Estramustine and vinblastine: use of prostate specific antigen as a clinical trial end point for hormone refractory prostatic cancer

Crosstalk between Microtubule Stabilizing Agents and Prostate Cancer

A variety of microtubule-stabilizing cytotoxic agents (MSA) with diverse chemical scaffolds have been discovered from marine sponges, microorganisms, and plants. Two MSAs, docetaxel and cabazitaxel, are the exclusive chemotherapeutics that convey a survival benefit in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Additional MSAs have been investigated for their potential in treating prostate cancer in both clinical and preclinical settings. Independent of promoting mitotic arrest, MSAs can suppress the nuclear accumulation of androgen receptor (AR), which is the driving force for prostate cancer cell growth and progression. The alternative mechanism not only helps to better understand the clinical efficacy of docetaxel and cabazitaxel for AR-driven CRPC but also provides an avenue to seek better treatments for various forms of prostate cancer. The dual mechanisms of action enable MSAs to suppress AR-null prostate cancer cell proliferation by cell mitosis pathway and to interfere with the AR signaling pathway in AR positive cells. MSA chemotherapeutics, being administered alone or in combination with other therapeutics, may serve as the optimal therapeutic option for patients with either castration-sensitive or castration-resistant prostate cancer. This review provides an overview of the anti-prostate cancer profiles (including preclinical and clinical studies, and clinical use) of diverse MSAs, as well as the mechanism of action.

Vinorelbine and Prednisone in older Cancer Patients with Hormone-Refractory Metastatic Prostate Cancer a Phase II Study

Aims and Background

Prostate cancer is a common disease in older men. Since it is hormone resistant, no treatment may improve survival. In patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer, clinical benefit is an important treatment end point.

Study Design

This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of a vinorelbine and prednisone combination in hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients. Vinorelbine was administered at the dose of 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every three weeks; prednisone was administered orally at the dose of 12 mg/day. Thirty consecutive patients, 65 years or older, with progressive (PSA increase or increase in bidimensionally measurable lesion) metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma were enrolled. Four patients (13%) had a partial response and 14 (46%) stable disease. Time to progression for the entire group was 4.5 months (range, 2–13) and 7.5 months for the group of responders (range, 3–13). A PSA decrease >50% was registered in 36% of the patients. Pain reduction was recorded in 44.4% of the patients and stability in 14.8%.

Results

The treatment was well tolerated and grade 3 toxicity was found in 2 cases of anemia and 2 cases of leukopenia without fever.

Conclusions

The schedule is able to control the evolution of hormone-refractory prostate cancer and to give a clinical benefit. These results provide information for further clinical trials in a large series of elderly cancer patients.

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.

Re-expression of microRNA-4319 inhibits growth of prostate cancer via Her-2 suppression

PURPOSE

Her-2 is an epidermal growth factor receptor expressed in some prostate cancers (PC) associated with outgrowth of the tumor. Dysregulation of some microRNAs is involved in the regulation of PC pathogenesis, whereas the role of miR-4319 in PC is unknown and addressed in the current study.

METHODS

The levels of miR-4319 in PC tissues were determined by RT-qPCR and their association with patient survival was studied by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Targeted genes for miR-4319 were predicted by a bioinformatics algorithm and confirmed by a dual-luciferase reporter assay. Growth of cells of overexpression or inhibition of miR-4319 or Her-2 was analyzed by an MTT assay. Cell survival in response to a chemotherapeutic drug, estramustine (EM), was analyzed by CCK-8 assay. Cell apoptosis was evaluated by TUNEL assay and Western blotting for apoptosis-associated proteins.

RESULTS

MiR-4319 levels were decreased in PC specimens, compared to corresponding normal prostate tissue. Lower levels of miR-4319 were correlated with poorer overall patients' survival. In vitro, the cell survival mediated with Her-2 against chemotherapy was inhibited by overexpression of miR-4319 and was enhanced by depletion of miR-4319. Depletion of miR-4319 in primary prostate epithelial cells increased Her-2-dependent cell growth, while re-expression of miR-4319 in PC cells inhibited Her-2-dependent cell growth and Her-2-dependent resistance to EM-induced apoptosis.

CONCLUSION

The growth and chemo-resistance of PC cells may be suppressed via re-expression of miR-4319 that inhibits Her-2 signaling.

Validation of the Association of RECIST Changes With Survival in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated on SWOG Study S0421

BACKGROUND

Phase 2 trials evaluating new agents for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have relied on bone scan and prostate-specific antigen changes to assess activity. Given the increasing detection of measurable disease, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) changes warrant consideration to evaluate activity. We validated the association of RECIST 1.0 changes with survival in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data for men with measurable disease from the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0421, a phase 3 trial in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel and prednisone plus placebo or atrasentan, were used. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association of RECIST 1.0 outcomes within 120 days, ie, unconfirmed partial response (uPR), stable disease, and progressive disease (PD), with overall survival (OS) from day 120, adjusted for prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 326 men were evaluable for landmark analysis, of whom 23 had PD, 230 stable disease, and 73 uPR. OS beyond day 120 was significantly different (P = .004) among these subgroups, with median (95% confidence interval) OS of 7.1 (3.5-8.8), 13.4 (11.4-15.6), and 16.3 (10.0-19.6) months for those with PD, stable disease, and uPR, respectively. In a multivariable model, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for patients with PD was 2.47 (1.42-4.29) compared to patients with an uPR (P = .002).

CONCLUSION

The association of RECIST 1.0 changes with OS in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel was validated. Given limitations of bone scan and prostate-specific antigen alterations, improvements in objective RECIST 1.0 changes should be reported in phase 2 trials before launching phase 3 trials.

Treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer

Objective. An increasing number of patients with prostate cancer develop hormone-refractory disease after standard treatment modalities. In these patients, early clinical trials with chemotherapy produced disappointing response rates. However, clinical trials that employ response criteria such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and clinical benefit response have produced encouraging responses. This article reviews current and future treatment options for the management of hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Data Sources. A MEDLINE search for the years 1978 to 1998 was completed. The following terms were used in our search: prostate cancer, hormone-refractory, treatment, and chemotherapy. Relevant articles referenced in the literature obtained in our MEDLINE search were reviewed.

Study Selection. Randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials were used in our review. Clinical trials using prostate-specific antigen or a palliation of symptoms as primary criteria for response were given priority.

Data Synthesis. Several genetic alterations, including the overexpression of bcl-2 or mutations in p53, may lead to the development of hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Agents such as estramustine and taxanes, which affect microtubule function and potentially modulate bcl-2, appear to be particularly active in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer. In addition, mitoxantrone as well as other agents has been shown to be beneficial in improving the quality of life in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Conclusion. Hormone-refractory prostate cancer is not a chemotherapy-resistant disease as once believed; significant progress in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer has been made with new combinations of chemotherapy agents. Promising new treatments are currently under evaluation to assess their potential benefit over the standard treatment modalities that are currently available.

Tubulin-targeted agents including docetaxel and cabazitaxel

Microtubules are dynamic filamentous cytoskeletal proteins that are responsible for cellular integrity and architecture, mitosis, intracellular transport, cell signaling, and gene expression. Tubulin exists in the cell as dimers of α and β subunits, which complexes with a variety of regulatory proteins. There is a dynamic equilibrium between free and polymerized tubulin causing a state called "dynamic instability," which is a target of anticancer drugs, which inhibit tubulin through polymerization (taxanes, epothilones) or depolymerization (vinca alkaloids). Docetaxel-based therapy was the first such treatment to demonstrate a survival benefit in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer. Cabazitaxel, an antitubulin agent, which demonstrates activity in multidrug- and docetaxel-resistant cancer cell lines, demonstrates a survival benefit over mitoxantrone and prednisone in patients who have failed docetaxel-based chemotherapy. This article reviews the use of antitubulin agents in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Combination of albendazole and 2-methoxyestradiol significantly improves the survival of HCT-116 tumor-bearing nude mice

Background

Albendazole (ABZ) is a microtubule-targeting anthelmintic with a remarkable activity against a variety of human cancer cells. In this study, we examined if the antitumor activity of ABZ could be enhanced by its combination with other microtubule-binding agents.

Methods

The interactions between ABZ and microtubule-binding agents, paclitaxel, vinblastine, colchicine, and 2-methoxyestradiol were characterized using median effect analysis method in HCT-116 colorectal cancer cells and DU145 prostate cancer cell line. The mechanism underlying the synergistic interaction related to tubulin polymerization and apoptosis was then investigated. Finally, the effect of the combination therapy on the survival of HCT-116 tumor-bearing nude mice was evaluated.

Results

Among the tested drugs, a synergistic anti-proliferative effect was observed with the combination of low concentrations of ABZ plus colchicine and ABZ plus 2-methoxyestradiol (2ME). Exploring the mechanism of the interaction between ABZ and 2ME revealed that the combination therapy synergistically activated the extrinsic pathway of apoptosis. Consistent with in vitro results, the combination of low concentration of ABZ with 2ME prolonged the survival of mice-bearing HCT-116 tumors. High concentration of ABZ in combination with 2ME, however, proved to be less effective than ABZ alone.

Conclusions

The combination of low doses of ABZ and 2ME has shown promising results in our pre-clinical model. Additionally, the finding that the combination of two microtubule-binding agents that share the same binding site can act synergistically may lead to the development of new therapeutic strategies in cancer treatment.

Phase II trial of oral 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) in hormone refractory prostate cancer

Epidemiologic and experimental data support a role for 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) in the growth regulation of prostate cancer. We conducted a phase II clinical trial evaluating calcitriol (1,25(OH)(2)D(3)) in patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer. We enrolled 14 patients in this study. 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) was initiated at a daily oral dose of 0.5 μg and escalated to 1.5 μg daily. No objective responses were observed. However, in two patients decreases of 25% and 45% in prostate specific antigen levels were seen. Hypercalcemia was the predominant toxicity. We conclude that 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) given in this manner is inactive in advanced prostate cancer. Dose escalation of oral 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) is limited by hypercalcemia.

Clinical development of novel therapeutics for castration-resistant prostate cancer: historic challenges and recent successes

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

Second-line therapy for castrate-resistant prostate cancer: a literature review

Despite a survival benefit in the first-line treatment of castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) with docetaxel, the prognosis remains limited. There are increasing options available for patients with CRPC in the second-line setting, but there is currently little consensus regarding the optimal treatment. There have been numerous phase II and retrospective studies examining second-line options in CRPC, including retreatment with docetaxel, mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide and carboplatin, which can be associated with meaningful responses in a significant minority of patients. In 2010 three randomized trials were published or presented which demonstrated a survival benefit in the second-line setting. These included cabazitaxel compared with mitoxantrone, sipuleucel-T (immunotherapy) and abiraterone acetate versus placebo. Ongoing research in the second-line setting of CRPC to optimize treatment options, with the objectives of survival prolongation, improvement in quality of life and pain management, is still needed.

End points and outcomes in castration-resistant prostate cancer: from clinical trials to clinical practice

New therapeutic approaches for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) introduce new treatment dilemmas: how best to sequence these options to maximally benefit patients, what tests to perform before and after treatment to assess disease status, and how to interpret the test results and use them to guide treatment. New and specific end points for different classes of drugs are needed to provide the information to guide these treatment decisions. In 2008, the Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 consensus criteria for early-phase clinical trials redefined clinical trial end points as first, to control, relieve, or eliminate disease manifestations present when treatment is started and second, to prevent or delay future disease manifestations. Disease manifestations include prostate-specific antigen (PSA), soft-tissue disease (nodes and/or viscera), bone disease (most common site of spread), and symptoms. Recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals for CRPC therapies have been based on the prevent/delay end points that reflect unequivocal benefit to a patient: prolongation of life or reduction in skeletal-related events (SREs). For the practicing oncologist, the control/relieve/eliminate outcomes should serve primarily to inform the decision of whether to continue therapy. In this review, we consider individual end points such as PSA, imaging, and patient-reported outcomes in the context of the control/relieve/eliminate and prevent/delay framework. We address the time-to-event end points of metastasis prevention, SRE, time to progression, and overall survival in the context of regulatory approvals. We also discuss circulating tumor cells measured with the CellSearch assay, recently cleared by the FDA for monitoring CRPC.

Design and end points of clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group

PURPOSE

To update eligibility and outcome measures in trials that evaluate systemic treatment for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone.

METHODS

A committee of investigators experienced in conducting trials for prostate cancer defined new consensus criteria by reviewing previous criteria, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), and emerging trial data.

RESULTS

The Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2) recommends a two-objective paradigm: (1) controlling, relieving, or eliminating disease manifestations that are present when treatment is initiated and (2) preventing or delaying disease manifestations expected to occur. Prostate cancers progressing despite castrate levels of testosterone are considered castration resistant and not hormone refractory. Eligibility is defined using standard disease assessments to authenticate disease progression, prior treatment, distinct clinical subtypes, and predictive models. Outcomes are reported independently for prostate-specific antigen (PSA), imaging, and clinical measures, avoiding grouped categorizations such as complete or partial response. In most trials, early changes in PSA and/or pain are not acted on without other evidence of disease progression, and treatment should be continued for at least 12 weeks to ensure adequate drug exposure. Bone scans are reported as "new lesions" or "no new lesions," changes in soft-tissue disease assessed by RECIST, and pain using validated scales. Defining eligibility for prevent/delay end points requires attention to estimated event frequency and/or random assignment to a control group.

CONCLUSION

PCWG2 recommends increasing emphasis on time-to-event end points (ie, failure to progress) as decision aids in proceeding from phase II to phase III trials. Recommendations will evolve as data are generated on the utility of intermediate end points to predict clinical benefit.

Response to Vinorelbine With or Without Estramustine as Second-Line Chemotherapy in Patients with Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Vinorelbine (VRL) in combination with estramustine has known efficacy in the initial chemotherapeutic management of hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). However, little is known about the efficacy of VRL as second-line chemotherapy in HRPC.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with HRPC treated in a single institution with VRL as second-line chemotherapy with or without estramustine. Patient baseline characteristics, declines in prostate-specific antigen, performance status, toxicities, and survival were assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were treated with VRL between 1999 and 2005. Twenty-one patients (54%) received single-agent VRL and 18 patients (46%) had concomitant estramustine. Seven patients (17.9%, 95% confidence interval 7.5%-33.6%) treated with VRL experienced prostate-specific antigen declines >or=50%. Median duration of therapy was 1.4 months (range 0.2-14.0 months). Median overall survival was 6.9 months (range 1.4-29.9 months); it was 16.1 month in responders and 5.5 months in nonresponders. Median survival was significantly longer in patients with VRL and estramustine than in patients who received VRL alone (8.5 months versus 4.1 months, P=0.05). The most common reversible adverse effect of VRL was grade 1 or 2 fatigue observed in 36% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

As a second-line chemotherapy, VRL demonstrated moderate activity and was well tolerated in patients with HRPC. Patients treated with the combination of VRL and estramustine experienced a longer survival than those receiving VRL alone.

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.

Changing perspectives of the role of chemotherapy in advanced prostate cancer

The use of cytotoxic chemotherapy in advanced prostate adenocarcinoma has been validated by the recent demonstration of survival benefit in two large randomized phase III trials. Before publication of these landmark trials, SWOG 9916 and TAX 327, no chemotherapeutic regimen had shown survival benefit in the treatment of androgen independent prostate cancer (AIPC). These trials provide new encouragement for the use of chemotherapy in all stages of disease. Improved communication between medical and urologic oncologists and early patient referral for clinical trial participation remains essential for identifying new chemotherapeutic regimens with improved activity in AIPC and for defining the role of chemotherapy in earlier-stage disease. This article discusses the role of chemotherapy as the current standard of care for the treatment of AIPC and provides a historical perspective of the trials that preceded the development of current docetaxel-based regimens.

Prostate-specific antigen velocity and survival for patients with hormone-refractory metastatic prostate carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The authors investigated whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity was associated significantly with the time to death after randomization among patients with hormone-refractory metastatic prostate carcinoma (HRMPC) who were treated with cytotoxic, cytotatic, or combination therapy.

METHODS

The study cohort included 213 men with HRMPC who were treated on 3 prospective, randomized Phase II studies between February 1996 and October 2001. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate whether there was a significant association between PSA velocity and the time to death after randomization, controlling for treatment and known prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Increasing PSA velocity was associated significantly with shorter survival after randomization (P = 0.005) controlling for treatment and known prognostic factors. The adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.8 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.3-2.5; P = 0.0004) for men who had a PSA velocity > 0.0 ng/mL per month compared with men who had a PSA velocity < or = 0.0 ng/mL per month. Estimates of survival 2 years after randomization for these men were 16% (95% CI, 7-25%) and 44% (95% CI, 35-53%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PSA velocity was associated significantly with the length of survival among men with HRMPC who received cytotoxic, cytostatic, or combination therapy.

[Treatment options for hormone-refractory prostate cancer]

Surgical or medical androgen deprivation therapy in its multiple variants represents the standard therapeutic approach in the management of metastatic prostate cancer resulting in a primary response rate of about 90%. However, about 90% of the men treated will develop PSA progression within 3-4 years resulting in androgen-independent and later on hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Management of AIPCA and HRPCA still represents a therapeutic challenge despite the development of new and effective treatment options. PSA progression following primary ADT defines an androgen-refractory but still hormone-sensitive PCA which might respond to secondary hormonal manipulations such as antiandrogen withdrawal, addition of nonsteroidal antiandrogens, and administration of estrogens, ketoconazole and hydrocortisone, and somatostatin analogues. Secondary hormonal manipulations will result in a PSA decline >50% in about 60-80% of the patients with a mean duration of 7-17 months depending on the type of treatment. PSA progression following secondary endocrine treatment defines hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPCA) which might be treated by systemic chemotherapy. Based on the results of two prospective, randomized clinical phase III trials comparing docetaxel and mitoxantrone, docetaxel results in a statistically significant survival benefit of 2.5 months, a significantly higher PSA and pain response, and represents the treatment of choice in the management of HRPCA. Bisphosphonates such as zoledronate represent another cornerstone in the management of PSA-progressive PCA demonstrating a significant benefit with regard to the prevention of skeletal-related events. Furthermore, bisphosphonates might be indicated in the treatment of symptomatic bone pain as has been demonstrated for ibandronate and zoledronate. The current article critically reflects on the various therapeutic options in the management of PSA progression following primary androgen deprivation for advanced prostate cancer. The development, rationale, and results of systemic chemotherapy are discussed critically and a therapeutic algorithm is demonstrated.

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.

Therapie des hormonrefraktären Prostatakarzinoms

PSA-progression following primary ADT defines an androgen-refractory but still hormone sensitive PCA which might respond to secondary hormonal manipulations. Secondary hormonal manipulations will result in a PSA decline >50% in about 60-80% of the patients with a mean duration of 7-17 months depending on the type of treatment. PSA-progression following secondary endocrine treatment defines hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPCA) which might be treated by systemic chemotherapy. Based on the results of 2 prospective, randomized clinical phase-III trials comparing docetaxel and mitoxantrone, docetaxel results in a statistically significant survival benefit of 2.5 months, a significantly higher PSA- and pain response and represents the treatment of choice in the management of HRPCA. Bisphosphonates such as zoledronate represent another cornerstone in the management of PSA-progressive PCA demonstrating a significant benefit with regard to the prevention of skeletal related events. Furthermore, bisphosphonates might be indicated in the treatment of symptomatic bone pain. The current article critically reflects the various therapeutic options in the management of PSA progression following primary androgen deprivation for advanced prostate cancer.

A phase II study of vinorelbine and estramustine in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

This phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of vinorelbine in combination with estramustine in patients with chemotherapy-naïve hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients received vinorelbine (i.v. 25 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks and estramustine (oral, 600 mg/m2) daily. Eligible patients were required to have progressive metastatic disease following the first hormonal manipulation.

RESULTS

Of the 51 patients enrolled (median age = 69 years), 84% presented bone involvement and 75% had at least two organs involved at the time of study entry and 47 were evaluable for treatment efficacy. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) response (> or =50% decrease) which was the primary efficacy criterion was reported in 21 patients (41.2%) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in 20 patients (48.8%) in the per protocol (PP) population. Of the 7 patients with measurable disease, 2 achieved partial response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.7 months (range: 1.9-8.6) and 14.3 months (range: 4.2-21.2), respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was reported in 6.1% of patients and in 1% of cycles. The incidence of complicated neutropenia (febrile neutropenia reported in 1 patient and septic shock with severe neutropenia reported in 2 patients) was 5.8%. The most frequent grade 3-4 non-haematological events (% of patients > or =5%) included anorexia (10%), thrombosis/embolism (8%), vomiting and hypotension (6% each). There were 3 toxic deaths (5.9 %) resulting from pulmonary embolism, angina pectoris, and septic shock. The impact of combined chemotherapy on the quality-of-life (QL) of the patients was assessed between baseline and the first evaluation scheduled at 6 weeks indicated a marked reduction in pain while the rest of the symptoms remained stable. Overall, health status improved slightly over the treatment period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirmed that the combination of vinorelbine and estramustine is an active regimen in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer who had not been treated previously with chemotherapy. Main toxicities included complicated neutropenia even though the incidence of severe neutropenia was low. We observed a higher incidence of toxic deaths which could have been related to the regimen of estramustine used in the study.

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.

Five-year outcomes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and conformal radiotherapy in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To describe the 5-year outcomes of patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer treated with neoadjuvant estramustine and vinblastine followed by concurrent chemotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT).

METHODS

A total of 23 patients completed therapy consisting of two 8-week cycles of vinblastine, weekly as 4 mg/m2, followed by 8 weeks of concomitant chemotherapy and 3D-CRT. Estramustine was given daily at 10 mg/kg in three divided doses. 3D-CRT consisted of a total dose of 7560 cGy.

RESULTS

Assessable patients include 9 with Stage T3 or greater tumors and 5 with lymph node metastasis at diagnosis. All patients had a Gleason score 7 or greater. The median follow-up was 60 months. Of the 23 assessable patients, 15 (65%) experienced biochemical relapse by American Society for Therapeutic Radiology Oncology criteria. The median time to prostate-specific antigen relapse was 12 months (range 7 to 16). Five patients (22%) developed metastases. The median time to metastasis had not been reached by last follow-up. Of the 23 assessable patients, 11 (48%) received no additional therapy and had noncastrate testosterone levels. Six patients had no evidence of disease and 9 patients were receiving androgen blockade. Three patients died (one of prostate cancer and two of other diseases).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of patients with unfavorable-risk localized prostate cancer achieved long-term disease control with estramustine and vinblastine and concurrent 3D-CRT, no significant long-term toxicities were seen and 48% underwent no further therapy after RT. These long-term findings support the continued study of chemotherapy combined with RT as a potential alternative to prolonged androgen deprivation.

Enhancement of paclitaxel-induced microtubule stabilization, mitotic arrest, and apoptosis by the microtubule-targeting agent EM012

EM012, a semisynthetic phthalideisoquinoline alkaloid, has been recently found to target microtubules and possess anti-cancer activity. In this study, we evaluated the effects of EM012 in combination with the classic microtubule-targeting agent paclitaxel. Our results demonstrated that EM012 enhanced the anti-proliferative activity of nanomolar concentrations of paclitaxel in human breast cancer (MCF7), prostate cancer (DU145), and non-small-cell lung cancer (A549) cells. Further studies revealed that EM012 increased the ability of nanomolar concentrations of paclitaxel to induce mitotic arrest and apoptosis, without affecting microtubule polymerization. In contrast, when micromolar concentrations of paclitaxel were used, EM012 promoted paclitaxel-induced microtubule polymerization both in vitro and in cultured cells. Nevertheless, EM012 enhanced the ability of nanomolar concentrations of paclitaxel to stabilize microtubules, as indicated by increased tubulin acetylation. Our results therefore suggest a therapeutic potential of EM012/paclitaxel combination in the management of human cancer and provide mechanistic insights into the combined effects of these two microtubule-targeting agents.

Synergistic suppression of microtubule dynamics by discodermolide and paclitaxel in non-small cell lung carcinoma cells

Discodermolide is a new microtubule-targeted antimitotic drug in Phase I clinical trials that, like paclitaxel, stabilizes microtubule dynamics and enhances microtubule polymer mass in vitro and in cells. Despite their apparently similar binding sites on microtubules, discodermolide acts synergistically with paclitaxel to inhibit proliferation of A549 human lung cancer cells (L. Martello et al., Clin. Cancer Res., 6: 1978-1987, 2000). To understand their synergy, we examined the effects of the two drugs singly and in combination in A549 cells and found that, surprisingly, their antiproliferative synergy is related to their ability to synergistically inhibit microtubule dynamic instability and mitosis. The combination of discodermolide and paclitaxel at their antiproliferative IC(50)s (7 nm for discodermolide and 2 nm for paclitaxel) altered all of the parameters of dynamic instability synergistically except the time-based rescue frequency. For example, together the drugs inhibited overall microtubule dynamicity by 71%, but each drug individually inhibited dynamicity by only 24%, giving a combination index (CI) of 0.23. Discodermolide and paclitaxel also synergistically blocked cell cycle progression at G(2)-M (41, 9.6, and 16% for both drugs together, for discodermolide alone, and for paclitaxel alone, respectively; CI = 0.59), and they synergistically enhanced apoptosis (CI = 0.85). Microtubules are unique receptors for drugs. The results suggest that ligands that bind to large numbers of binding sites on an individual microtubule can interact in a poorly understood manner to synergistically suppress microtubule dynamic instability and inhibit both mitosis and cell proliferation, with important consequences for combination clinical therapy with microtubule-targeted drugs.

Gene expression profiling reveals novel targets of estramustine phosphate in prostate cancer cells

Estramustine phosphate (EMP) is a compound widely used for the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer. In order to better understand the precise molecular mechanism(s) by which EMP exerts its effects on hormone-resistant PC3 prostate cancer cells, we have utilized microarray to interrogate 22,215 known genes to determine the gene expression profiles altered by EMP treatment. The purpose of this investigation was to identify gene expression profile first and then in future studies determine the specific role of these genes in EMP-induced apoptosis in prostate cancer cells. We found a total of 726 genes which showed >2 fold change after EMP treatment. Clustering analysis showed 12 different types of expression alteration. These genes were also subjected to cluster analysis according to their biological functions. We found that EMP regulated the expression of genes, which are critically involved in the regulation of cell growth, cell cycle, apoptosis, iron homeostasis, cytoskeleton and cell signaling transduction. Real-time quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis was used to confirm the results of microarray, and the results of real-time quantitative RT-PCR were consistent with the microarray data. From these results, we conclude that EMP caused changes in the expression of a large number of genes that are related to the control of cell survival and physiological behaviors. The gene expression profiles may provide comprehensive molecular mechanism(s) by which EMP exerts its pleiotropic effects on prostate cancer cells. EMP-induced regulation of these genes may be further exploited for devising therapeutic strategies for prostate cancer.

Randomized Phase II trial assessing estramustine and vinblastine combination chemotherapy vs estramustine alone in patients with progressive hormone-escaped metastatic prostate cancer

Based on the results of combined data from three North American Phase II studies, a randomised Phase II study in the same patient population was performed, using combination chemotherapy with estramustine phosphate (EMP) and vinblastine (VBL) in hormone refractory prostate cancer patients. In all, 92 patients were randomised into a Phase II study of oral EMP (10 mg kg day continuously) or oral EMP in combination with intravenous VBL (4 mg m² week for 6 weeks, followed by 2 weeks rest). The end points were toxicity and PSA response in both groups, with the option to continue the trial as a Phase III study with time to progression and survival as end points, if sufficient responses were observed. Toxicity was unexpectedly high in both treatment arms and led to treatment withdrawal or refusal in 49% of all patients, predominantly already during the first treatment cycle. The mean treatment duration was 10 and 14 weeks, median time to PSA progression was 27.2 and 30.8 weeks, median survival time was 44 and 50.9 weeks, and PSA response rate was only 24.6 and 28.9% in the EMP/VBL and EMP arms, respectively. There was no correlation between PSA response and survival. While the PSA response in the patients tested was less than half that recorded in the North American studies, the toxicity of EMP monotherapy or in combination with VBL was much higher than expected. Further research on more effective and less toxic treatment strategies for hormone refractory prostate cancer is mandatory.

Role of secondary hormonal therapy in the management of recurrent prostate cancer

Androgen ablation remains the cornerstone of the systemic management of prostate cancer. After initial androgen deprivation, clinical outcomes vary considerably. For the patient with progressive disease after androgen deprivation, multiple therapeutic options are available and include antiandrogen withdrawal, chemotherapy, and secondary hormonal agents. Multiple secondary hormonal agents have clinical activity and the sequential use of these agents may lead to prolonged periods of clinical response. In addition to the use of oral antiandrogens, active secondary hormonal therapies include adrenolytic agents such as ketoconazole and aminoglutethimide, corticosteroids and estrogenic compounds. This article reviews the clinical trial data for these various agents and discusses their role in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer and bone metastases: medical treatment

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in men in the United States. With the long natural history of the disease, management of skeletal morbidity related to advanced prostate cancer becomes a major public health issue. The standard of care in advanced prostate cancer is androgen deprivation therapy. This may accelerate the development of osteoporosis and further exacerbate the risks of having adverse skeletal-related events develop. Recently, the use of bisphosphonates in men who have not responded to androgen deprivation therapy has been shown to reduce the incidence of skeletal-related events with time. Questions remain as to whether bisphosphonates should be broadly applied to earlier stages of the disease or tailored to men at higher risk of having bone-related morbidity. Work is ongoing to improve other approaches to the medical treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced prostate cancer including the use of radiopharmaceuticals and combined chemotherapy.

Pilot study of epothilone B analog (BMS-247550) and estramustine phosphate in patients with progressive metastatic prostate cancer following castration

BACKGROUND

Several trials have demonstrated that the response proportions to microtubule agents in patients with prostate cancer are increased by the addition of estramustine phosphate (EMP). The epothilone B analog BMS-247550 is a novel microtubule agent that has shown activity in taxane-resistant tumors. We conducted a dose-escalation study to determine a safe dose of BMS-247550 to combine with EMP in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients with castrate-metastatic prostate cancer were treated with intravenous BMS-247550 and oral EMP (280 mg three times daily for 5 days) every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients were treated at two dose levels (35 and 40 mg/m(2)). Three of six patients treated at 40 mg/m(2) developed grade 4 neutropenia, establishing 35 mg/m(2) as the maximum-tolerated dose. Significant peripheral neuropathy (grade >/= 2) was related to dose level and infusion rate. A decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of >/= 50% was seen in 11 of 12 evaluable patients (92%) (95% confidence interval 76% to 100%). There were objective responses in soft tissue (57%) and bone metastasis (40%).

CONCLUSIONS

The phase II dose of BMS-247550 combined with EMP is 35 mg/m(2) over 3 h every 3 weeks. This combination is safe and >/= 50% post-therapy declines in PSA were seen in 11 of 12 patients (92%).

Phase II trial of paclitaxel, estramustine, etoposide, and carboplatin in the treatment of patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Preclinical data suggest that the combination of intravenous (i.v.) paclitaxel, carboplatin, oral etoposide, and oral estramustine (TEEC) has significant activity in patients with advanced, hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. The authors conducted this clinical trial to evaluate the addition of carboplatin to the three-drug combination of paclitaxel, estramustine, and etoposide (TEE).

METHODS

Twenty patients with carcinoma of the prostate that was progressing despite hormone therapy were enrolled on this Phase II trial. Patients were treated with oral estramustine, 280 mg three times daily, and oral etoposide, 50 mg/m2, once daily on Days 1-7, with i.v. paclitaxel, 135 mg/m2, over 1 hour followed by carboplatin (area under the curve, 5) on Day 2 of each 21-day treatment cycle. Patients were evaluated for response after three cycles, and three additional cycles were given to responding or stable patients.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were evaluable for response, and 12 patients had measurable disease at baseline. The measurable response rate was 58% (7 of 12 patients; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 28-85%), and all of those were partial responses. Eleven patients had decreases >50% from their baseline prostate specific antigen levels during therapy, for a response rate of 58% (95% CI, 34-80%) by this criterion. The median time to disease progression was 5.5 months, with a median survival of 14.2 months. Major toxicities included Grade (according to version 2 of the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria) 4 neutropenia in 4 patients, Grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 4 patients, and anemia > or = Grade 3 in 4 patients. One patient had a deep vein thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of TEEC was active in patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. The regimen was tolerable, with primarily hematologic toxicity. The addition of carboplatin to TEE did not appear to add to the efficacy of the three-drug combination of antimicrotubule agents.

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.

Phase II trial of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and dexamethasone in the treatment of androgen-independent prostate carcinoma

BACKGROUND

In this Phase II study, the authors assessed the toxicity and anti-tumor activity of a combination of oral cyclophosphamide, oral low-dose dexamethasone, and intravenous vincristine (CVD) in patients with metastatic androgen-independent prostate carcinoma (AI-PCa).

METHODS

Patients with histologic proof of adenocarcinoma of the prostate progressing despite adequate hormonal therapy and adequate organ function were treated with oral cyclophosphamide, 250 mg/daily (Days 1-14); intravenous vincristine, 1 mg daily (Days 1, 8, 15); and oral dexamethasone, 0.75 mg twice a day (Days 1-14) in 28-day cycles. Study endpoints were toxicity, rate of prostate specific antigen (PSA) decline > 50%, and/or measurable disease response.

RESULTS

Fifty-two (95%) of 55 registered patients were evaluable. The majority (65%) of patients had received prior chemotherapy. The median number of treatment cycles given was two (range, one-seven cycles). Twenty-nine percent of the patients were found to have a > 50% decline in PSA level compared with baseline levels, and 25% of the patients with bidimensionally measurable soft-tissue or visceral disease were found to have a partial response. The median progression-free survival duration was 10 weeks, and the median overall survival duration was 10.6 months. There were no thromboembolic events, and hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity was minimal.

CONCLUSIONS

CVD was found to be an active and well-tolerated regimen for AI-PCa. The low toxicity profile makes CVD a useful treatment option for patients with significant comorbidities and high risk for treatment-related toxicity, especially thromboembolic events and myelotoxicity.

State-of-the-art treatment of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer

Initial therapy for advanced prostate cancer includes androgen ablation by surgical or medical castration. Still, nearly all men with metastases will progress to hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). Current U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved agents for the treatment of HRPC include mitoxantrone and estramustine, although the vinca alkaloids and the taxanes have shown promising activity in single-agent phase II trials. Combinations of these agents induce a biochemical response in greater than 50% of patients, but the median duration of response is approximately 6 months. Overall survival of patients treated with these combinations is approximately 18-24 months. Studies are ongoing to develop novel therapies that target specific molecular pathways or mechanisms of chemotherapy resistance. Novel agents under development include growth factor receptor inhibitors, antisense oligonucleotides, bisphosphonates, and cell differentiating agents. Evaluation and incorporation of these agents into existing treatment regimens will guide us in the development of more active regimens in the treatment of HRPC.

Combined anti-microtubule therapy: a phase II study of weekly docetaxel plus estramustine in patients with metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel and estramustine exert anti-tumor effects by inhibiting microtubule function. In vitro data suggest synergism with this combination. This phase II study evaluated the response rate and toxicity of docetaxel and estramustine in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were treated with docetaxel 35 mg/m(2) on day 2 and estramustine phosphate 280 mg p.o. tds days 1-3 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks, for a maximum of six treatment cycles.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were enrolled between August 1999 and March 2001; 36 were eligible. Of 31 evaluable patients, responses were observed in 15 patients (47%); two patients (6%) obtained a complete response. Median time to treatment failure was 6 months; median survival was 1 year. Thromboembolic toxicity occurred in 11% of patients: three experienced deep venous thromboses and one had a fatal pulmonary embolism. Myelosuppression was minimal with this regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite modest activity in metastatic breast cancer, the toxicity observed with the combination of estramustine and docetaxel precludes the routine use of this combination in the treatment of breast cancer. Further studies using this compound in metastatic breast cancer are not warranted.

Chemotherapy for prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy remains the mainstay of therapy for patients with advanced prostate cancer and for selected patients with localized prostate cancer. Androgen deprivation therapy is the model of target-based therapies in this disease. Although it is clear that other target-based therapies need to be developed, cytotoxic chemotherapy is emerging as an effective form of treatment for men with prostate cancer. The early studies combining mitoxantrone plus a corticosteroid demonstrated that chemotherapy could be given to men with symptomatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer with minimal toxicity, and significant palliation could be provided. Since then, it has been recognized that estramustine, when combined with a variety of microtubular inhibitors, is very active in hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Doublets combining estramustine plus a taxane seem to be the most active. Although it appears that estramustine may add some activity to taxanes, the mechanism of its activity is uncertain, and its overall value is similarly questioned, particularly in light of its significant toxicity. Regimens that omit estramustine are being explored (ie, either taxane alone or taxane plus biologic agents). In addition, triplet therapy (combining estramustine plus a taxane plus a third drug, such as carboplatin or etoposide) is being explored. Finally, the utility of chemotherapy is beginning to be explored in the context of earlier disease in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or serologically relapsing group of patients. Data from these studies are just beginning to be gathered.

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.

Results of a phase II study with doxorubicin, etoposide, and cisplatin in patients with fully characterized small-cell carcinoma of the prostate

PURPOSE

To determine the activity and toxicity of doxorubicin in combination with cisplatin and etoposide in patients with small-cell prostate carcinoma (SCPCa) and to characterize the clinicopathologic features of SCPCa.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with SCPCa (pure or mixed), measurable disease, good organ function, and no prior treatment with doxorubicin, etoposide, or cisplatin were treated every 4 weeks with doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) as a 24-hour intravenous (IV) infusion followed by etoposide 120 mg/m(2)/d and cisplatin 25 mg/m(2)/d IV on days 2 to 4.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients (36 assessable for response) were treated for a median of four cycles. Twenty-nine (81%) of 36 patients had prior hormonal therapy. Study patients had visceral metastases, lytic bone disease, and relatively low serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). We observed 22 partial responses (response rate, 61% in an intent-to-treat analysis); toxicity was severe (grade 3 or 4 neutropenia 100%, thrombocytopenia 66%, mucositis 21%, and infection 68%). Three patients died of toxicity. Median time to progression and overall survival time were 5.8 months and 10.5 months, respectively. Performance status, serum albumin, and number of organs involved (but not PSA, carcinoembryonic antigen, or neuroendocrine markers) were predictors of survival.

CONCLUSION

SCPCa presents unique clinicopathologic features. Addition of doxorubicin to the etoposide/cisplatin regimen caused higher toxicity in this patient population and failed to improve outcome. Given these results, we do not recommend further development of this regimen for patients with SCPCa. Improvement in therapy will come from understanding the biology of SCPCa progression and integrating new targeted therapies into the treatment of SCPCa.

Estramustine and Vinblastine (EV) Regimen for Advanced Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer

The increasing complexity of cancer chemotherapy makes it mandatory that pharmacists be familiar with these highly toxic agents. This column reviews various issues related to the preparation, dispensing, and administration of cancer chemotherapy, both commercially available and investigational.

A multiinstitutional, concurrent chemoradiation trial of strontium-89, estramustine, and vinblastine for hormone refractory prostate carcinoma involving bone

BACKGROUND

Estramustine phosphate (EMP) and vinblastine have radiosensitizing properties and significant activity against hormone refractory prostate carcinoma. Strontium-89 is a palliative agent that acts as a selective radiation source for bone metastasis. The combination of EMP, vinblastine, and strontium-89 was developed to exploit the potential for radiosynergy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-four patients at the Brown Oncology Group affiliated hospitals were treated with oral EMP 600 mg/m2 daily on Weeks 1-4 and 7-10, vinblastine 4 mg/m2 intravenously once each week on Weeks 1-4 and 7-10, and strontium-89 2.2 MBq/kg on Day 1. Courses were repeated every 12 weeks. Response assessment was based on a change in the serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels, correlated with change in measurable disease and bone scan appearance.

RESULTS

A greater than or equal to 50% decline in PSA for at least 6 weeks was observed in 21 patients (48%, 95% confidence interval, 33-62%). Median duration of response was 23 weeks (range, 6-70.8 weeks). The median survival was 13 months with 1- and 2-year survival rates of 55% and 25%, respectively. After completion of protocol therapy, a retrospective review showed that only nine patients received subsequent palliative external beam radiation after progression.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of strontium-89 to the regimen of EMP and vinblastine can be delivered safely and in repeated doses, provides effective palliation, and may decrease the need for future radiation therapy. A randomized trial is necessary to quantify these effects.