A phase II trial of estramustine and etoposide in hormone refractory prostate cancer: A Southwest Oncology Group trial (SWOG 9407)

Metronomic Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Clinical Experience

Metronomic chemotherapy, continuous and dose-dense administration of chemotherapeutic drugs with lowered doses, is being evaluated for substituting, augmenting, or appending conventional maximum tolerated dose regimens, with preclinical and clinical studies for the past few decades. To date, the principle mechanisms of its action include impeding tumoral angiogenesis and modulation of hosts' immune system, affecting directly tumor cells, their progenitors, and neighboring stromal cells. Its better toxicity profile, lower cost, and easier use are main advantages over conventional therapies. The evidence of metronomic chemotherapy for personalized medicine is growing, starting with unfit elderly patients and also for palliative treatment. The literature reviewed in this article mainly demonstrates that metronomic chemotherapy is advantageous for selected patients and for certain types of malignancies, which make it a promising therapeutic approach for filling in the gaps. More clinical studies are needed to establish a solidified role for metronomic chemotherapy with other treatment models in modern cancer management.

Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer (Hrpc): Present and Future Approaches of Therapy

The mainstay of therapy for patients with advanced prostate cancer still remains androgen deprivation, although response to this is invariably temporary. Most of the patients develop hormone-refractory disease resulting in progressive clinical deterioration and, ultimately, death. Until recently there has been no standard chemotherapeutic approach for hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC), the major benefits of chemotherapy being only palliative. The studies combining mitoxantrone plus a corticosteroid demonstrated that chemotherapy could be given to men with symptomatic HRPC with minimal toxicity and a significant palliation could be provided. Recently, results from 2 phase III randomized clinical trials demonstrating that a combination of docetaxel plus prednisone can improve survival in men with HRPC have propelled docetaxel-based therapy into the forefront of treatment options for these patients as the new standard of care. There is a promising activity of new drug combinations such as taxanes plus vinca alkaloids; bisphosphonates are assuming a prominent role in prostate therapy through their ability to prevent skeletal morbidity. Combinations of classic chemotherapeutic agents and biological drugs began to be tested in phase II-III trials and the first results appear interesting. This article focuses on combinations recently evaluated or under clinical development for the treatment of HRPC.

Is There a Standard Chemotherapeutic Regimen for Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer? Present and Future Approaches in the Management of the Disease

Prostate cancer that no longer responds to hormonal manipulation can be defined as hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Until recently, there has been no standard chemotherapeutic approach for hormone-refractory prostate cancer. The major benefits of chemotherapy in the treatment of the disease are palliative in nature, in terms of reduction of pain and use of analgesics and improvement of performance status, as followed in the most recent trials. Phase III studies are necessary to better evaluate the efficacy of the different regimens, because several old studies suffer for methodological deficits. There is a promising activity of new drug combinations, such as vinca alkaloids and taxanes. Phase I and II trial are testing combinations of classic chemotherapeutic agents and biologic drugs, and the first results appear interesting. In this article, recent advances in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer using chemotherapeutic regimens are critically reviewed.

Treatment Options in Hormone-refractory Metastatic Prostate Carcinoma

Prostate cancer represents one of the most important health problems in industrialized countries. It is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Therapeutic options are different according to the stage of the disease at the diagnosis. Patients with localized disease may be treated with surgery or radiation, whereas the treatment for patients with a metastatic disease is purely palliative. Hormonal treatment represents the standard therapy for stage IV prostate cancer, but patients ultimately become unresponsive to androgen ablation and are classified as hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients. The molecular mechanisms involved in progression in hormone resistance are characterized by mutations, down and up-regulation in the androgen receptor gene, mutations in p53 and over-expression of Bcl2 and other alterations in genes and in gene expression. The important thing is that we understand these mechanisms to define potential therapeutic agents for the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients. Conventional options for patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer include secondary hormone therapy, radiotherapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy. The commonest antineoplastic agents are mitoxantrone, estramustine and taxanes. Despite an improvement In the palliative benefit, none of these agents has demonstrated a beneficial impact on the overall survival of patients. Therefore, there is no standard therapy for these patients, thus we need new approaches which should be studied in clinical trials. The evaluation and incorporation of new agents into current treatment regimens could have a role in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer, but their efficacy has not yet been demonstrated.

COOPERATIVE GROUP TRIALS - SOUTHWEST ONCOLOGY GROUP (SWOG) INNOVATIONS IN ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER

The major goals of the SWOG-GU committee in the area of advanced prostate cancer are to improve the survival and quality of life of patients with advanced prostate cancer. SWOG trials have examined the role of combined androgen blockade, intermittent androgen deprivation, and the early application of chemotherapy in castration-naïve disease. In addition, they have contributed to advancing the current chemotherapy standard of docetaxel plus prednisone, and ongoing trials seek to improve upon that standard. Finally, surrogate endpoints have been identified and markers of treatment response or resistance with novel technology are under active investigation. This review highlights findings from recent SWOG clinical trials for advanced prostate cancer, emphasizing the clinical impact and future applications of the data.

Phase III multi-institutional trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel, estramustine, and oral etoposide combined with long-term androgen suppression therapy and radiotherapy versus long-term androgen suppression plus radiotherapy alone for high-risk prostate cancer: preliminary toxicity analysis of RTOG 99-02

PURPOSE

Long-term androgen suppression plus radiotherapy (AS+RT) is standard treatment of high-risk prostate cancer. A randomized trial, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 9902, was undertaken to determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel, estramustine, and etoposide (TEE) plus AS+RT would improve disease outcomes with acceptable toxicity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

High-risk (prostate-specific antigen 20-100 ng/mL and Gleason score >or=7; or Stage T2 or greater, Gleason score 8, prostate-specific antigen level <100 ng/mL) nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients were randomized to AS+RT (Arm 1) vs. AS+RT plus four cycles of TEE (Arm 2). TEE was delivered 4 weeks after RT. AS continued for 2 years for both treatment arms. RT began after 8 weeks of AS began.

RESULTS

The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9902 trial opened January 11, 2000. Excess thromboembolic toxicity was noted, leading to study closure October 4, 2004. A total of 397 patients were accrued, and the data for 381 were analyzable. An acute and long-term toxicity analysis was performed. The worst overall toxicities during treatment were increased for Arm 2. Of the 192 patients, 136 (71%) on Arm 2 had RTOG Grade 3 or greater toxicity compared with 70 (37%) of 189 patients on Arm 1. Statistically significant increases in hematologic toxicity (p < 0.0001) and gastrointestinal toxicity (p = 0.017) but not genitourinary toxicity (p = 0.07) were noted during treatment. Two Grade 5 complications related to neutropenic infection occurred in Arm 2. Three cases of myelodysplasia/acute myelogenous leukemia were noted in Arm 2. At 2 and 3 years after therapy completion, excess long-term toxicity was not observed in Arm 2.

CONCLUSION

TEE was associated with significantly increased toxicity during treatment. The toxicity profiles did not differ at 2 and 3 years after therapy. Toxicity is an important consideration in the design of trials using adjuvant chemotherapy for prostate cancer.

Dose escalation of oral vinorelbine in combination with estramustine in hormone-refractory adenocarcinoma of the prostate

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of the current study was to identify the tolerable dose level of oral vinorelbine when given in combination with estramustine to men with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). The secondary objectives were to describe the toxicities of the combined regimen in patients with HRPC and to estimate the efficacy of oral vinorelbine in combination with estramustine based on the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response.

METHODS

Thirty-three patients with HRPC were treated on a 28-day cycle with estramustine at a dose of 140 mg orally 3 times a day on Days 1-3 and 8-10. Vinorelbine was given orally on Days 2 and 9. The initial dose of vinorelbine was 50 mg/m2 and was escalated to 70 mg/m2 using the time-to-event continual reassessment method.

RESULTS

Three of 17 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity at the 70 mg/m2 dose level of oral vinorelbine. One patient experienced dose-limiting toxicity at a dose of 60 mg/m2 and no dose-limitig toxicities were reported at the 50 mg/m2 dose. The overall response rate by > or = 50% reduction in PSA was 17.2%, (95% confidence interval, 5.9-35.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral vinorelbine at doses of 70 mg/m2 may be safely combined with estramustine. The combination appears to have modest activity in men with advanced prostate cancer. The trial design employed the time-to-event continual reassessment method, which potentially allows for rapid accrual, a more complete assessment of toxicities, and a larger fraction of patients to be treated at an effective dose. More active regimens are needed to further evaluate the utility of this clinical trial design in patients with prostate cancer.

New standards in the chemotherapy of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer

Hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) is a major issue in Western countries and the second leading cause of cancer death in North American men. In the prostate-specific antigen era, most HRPCs are currently diagnosed in asymptomatic patients based on biochemical failure, with increasing demand for active treatment. Until recently, chemotherapy for HRPC patients was not considered a standard of care due to the absence of clear data evidencing an overall survival benefit. In fact, few Phase III studies conducted in the 1980s and early 1990s had documented a superiority over corticosteroids alone in terms of biochemical response (declines in serum prostate-specific antigen levels) and quality of life, but not survival. Due to their impact on pain control, mitoxantrone and prednisone were long considered the best regimen for symptomatic HRPC patients. In recent years, more chemotherapeutic agents have been tested, among which the microtubule inhibitors (vinca alkaloids and taxanes) have obtained the most promising results in Phase II trials and have entered Phase III testing. Two well-designed randomized trials have changed this scenario. Both compared docetaxel (with or without estramustine) against mitoxantrone and prednisone, and demonstrated a significant advantage not only in terms of response, pain control and quality of life, but also in terms of overall survival. Which patients need to be treated, the regimen of choice and duration of chemotherapy will be the next questions to be answered in the coming years in the field of HRPC, along with the role of new signal transduction inhibitors and other targeted therapies.

Ixabepilone (Epothilone B Analogue BMS-247550) Is Active in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer: A Southwest Oncology Group Trial S0111

Purpose

The epothilones are a new class of tubulin-polymerizing agents with activity in taxane-sensitive and resistant tumor models. We evaluated ixabepilone (BMS-247550) in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC).

Methods

Eligible patients had chemotherapy-naive metastatic HRPC, a Zubrod performance status of 0 to 2, and adequate organ function. All patients received BMS-247550 at 40 mg/m2 over 3 hours every 3 weeks. The primary end point was proportion of patients achieving a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response.

Results

Forty-eight patients with metastatic HRPC were registered. Forty-two patients were eligible, with a median age of 73 years and a median PSA level of 111 ng/mL; 78% had bone-only or bone and soft tissue metastases, and 88% had objective radiologic disease progression at registration. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 16 and three patients, respectively. All grade 4 toxicities were neutropenia or leukopenia. The most frequent grade 3 AEs were neuropathy (eight patients), hematologic toxicity (seven patients), flu-like symptoms, and infection (five patients each). There were no grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia or grade 5 AEs. There were 14 confirmed PSA responses (33%; 95% CI, 20% to 50%); 72% of PSA responders had declines greater than 80%, and two patients achieved an undetectable PSA. The estimated median progression-free survival is 6 months (95% CI, 4 to 8 months), and the median survival is 18 months (95% CI, 13 to 24 months).

Conclusion

Ixabepilone has demonstrated activity in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic HRPC. Major toxicities were neutropenia and neuropathy. Further testing to define its activity relative to standard therapy is warranted.

In vitro cytotoxic effects of imatinib in combination with anticancer drugs in human prostate cancer cell lines

BACKGROUND

The platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDFG-r), a tyrosine kinase, is expressed in 88% of primary prostate cancer and in 80% of the metastases. The tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib blocks the PDGF signaling pathway by inhibiting PDGF-r autophosphorylation. We examined the cytotoxic effects of imatinib in combination with other anticancer agents in the human prostate cancer cell lines LNCaP, PC-3, and DU 145.

METHODS

The cells were exposed to imatinib and to the other drugs simultaneously for 5 days. Cell growth inhibition was determined by XTT assay. The cytotoxic effects in combinations were evaluated at the inhibitory concentration of 50% level by the isobologram.

RESULTS

Imatinib produced additive effects with estramustine phosphate (EMP) and 4-hydroperoxy-cyclophosphamide in all three cell lines. In combination with etoposide imatinib produced additive effects in two of three cell lines. Imatinib with docetaxel produced antagonistic effects in PC-3 and additive to antagonistic effects in LNCaP and DU 145 cells.

CONCLUSIONS

The simultaneous exposure of imatinib and EMP would be effective against hormone sensitive and hormone insensitive cell lines and this combination should be evaluated in clinical trials. In contrast, the simultaneous exposure of imatinib and docetaxel would have little therapeutic efficacy. Although there are gaps between in vitro studies and clinical trials, the present findings provide useful information for the establishment of clinical protocols involving imatinib in hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Phase II trial of estramustine and etoposide in androgen-sensitive metastatic prostate carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Early chemohormonal therapy in metastatic prostate cancer may offer an advantage by simultaneously targeting androgen-dependent and -independent clones. Hence, a phase II trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of estramustine and etoposide in hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer.

PATIENT AND METHODS

Eligibility consisted of untreated metastatic prostate cancer, adequate organ function, and a performance status of 0 to 2 by Zubrod criteria. A 21-day schedule of oral estramustine (10 mg/kg/day) and etoposide (50 mg/m2/day) was administered every 28 days. Hormonal therapy was allowed at the end of the protocol therapy. Toxicity was assessed weekly, PSA levels were assessed with each cycle, and objective response was evaluated every 3 cycles.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were enrolled (10 white, 11 black) with a median age of 59.5 years (range, 42-79 years), a median PSA of 338 ng/mL (range, 0.9-20,000 ng/mL), and a median Gleason score of 8 points. Ten patients had bone-only metastases, 11 had measurable disease, of whom 4 had visceral metastases. A total of 128 cycles were administered (median, 6 cycles). No dose reductions were required. Nineteen patients were able to be evaluated for response. Severe toxicities included thromboembolic events and anemia in 2 patients each and fatigue in 1 patient. There were no episodes of febrile neutropenia. Response was observed in 8 of 11 patients (73%) with measurable disease. Median PSA nadir after therapy was 0.45 ng/mL, and undetectable PSA (<0.1 ng/mL) was achieved in 4 patients. Median time to PSA progression was 16.65 months. At a median follow-up of 34 months, 18 patients were alive. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival rates were 90%, 82%, and 72% respectively. Median survival has not yet been reached.

CONCLUSION

The combination of estramustine and etoposide is well tolerated, and has promising activity in newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer.

Clinical trials in metastatic prostate cancer – Has there been real progress in the past decade?

Hormone refractory prostate cancer remains a challenge. While only palliative treatment strategies were available for the past several decades, many promising agents have been investigated over the past decade. Of those the taxanes appeared with significant anti-tumor activity and recently, two large randomized controlled trials demonstrated for the first time, a survival and palliative benefit with docetaxel based chemotherapy. In the current era, recurrent disease after local treatment for localized disease is diagnosed long before evidence of systemic disease. With earlier institution of hormonal treatments, patients are becoming "hormone refractory" earlier in the course of their disease with considerable long life expectancy. Hence, there is a greater need than ever for more treatment options for this expanding group of patients. A number of new systemic therapies have recently emerged, based on a deeper understanding of prostate cancer biology. Novel chemotherapeutics such as the epothilones, molecularly targeted therapies against angiogenesis, the proteosome and endothelin receptor antagonists, as well as biological agents such as anti-sense oligonucleotides are being tested as part of the armamentarium. Key to progress in the therapy of this fatal disease is the commitment and timely enrolment of prostate cancer patients in clinical trials.

Oral estramustine plus oral etoposide in the treatment of hormone refractory prostate cancer patients: A phase II study with a 5-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy regimens that target microtubular trafficking were repeatedly found to be active in the treatment of hormone refractory prostate cancer patients, but disease responses were reportedly short-lived on average.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 1994 to 1997, 46 consecutive patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer were enrolled in a multicenter Phase II trial of oral etoposide 100 mg/day and estramustine 560 mg/day for 21 days, followed by a 7-day rest period. Final evaluation of this trial was performed after a follow-up of 5 years.

RESULTS

Fifty-four percent of patients attained a PSA response and 46% attained a response on measurable lesions. Median time to progression (TTP) and overall survival were 7.4 and 18.4 months, respectively. Fourteen patients (30.4%) had a TTP greater than 12 months and 9 (19.5%) a TTP greater than 18 months. Sixteen patients (34.8.%) survived more than 2 years and 2 (4.3%) survived more than 5 years. One patient was still alive and free from progression more than 7 years after starting treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This Phase II trial with a long-term follow-up revealed that some patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer could obtain durable disease response and long survival with an oral etoposide and estramustine combination regimen.

Thromboembolic events with estramustine phosphate-based chemotherapy in patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma: results of a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Combinations of cytotoxic chemotherapy with estramustine phosphate (EMP), a nornitrogen mustard-estrogen conjugate, are used to treat patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma (HRPC). However, thromboembolic events (TE), including deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, stroke, myocardial infarction, and arterial thrombosis, are significant toxicities of these regimens. The current study sought to establish the rate of TE and to determine risk factors for TE.

METHODS

A MEDLINE-based search identified EMP-based clinical trials published in the English-language peer-reviewed literature after 1990 in which > or = 20 patients with HRPC were enrolled and TE were clearly documented. Patient characteristics and the dose of EMP given were analyzed to determine their association with the rate of TE.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies, enrolling a total of 896 patients, were included in the analysis. The overall risk of TE was 0.07 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.05-0.11). The risk of DVT was 0.06 (95% CI, 0.04-0.09). The risks of all other types of TE were <0.01. Using univariate logistic regression analysis, the dose of EMP administered, baseline patient age, and baseline prostate-specific antigen level were not found to be associated with the total risk of TE. The rates of total TE and DVT may be inflated because one of the analyzed studies initially had a very high rate of DVT (25%) when compared with the others.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of TE in men with HRPC who are treated with EMP-based regimens is significant, but it does not appear to be related to the dose of EMP. Whether TE can be prevented with anticoagulant prophylaxis remains to be determined.

Current strategies in the management of hormone refractory prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed in American males, and is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Most patients who develop metastatic disease will initially respond to androgen deprivation, but response is invariably temporary. Most patients will develop androgen-independent ("hormone-refractory") disease that results in progressive clinical deterioration and ultimately death. This progression to androgen independence is accompanied by increasingly evident DNA instability and alterations in genes and gene expression, including mutations in p53, over-expression of Bcl2, and mutations in the androgen receptor gene, among others. Treatment options for hormone refractory disease include intensive supportive care, radiotherapy, bisphosphonates, second-line hormonal manipulations, cytotoxic chemotherapy and investigational agents. A post-treatment reduction in the level of prostate specific antigen (PSA) by 50% has been shown to correlate with survival and has been accepted by consensus as a valid endpoint in clinical trials. Chemotherapeutic agents such as mitoxantrone, estramustine, and the taxanes have yielded improved response rates and palliative benefit, but not improved survival. Therefore, current efforts must be focused on enrolling patients onto clinical trials of investigational agents with novel mechanisms of action, and on using survival, time to progression, and quality of life as end points in routine clinical practice.

Prostate carcinoma: defining therapeutic objectives and improving overall outcomes

The development and progression of a prostate carcinoma from prediagnosis to death can be characterized as a series of clinical states. The states are milestones that can be used to assess prognosis, define therapeutic objectives, and assess outcomes. The antitumor effects of hormone therapies and cytotoxic agents in patients with prostate carcinoma are placed in context along with the bidrectional tumor-host interactions that contribute to the growth and resistance of osseous lesions. Identifying the factors that contribute to the growth of the disease at different points in the illness has lead to novel, systemic approaches. Proving the benefit of these approaches requires a series of unique trials with unique endpoints relevant to the clinical state of the patients and the specific therapy under evaluation.

Nuclear matrix proteins as biomarkers in prostate cancer

The nuclear matrix (NM) is the structural framework of the nucleus that consists of the peripheral lamins and pore complexes, an internal ribonucleic protein network, and residual nucleoli. The NM contains proteins that contribute to the preservation of nuclear shape and its organization. These protein components better known as the NM proteins have been demonstrated to be tissue specific, and are altered in many cancers, including prostate cancer. Alterations in nuclear morphology are hallmarks of cancer and are believed to be associated with changes in NM protein composition. Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in American men and many investigators have identified unique NM proteins that appear to be specific for this disease. These NM protein changes are associated with the development of prostate cancer, as well as in some cases being indicative of cancer stage. Identification of these NM proteins specific for prostate cancer provides an insight to understanding the molecular changes associated with this disease. This article reviews the role of NM proteins as tumor biomarkers in prostate cancer and the potential application of these proteins as therapeutic targets in the treatment of this disease.

Highlights of contemporary issues in the medical management of prostate cancer

This paper highlights contemporary issues in the medical management of prostate cancer. Controversies surrounding adjuvant and neo-adjuvant hormonal therapy in localized prostate cancer are reviewed, as well as the use of chemohormonal therapy in high risk localized disease. The latent period of asymptomatic biochemical progression prior to clinical progression is an opportunity to evaluate new non-toxic therapies. In patients with advanced metastatic disease hormonal therapy and new alternatives are discussed. Chemotherapy in hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) is extensively covered as well as the emerging role of molecular-targeted therapies.

EMP combination chemotherapy and low-dose monotherapy in advanced prostate cancer

Many chemotherapeutic regimens combined with estramustine phosphate (EMP) have been elaborated for the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer over 30 years. However, older EMP-based combination chemotherapies with vinblastine, vinorelbine, doxorubicin or cyclophosphamide showed relatively low PSA response rate (25-58%) accompanied with high toxicities. On the other hand, newly developed EMP-based combination regimens with etoposide, pacitaxel, carboplatin or docetaxel demonstrated promising PSA response rate (43-77%) with moderate to severe toxicity in the rate of thromboembolic event (5-18%) and of neutropenia (9-41%). Treatment-related death was less in the latter combination group (5/615, 0.8%) than that in the former group (3/234, 1.3%). Of note, in the docetaxel combination with EMP, PSA response rate is as high as 77% with high rate (41%) of neutropenia but no treatment-related death was observed. Docetaxel combination with EMP seems to be the best regimen, though not completely justified by randomized trials, to be selected in the modern era, which will be followed by paclitaxel, carboplatin and EMP combination with PSA response rate of 71%. In addition, an interim report in 83 patients was presented. They were not consecutively enrolled but were treated on low-dose EMP monotherapy for previously untreated advanced prostate cancer in Department of Urology of Tokyo University and our 21 affiliated hospitals. Overall PSA response rate was as high as 93.4% out of 76 assessable patients. However, overall toxicity rate was abnormally high (39.5%) with drug discontinuation rate of 32.1%. The reason of low drug compliance may be attributed to gastrointestinal symptoms. To overcome the low drug compliance, appropriate patients for EMP administration should be selected by using gene analysis on the basis of sophisticated tailor-made medicine.