Significance of androgen-deprivation therapy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with high-dose radiotherapy: A literature review

The real-world benefits of adding androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and its optimal duration when combined with current standard high-dose radiation therapy (RT) remain unknown. We aimed to assess the efficacy of and toxicities associated with ADT in the setting of combination with high-dose RT for intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa). This article is a modified and detailed version of the commentary on Clinical Question 8 described in the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer (ver. 2023). A qualitative systematic review was performed according to the Minds Guide. All relevant published studies between September 2010 and August 2020, which assessed the outcomes of IR or HR PCa treated with high-dose RT, were screened using two databases (PubMed and ICHUSHI). A total of 41 studies were included in this systematic review, mostly consisting of retrospective studies (N = 34). The evidence basically supports the benefit of adding ADT to high-dose RT to improve tumor control. Regarding IR populations, many studies suggested the existence of a subgroup for which adding ADT had no impact on either overall survival or the BF-free duration. On the other hand, regarding HR populations, several studies suggested the positive impact of adding ADT for ≥1 year on overall survival. Adding ADT increases not only the risk of sexual dysfunction but also that of cardiovascular toxicities or bone fracture. Although the benefit of adding ADT was basically suggested for both IR and HR populations, further investigations are warranted to identify subgroups of patients for whom ADT has no benefit, as well as the appropriate duration of ADT for those who do derive benefit.

Phase II clinical trial of sequential treatment with systemic chemotherapy and intraperitoneal paclitaxel for gastric and gastroesophageal junction peritoneal carcinomatosis - STOPGAP trial

BACKGROUND

Studies from Asia indicate that normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC) may confer survival benefit in patients with gastric peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). However, data regarding this approach is lacking in western population. The current STOPGAP trial is intended to assess 1-year progression-free survival benefit of sequential systemic chemotherapy and paclitaxel NIPEC in patients with gastric/ gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma PC.

METHODS

This is a prospective, single center, single arm, phase II investigator-initiated clinical trial. Patients with histologically proven gastric/GEJ (Siewert 3) adenocarcinoma with positive peritoneal cytology or PC will be eligible to participate after three months of standard of care systemic chemotherapy and with no evidence of visceral metastasis on restaging scans. The primary treatment is iterative paclitaxel NIPEC with systemic paclitaxel and 5-fluorouracil, which will be administered on days1 and 8 and repeated every three weeks for 4 cycles. Patients will undergo diagnostic laparoscopy both before and after NIPEC to assess peritoneal cancer index (PCI). Patients with PCI less than or equal to 10 in whom complete cytoreduction (CRS) is feasible may opt to undergo CRS with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The primary endpoint is 1-year progression free survival and secondary endpoints are overall survival and patient reported quality of life outcomes measured by EuroQol- 5 dimensions-5 level (EuroQol-5D-5L) questionnaire.

DISCUSSION

If the sequential approach of systemic chemotherapy followed by paclitaxel NIPEC proves beneficial, then this approach could be used in larger, muti-institutional randomized clinical trial of gastric PC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on 21/02/2021, under clinical trials.gov; Identifier: NCT04762953.

Intraperitoneal infusion of recombinant human indentation improves prognosis in gastric cancer ascites

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal administration of recombinant human indentation in gastric cancer with malignant ascites. Methods: Clinical data of 90 patients (37 in an Endostar^® combined with cisplatin group and 53 in a cisplatin group) were retrospectively analyzed. The primary end point was overall survival, and the secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and so on. Results: Median overall survival was longer in the combination group (9.7 vs 8.1 months; p = 0.01). ORR and DCR were higher in the combination group (ORR: 75.7% vs 54.7%; p = 0.04; DCR: 94.6% vs 75.5%; p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in adverse effects between the two groups. Conclusion: Intraperitoneal administration of recombinant human indentation improved efficacy and survival for gastric cancer with ascites.