix can offer improved disease control when compared with a GnRH agonist in terms of superior PSA progression-free survival (suggesting that degarelix likely delays progression to castration-resistant disease), and a more significant impact on bone serum alkaline phosphatase and follicle-stimulating hormone. Degarelix is generally well tolerated, with no reports of systemic allergic reactions in any clinical studies. In conclusion, degarelix offers clinicians a rational first-line hormonal monotherapy option for the management of advanced prostate cancer.