Cardiovascular mortality after androgen deprivation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: RTOG 85-31

Testosterone Replacement Therapy and the Cardiovascular System

As testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) has emerged as a commonly prescribed therapy for symptomatic low testosterone, conflicting data have been reported in terms of both its efficacy and potential adverse outcomes. One of the most controversial associations has been that of TRT and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. This review briefly provides background on the history of TRT, the indications for TRT, and the data behind TRT for symptomatic low testosterone. It then specifically delves into the rather limited data for cardiovascular outcomes of those with low endogenous testosterone and those who receive TRT. The available body of literature strongly suggests that more work, by way of clinical trials, needs to be done to better understand the impact of testosterone and TRT on the cardiovascular system.

Cardiac Outcomes in Survivors of Pediatric and Adult Cancers

More than 80% of children and 60% of adults with cancer will become long-term survivors, emphasizing the importance of late effects of cancer therapy. Cardiotoxicity due to chemotherapy and radiation is a frequent cause of serious morbidity and premature mortality in survivors. Anthracyclines, a core component of many treatment regimens, have been implicated as a principal cause of irreversible cardiomyopathy. Approximately 60% of anthracycline-treated children will develop echocardiographic evidence of cardiac dysfunction, and 10% of those treated with high-dose anthracyclines will develop congestive heart failure within the 20 years after therapy. Adults treated with trastuzumab are at risk of a cardiomyopathy that is usually reversible. As many as 12% of adults treated with trastuzumab and 20% of those who have also received an anthracycline will develop cardiotoxicity within 5 years. Risk factors for cardiomyopathy include patient (eg, age, sex, genetic predisposition) and treatment characteristics (eg, cumulative anthracycline dose). Radiotherapy to a field involving the heart increases the risk of cardiomyopathy, coronary artery disease, valvular dysfunction, arrhythmias, and pericardial disease. Surveillance guidelines are available to guide long-term cardiac follow-up of childhood cancer survivors, but not for survivors of adult cancers; however, periodic follow-up to detect cardiac dysfunction may be reasonable. Modifiable cardiac risk factors such as hypertension, smoking, and dyslipidemia interact with cancer therapies to increase the risk of cardiac disease, emphasizing the importance of risk-factor control. Coordination of care between oncologists and cardiologists would optimize care for those individuals at high risk of cardiotoxicity who would benefit from appropriate surveillance and treatment strategies.

No increased risk of coronary heart disease for patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer in Chinese/Taiwanese men

The relationship between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and coronary heart disease (CHD) remains controversial. Furthermore, the majority of such studies focused on Caucasian populations, and there is still a paucity of studies among Asian populations. This population-based study aimed to investigate the relationship between ADT and CHD in an ethnic Chinese (i.e., Taiwanese) population. We used data sourced from the Taiwan 'Longitudinal Health Insurance Database'. This study included 1278 patients with prostate cancer in the study group and 1278 subjects without prostate cancer in the comparison group. Each patient was individually tracked for a 3-year period to identify those who had subsequently received a diagnosis of CHD. The results showed that the incidence rate of CHD during the 3-year follow-up period was 4.69 (95% CI: 2.99-5.48) per 100 person-years and 2.67 (95% CI: 2.15-3.27) per 100 person-years for the study and comparison cohort, respectively. The Cox proportional hazard regression showed that the hazard ratio for CHD during the 3-year follow-up period for prostate cancer patients was 1.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.25-2.16) compared with comparison subjects after adjusting for patients' geographic location, monthly income, urbanization level, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and stroke. However, we failed to find a significant difference in the adjusted hazard of CHD during the 3-year follow-up period between prostate cancer patients who did and those who did not receive ADT (hazard ratio = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.79-1.59). We concluded that prostate cancer but not ADT was significantly associated with CHD. In addition, a common cause of prostate cancer and coronary heart disease could exist.

Optimal duration of androgen deprivation therapy following radiation therapy in intermediate- or high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer: A systematic review and metaanalysis

Objectives:

To investigate current evidence on the optimal duration of adjuvant hormone deprivation for prostate cancer treated with radiation therapy with curative intent.

Materials and Methods:

A systematic search was performed in electronic databases. Data from randomized trials comparing different durations of hormone blockade was collected for pooled analysis. Overall survival, disease-free survival, disease-specific survival and toxicity were the outcomes of interest. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects model.

Results:

Six studies met the eligibility criteria. For overall survival, the pooled data from the studies demonstrated a statistically significant benefit for longer hormone deprivation (Hazard Ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.74 – 0.96). A statistically significant benefit was also found for disease-free survival (Hazard Ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.62 – 0.89), and disease-specific survival (Hazard Ratio 0.73; 95% CI 0.62 – 0.85). Studies with longer blockade duration arm demonstrated greater benefit. Toxicity was low, with no increase in cardiovascular events.

Conclusions:

Longer duration of androgen deprivation combined to radiotherapy prolongs OS, DFS and DSS in patients with intermediate and high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer. However, this evidence is based on trials using older radiation techniques, and further research of combination of androgen deprivation and new RT technologies may be warranted.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists versus standard androgen suppression therapy for advanced prostate cancer A systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate efficacy and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared to standard androgen suppression therapy for advanced prostate cancer.

SETTING

The international review team included methodologists of the German Cochrane Centre and clinical experts.

PARTICIPANTS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, trial registries and conference books for randomised controlled trials (RCT) for effectiveness data analysis, and randomised or non-randomised controlled studies (non-RCT) for safety data analysis (March 2015). Two authors independently screened identified articles, extracted data, evaluated risk of bias and rated quality of evidence according to GRADE.

RESULTS

13 studies (10 RCTs, 3 non-RCTs) were included. No study reported cancer-specific survival or clinical progression. There were no differences in overall mortality (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.93), treatment failure (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.17) or prostate-specific antigen progression (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.06). While there was no difference in quality of life related to urinary symptoms, improved quality of life regarding prostate symptoms, measured with the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), with the use of GnRH antagonists compared with the use of standard androgen suppression therapy (mean score difference -0.40, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.14, and -1.84, 95% CI -3.00 to -0.69, respectively) was found. Quality of evidence for all assessed outcomes was rated low according to GRADE. The risk for injection-site events was increased, but cardiovascular events may occur less often by using GnRH antagonist. Available evidence is hampered by risk of bias, selective reporting and limited follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient evidence to make firm conclusive statements on the efficacy of GnRH antagonist compared to standard androgen suppression therapy for advanced prostate cancer. There is need for further high-quality research on GnRH antagonists with long-term follow-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42012002751.

Long-term Impact of Androgen-deprivation Therapy on Cardiovascular Morbidity After Radiotherapy for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the impact of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) on the incidence of cardiovascular events (CE) in prostate cancer patients treated with radiotherapy (RT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

There were 2211 patients with localized prostate cancer treated with RT from 1988 to 2008 at our institution. There were 991 patients (44.8%) who received ADT at the time of RT for a median of 6.1 months. Salvage ADT was initiated prior to CE in 365 men (16.5%) at a median of 5.5 years (range: 0.6 to 18.4 years) after RT and continued for a median of 4.3 years. A nomogram was constructed to predict the 10-year risk of CE "post-RT" (i.e., after RT).

RESULTS

Patients receiving ADT at the time of RT exhibited significantly higher 10-year incidence of CE (19.6%, 95% CI 17.0%-22.6%) than those not receiving ADT (14.3%, 95% CI 12.2%-16.7%, P = .005). On multivariate analysis, both ADT at the time of RT (P = .007) and the time of salvage (P = .0004) were associated with increased CE risk, as were advanced age (P  =  .02), smoking (P  =  .0007), history of diabetes (P  =  .0007), and history of CE before RT (P  <  .0001). A nomogram using patient age, smoking status, history of pre-RT CE, history of diabetes, and ADT use at the time of RT predicted the rate of 10-year CE with a C-index of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72-0.88).

CONCLUSION

While ADT is often an essential part of prostate cancer treatment, patients should be counseled regarding increased risks of CE and prophylactic efforts should be considered to mitigate that risk.

Cardiovascular mortality in patients with prostate cancer exposed to androgen deprivation therapy

INTRODUCTION

A relationship between the administration of GnRH agonists and the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMC) in patients with prostate cancer has been showed in the third observational study published in April 2014. The association AMC-orchiectomy was not found in any of these studies.

OBJECTIVE

Define risk factors for cardiovascular disease in patients treated with GnRH agonist. Their probable underlying pathogenic mechanism in the myocardium and peripheral vascular tree was also analyzed.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

English articles cited in PubMed were reviewed. No time period is specified. The last search date was 11/30/14.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

In patients with coronary history of AMC or congestive heart failure, hormonal neoadjuvant therapy increased cardiovascular mortality rates (HR: 1.96, IC 95%: 1.04-3.71; P=.04) as well as cardiovascular-specific mortality rates (AHR: 3.28; IC 95%: 1.01-10.64; P=.048). Two possible mechanisms can be involved: a) direct mechanism through myocardial receptor for GnRH/PKA along with atherogenic plaques; and b) indirect mechanism related with metabolic disturbances.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with AMC or congestive heart failure history could present a higher risk of death related to the use of GnRH agonists. In these cases, should carefully consider appropriateness of such treatment. These effects can explained by a direct mechanism on myocardium and peripheral vascular tree and indirect ones related with modified metabolic syndrome.

Cardiovascular Mortality Following Short-term Androgen Deprivation in Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: An Analysis of RTOG 94-08

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with coronary heart disease and diabetes in men with prostate cancer (PCa); however, controversy exists regarding ADT and cardiovascular mortality (CVM) with limited data for lower risk disease.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a hypothesis-generating retrospective analysis to evaluate the relationship between short-course ADT and CVM in patients with clinically localized PCa enrolled in a phase III trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1979 men with clinically localized (T1b-2b, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] <20 ng/ml) PCa enrolled in Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 94-08 from 1994 to 2001. Patients were randomized to radiation therapy (RT) with or without short-course ADT (4 mo of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist therapy and antiandrogen). Median follow-up was 9.1 yr for survivors.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The Cox proportional hazards model assessed overall survival. The Fine-Gray proportional hazards model assessed disease-specific survival (DSS) and CVM. Covariates included age, race, weight, baseline cardiovascular disease, baseline diabetes, baseline hypertension, Gleason score, T stage, and PSA.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Short-course ADT improved overall survival and DSS and was not associated with an increased risk of CVM. Overall, 191 cardiovascular-related deaths were observed. At 10 yr, 83 patients (cumulative incidence rate: 10%) receiving RT and ADT versus 95 patients (cumulative incidence rate: 11%) receiving RT alone experienced CVM. The treatment arm was not associated with increased CVM (unadjusted hazard ratio: 1.07; confidence interval, 0.81-1.42; p=0.62). Increased CVM was not observed in patients at low risk of PCa death or at high risk of cardiac-related death.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from patients enrolled in RTOG 94-08 support the hypothesis that ADT does not increase CVM risk in men with clinically localized PCa treated with short-course GnRH agonist therapy. These data support ADT use in settings with proven survival benefit.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We investigated the controversial relationship between hormone therapy and cardiovascular mortality in men with prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radiation in a large randomized trial. Our data suggest that hormone therapy does not increase the risk of cardiovascular death in patients with clinically localized PCa and support the use of such therapy in settings with proven survival benefit.

Cardiovascular risk with androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: potential mechanisms

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is frequently used for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. ADT is associated with numerous side effects related to its mode of action, namely the suppression of testosterone to castrate levels. Recently, several large retrospective studies have also reported an increased risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease in men receiving ADT, although these risks have not been confirmed by prospective randomized trials. We review the literature to consider the risk of cardiovascular disease with different forms of ADT and examine in detail potential mechanisms by which any such risk could be mediated. Mechanisms discussed include the metabolic syndrome resulting from low testosterone level and the potential roles of testosterone flare, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptors outside the pituitary gland, and altered levels of follicle-stimulating hormone. Finally, the clinical implications for men prescribed ADT for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer are considered.

Risk factors of PSA progression and overall survival in patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer treated with primary androgen deprivation therapy

BACKGROUND

Primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) has played an important role in the treatment of prostate cancer. We sought to identify factors of PSA progression in our series of patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer treated with PADT.

METHODS

Six-hundred forty-nine patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer who received PADT from 1998 to 2005 by Nara Uro-Oncology Research Group were enrolled. Age, T classification, stage, PSA level at diagnosis, Gleason score, laterality of cancer detected by biopsy and seminal vesicle involvement (SVI) were adopted as parameters of PSA progression. Cox's proportional hazards model was used to determine the predictive factors for PSA progression.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period and the median PSA level at diagnosis were 49 months and 15 ng/mL. The 5-year disease specific survival rate, overall survival rate and PSA progression-free survival (PFS) rate were 97.9 %, 91.9 % and 71.2 %, respectively. The univariate analysis showed that the PSA level at diagnosis, Gleason score, laterality of cancer detected by biopsy and SVI were independent predictive parameters of PSA-PFS. However, by multivariate analysis, only laterality of cancer detected by biopsy (unilateral vs. bilateral) was an independent predictive parameter of PSA-PFS (p = 0.034). The patients were classified into new risk groups base on three factors: PSA level at diagnosis, Gleason score, and laterality of cancer detected by biopsy. The PSA-PFS rates at 5-years in the low- (none or one factor), intermediate- (two factors) and high-risk (three factors) groups were 78.2 %, 62.5 % and 46.9 % (p < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In localized or locally advanced prostate cancer patients who received PADT, laterality of cancer detected by biopsy was a significant predictor associated with a longer PSA-PFS. Our new risk grouping indicates the usefulness of PSA-PFS.

Pharmacologic androgen deprivation and cardiovascular disease risk factors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacologic androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is widely used to treat prostate cancer. Observational studies suggest ADT is associated with cardiovascular disease and its risk factors; however, such studies may be subject to bias. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of ADT on cardiovascular disease risk factors using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process (1950-June 2013), EMBASE (1974-June 2013) and Web of Science (1900-June 2013) for all RCTs in men with prostate cancer that compared pharmacologic ADT (i.e. use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist) with a group that did not receive ADT and reported data on cardiovascular disease risk factors including blood pressure, cholesterol, triglycerides, fibrinogen, biomarkers of insulin sensitivity, adiposity and C-reactive protein. We also searched for ongoing or unpublished trials. This study was registered at the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42013005035).

RESULTS

Of the 3272 unique publications identified in our systematic review, we did not identify a single RCT that reported data on any cardiovascular disease risk factor. We were unable to locate unreported data from corresponding authors or study sponsors.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of published, reliable evidence describing the effects of ADT on cardiovascular disease risk factors. RCTs have likely collected data on these risk factors as part of routine study monitoring; however, these data have not been published. To understand the effect of ADT on cardiovascular morbidity, these data must be made available to the scientific community.

Influence of age on incident diabetes and cardiovascular disease in prostate cancer survivors receiving androgen deprivation therapy

PURPOSE

Observational data suggest that androgen deprivation therapy increases the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Using data from the population based PCOS we evaluated whether age at diagnosis and comorbidity impact the association of androgen deprivation therapy with incident diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer diagnosed from 1994 to 1995 who were followed through 2009 to 2010. We used multivariable logistic regression models to assess the relationship of androgen deprivation therapy exposure (2 or fewer years, greater than 2 years or none) with incident diabetes and cardiovascular disease, adjusting for age at diagnosis, race, stage and comorbidity.

RESULTS

Of 3,526 eligible study participants 2,985 without diabetes and 3,112 without cardiovascular disease comprised the cohorts at risk. Androgen deprivation therapy was not associated with an increased risk of diabetes or cardiovascular disease in men diagnosed with prostate cancer before age 70 years. Prolonged androgen deprivation therapy and increasing age at diagnosis in older men was associated with an increased risk of diabetes (at age 76 years OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.4) and cardiovascular disease (at age 74 years OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0-3.5). Men with comorbidities were at greater risk for diabetes (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.3-7.9) and cardiovascular disease (OR 8.1, 95% CI 4.3-15.5) than men without comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged androgen deprivation therapy exposure increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes in men diagnosed with prostate cancer who are older than approximately 75 years, especially those with other comorbidities. Older men who receive prolonged androgen deprivation therapy should be closely monitored for diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Risk of acute myocardial infarction after androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer in a Chinese population

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer in a Chinese population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All Chinese patients with prostate cancer who were treated primarily with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, with or without further ADT at our hospital from the year 2000 to 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. We compared the risk of AMI in the patients who were given further ADT (ADT group) with those who were not given any ADT (non-ADT group). Potential risk factors of AMI including age, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, history of stroke, ischaemic heart disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) and duration of ADT were reviewed. The risk of AMI after ADT was first analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method, followed by Cox regression analyses including the potential risk factors mentioned.

RESULTS

In all, 452 patients were included, with 200 patients in the non-ADT group and 252 patients in the ADT group. The mean (sd) age was 68.2 (5.9) years in the non-ADT group and 69.5 (6.5) years in the ADT group, and the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.031). There were no significant differences in their pre-existing medical conditions or ECOG PS. The ADT group was associated with an increased risk of AMI when compared with the non-ADT group (P = 0.004) upon Kaplan-Meier analysis. Upon multivariate Cox regression analysis, hyperlipidaemia, poor ECOG PS and the use of ADT were the only three significant factors that were associated with increased risk of developing new AMI.

CONCLUSIONS

There was increased risk of AMI after ADT for prostate cancer in a Chinese population. Hyperlipidaemia and poor ECOG PS were also significant risk factors for developing AMI. The risk of AMI should be considered when deciding on ADT, especially in patients with history of hyperlipidaemia and relatively poor ECOG PS.

Radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer

The combination of radiation treatment and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been shown in multiple clinical trials to prolong overall survival in men with high-risk prostate cancer compared with either treatment alone. New radiation technologies enable the safe delivery of high radiation doses that improve cancer control compared with lower radiation doses. Based on the results of multiple randomized trials, clinical practice guidelines for high-risk prostate cancer recommend total radiation doses of at least 75.6 Gy, with long-term (2-3 years) ADT. Ongoing research into hypofractionated radiation treatment, whole-pelvic radiation, and combinations of radiation with novel hormonal agents could further improve cancer control and survival outcomes for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Metabolic effects of androgen deprivation therapy

The therapeutic effects and side effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), which is a main treatment method for metastatic prostate cancer, are well known, but the metabolic effects have only recently been studied. This review describes the effects of ADT on body habitus, insulin resistance, lipid profiles, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The review was done by using KoreaMed and PubMed to search the medical literature related to prostate cancer, ADT, body habitus, lipid profile, diabetes, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular disease. ADT increases fat mass and decreases lean body mass. Fat mostly accumulates in the subcutaneous area. ADT increases total cholesterol, triglycerides, and high-density lipoprotein, as well as the risk for insulin resistance and diabetes. ADT also increases the risk for cardiovascular events, but insufficient evidence is available for a correlation with mortality. ADT changes body habitus and lipid profiles and has different characteristics than those of classic metabolic syndrome, but it is related to insulin resistance and diabetes. ADT increases the risk for cardiovascular events. No consistent guidelines have been proposed for treating the metabolic effects of ADT, but the generally recommended treatment methods for lowering the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease should be fully understood. Additional studies are necessary.

Quantifying observational evidence for risk of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease following androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for men with prostate cancer (PCa) increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains controversial. Pooled analyses using data from randomised controlled trials suggest no increased risk of fatal CVD following ADT, but no pooled analyses exist for observational studies.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a meta-analysis using observational data on ADT and risk of CVD events in men with PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed and Embase were searched using predefined inclusion criteria to perform meta-analyses on associations between types of ADT and nonfatal and fatal CVD outcomes using information from observational studies. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of eight observational studies were identified studying at least one type of ADT and a nonfatal or fatal CVD outcome. The RR for risk of any type of nonfatal CVD was 1.38 (95% CI, 1.29-1.48) for men with PCa on gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, compared with men not treated with ADT. When analysing nonfatal ischemic heart disease only, the RR was 1.39 (95% CI, 1.26-1.54). The associations between GnRH agonists and nonfatal or fatal myocardial infarction or stroke were even stronger: RR: 1.57 (95% CI, 1.26-1.94) and RR: 1.51 (95% CI, 1.24-1.84), respectively. The results for other types of ADT in relation to the risk of any nonfatal CVD were RR: 1.44 (95% CI, 1.28-1.62) for orchiectomy and RR: 1.21 (95% CI, 1.07-1.367) for antiandrogens.

CONCLUSIONS

Observational data show a consistent positive association between ADT and the risk of CVD. This finding supports the need for future randomised trials of PCa patients that include older patients and men with multiple comorbidities to better reflect the general population.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We investigated all the available data from observational studies on hormonal treatment for prostate cancer and its possible cardiovascular adverse effects. We found consistent evidence that this treatment may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Selection criteria for initiation and renewal of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist therapy in patients with prostate cancer: a French prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To define the profile of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) receiving a 3-month or 6-month formulation of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist in France and the reasons for choosing between formulations.

METHODS

This prospective 1-year observational study included patients with PCa starting LHRH agonist therapy in everyday practice. Reasons for prescription and patient preference were recorded at inclusion, 3 or 6 months, and 12 months. The percentage of patients with a renewed initial prescription was recorded during follow up.

RESULTS

A total of 1438 patients with PCa were included. Hormonotherapy was initiated more frequently with a 6-month (n = 903; 62.8%) than with a 3-month formulation (n = 535; 37.2%). The initial prescription was renewed in most patients after 3 or 6 months (86.1%) and 12 months (71%); 170 patients switched from a 3-month to a 6-month formulation during follow up. Presence of metastases influenced initial prescription (odds ratio 0.439; 95% confidence interval 1.095-1.892), with a 3-month formulation more often prescribed than a 6-month formulation to men with metastatic PCa at diagnosis (21.3% versus 15.8%, respectively). The most frequent reasons given by physicians for choosing the 6-month formulation were 'simplification of therapeutic regimen' (86.9%) or 'fewer unnecessary visits' (46.8%). Similar reasons were given for switching from a 3-month to a 6-month formulation during follow up. The most frequent reasons given by physicians to initiate therapy with a 3-month formulation were 'usual practice/habit' (55.5%) or 'closer patient management' (46.2%). 'Closer patient management' and 'reassuring effect upon patient' were the main reasons for switching from a 6-month to a 3-month formulation during follow up. Approximately 80% of patients were satisfied with the formulation they were prescribed and patients' reasons for preferring one formulation over another were similar to the physicians' reasons for prescribing these formulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Slow-release formulations of LHRH agonists are useful therapies for physicians treating patients with PCa and there may be a preference for the 6-month formulation.

Cardiovascular events associated with androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

A recently published meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) showed that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) did not significantly increase cardiovascular mortality in prostate cancer patients. However, cardiovascular morbidity, which can impact quality of life, was not evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk of cardiovascular morbidity associated with ADT in patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search from January 1960 to June 2012. RCT and large cohort studies that evaluated first-line endocrine therapy and ADT longer than 6 months were screened for inclusion.

RESULTS

In total, 126,898 patients were included in four cohort studies, and 10,760 patients were included in nine RCTs. Analysis of the RCTs showed no differences in the development of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (OR 1.23; 95 % CI 0.92-1.64; I (2): 0 %) among the patients receiving ADT or not. The analysis of randomized studies that reported other nonfatal cardiovascular events demonstrated a significant increase in such events in the group receiving ADT (OR 1.55; 95 % CI 1.09-2.20; I (2): 0 %). When the large cohort studies were included in the analysis, an increased risk of AMI among men with ADT was found (OR 2.01, 95 % CI 1.90-2.13; I (2): 91,3 %).

CONCLUSION

The use of ADT in prostate cancer patients corresponded with a significant increase in cardiovascular morbidity associated with AMI and with nonfatal events. Therefore, ADT is linked to a significant negative impact on quality of life. Periodic cardiovascular evaluation is required for these patients.

Cardiovascular, diabetes, and cancer strips: evidences, mechanisms, and classifications

OBJECTIVES

To report and name firstly that there are cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes mellitus (DM) and cancers (CDC) strips; and disclose their mechanisms, classifications, and clinical significances.

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative and systematic review study and interpretive analysis.

METHODS

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

to collect and present related evidences on CDC strips from evidence-based, open-access, both Chinese- and English-language literatures in recent 10 years on clinical trials from PubMed according to keywords "CVD, DM and cancers" as well as authors' extensive clinical experience with the treatment of more than fifty thousands of patients with CVD, diabetes and cancers over the past decades, and analyze their related mechanisms and categories which based on authors' previous works.

DATA EXTRACTION

data were mainly extracted from 48 articles which are listed in the reference section of this review. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed data were included, narratively and systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

With several conceptual and technical breakthrough, authors present related evidences on CDC strips, these are, CVD and DM, DM and cancers, cancers and CVD linked, respectively; And "Bad SEED" +/- "bad soil" theory or doctrine may explain this phenomenon due to "internal environmental injure, abnormal or unbalance" in human body resulting from the role of risk factors (RFs) related multi-pathways and multi-targets, which including organ & tissue (e.g., vascular-specific), cell and gene-based mechanisms. Their classifications include main strips/type B, and Branches/type A as showed by tables and figures in this article.

CONCLUSIONS

There are CDC strips and related mechanisms and classifications. CDC strips may help us to understand, prevent, and control related common non-communicable diseases (NCDs) as well as these high risk strips.

The effects of androgen deprivation therapy on cardiac function and heart failure: implications for management of prostate cancer

Conflicting clinical evidence regarding the possible association between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with heart failure in men with prostate cancer is reviewed, including 2 population-based registries showing such an association, and 1 showing no association. Studies of the effects of androgens on cardiomyocyte contractility at the molecular level, the effects of testosterone on the cardiovascular system, particularly cardiac function, and the beneficial effects of testosterone therapy for patients with heart failure might help illuminate this controversy. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effect of ADT on end points of heart failure. The authors weigh the possible adverse effects of ADT on cardiac function and heart failure against its known benefits to cancer outcomes, defined according to published, randomized trials, in a discussion of the implications of the preclinical and clinical literature on the management of prostate cancer in men at risk for heart failure. In the absence of conclusive evidence that ADT causes heart failure, the authors discuss clinical situations in which ADT may be delayed, given on a short-term or intermittent basis, or withheld from treatment with the goal of reducing the risks of heart failure without compromising prostate cancer outcomes.

Adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy and strategies to mitigate them

CONTEXT

Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is a key component of treatment for aggressive and advanced prostate cancer, but it has also been associated with adverse effects on bone, metabolic, cardiovascular, sexual, and cognitive health as well as body composition.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature on the adverse effects of ADT and strategies for ameliorating harm from ADT.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The Medline database (through PubMed) was searched from inception to August 1, 2013, for studies documenting the side effects of ADT and for randomized and prospective trials of interventions to mitigate those side effects.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Adverse effects of ADT include decreases in bone mineral density; metabolic changes such as weight gain, decreased muscle mass, and increased insulin resistance; decreased libido and sexual dysfunction; hot flashes; gynecomastia; reduced testicle size; anemia; and fatigue. Several observational studies suggest an increased risk of diabetes and cardiovascular events, although most published studies report that ADT is not linked to greater cardiovascular mortality. Randomized trials have found value in treatments for some adverse effects including bone loss (bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective estrogen receptor modulators), markers of metabolic syndrome (exercise, diet, metformin), gynecomastia (tamoxifen, prophylactic radiation), muscle loss (resistance and aerobic exercise), and hot flashes (venlafaxine, medroxyprogesterone, cyproterone acetate, gabapentin).

CONCLUSIONS

ADT is often a necessary component of the treatment of aggressive prostate cancer, yet it has known harms that can impair health and quality of life. Clinicians should be aware of interventions that can help mitigate these adverse effects.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Androgen deprivation therapy is a critical component of the management of aggressive and advanced prostate cancer, but it causes adverse effects including bone loss, metabolic changes, gynecomastia, muscle loss, hot flashes, and possibly increased cardiovascular events. Clinicians should be aware of interventions that can help mitigate these adverse effects.

Androgen deprivation therapy complications

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is increasingly used to treat advanced prostate cancer and is also utilised as adjuvant or neo-adjuvant treatment for high-risk disease. The resulting suppression of endogenous testosterone production has deleterious effects on quality of life, including hot flushes, reduced mood and cognition and diminished sexual function. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies show that ADT has adverse bone and cardio-metabolic effects. The rate of bone loss is accelerated, increasing the risk of osteoporosis and subsequent fracture. Fat mass is increased and lean mass reduced, and adverse effects on lipid levels and insulin resistance are observed, the latter increasing the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. ADT also appears to increase the risk of incident cardiovascular events, although whether it increases cardiovascular mortality is not certain from the observational evidence published to date. Until high-quality evidence is available to guide management, it is reasonable to consider men undergoing ADT to be at a higher risk of psychosexual dysfunction, osteoporotic fracture, diabetes and cardiovascular disease, especially when treated for extended periods of time and therefore subjected to profound and prolonged hypoandrogenism. Health professionals caring for men undergoing treatment for prostate cancer should be aware of the potential risks of ADT and ensure appropriate monitoring and clinical management.

American Cancer Society prostate cancer survivorship care guidelines

Prostate cancer survivors approach 2.8 million in number and represent 1 in 5 of all cancer survivors in the United States. While guidelines exist for timely treatment and surveillance for recurrent disease, there is limited availability of guidelines that facilitate the provision of posttreatment clinical follow-up care to address the myriad of long-term and late effects that survivors may face. Based on recommendations set forth by a National Cancer Survivorship Resource Center expert panel, the American Cancer Society developed clinical follow-up care guidelines to facilitate the provision of posttreatment care by primary care clinicians. These guidelines were developed using a combined approach of evidence synthesis and expert consensus. Existing guidelines for health promotion, surveillance, and screening for second primary cancers were referenced when available. To promote comprehensive follow-up care and optimal health and quality of life for the posttreatment survivor, the guidelines address health promotion, surveillance for prostate cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, long-term and late effects assessment and management, psychosocial issues, and care coordination among the oncology team, primary care clinicians, and nononcology specialists. A key challenge to the development of these guidelines was the limited availability of published evidence for management of prostate cancer survivors after treatment. Much of the evidence relies on studies with small sample sizes and retrospective analyses of facility-specific and population databases.

Non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy compared with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists or surgical castration monotherapy for advanced prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal antiandrogens and castration are the main therapy options for advanced stages of prostate cancer. However, debate regarding the value of these treatment options continues.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy compared with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists or surgical castration monotherapy for treating advanced stages of prostate cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Prostatic Diseases and Urologic Cancers Group Specialized Register (PROSTATE), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science with Conference Proceedings, three trial registries and abstracts from three major conferences to 23 December 2013, together with reference lists, and contacted selected experts in the field and manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy with medical or surgical castration monotherapy for men in advanced stages of prostate cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author screened all titles and abstracts; only citations that were clearly irrelevant were excluded at this stage. Then, two review authors independently examined full-text reports, identified relevant studies, assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted the study authors to request additional information. We used Review Manager 5 for data synthesis and used the fixed-effect model for heterogeneity less than 50%; we used the random-effects model for substantial or considerable heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 3060 randomly assigned participants were included in this review. The quality of evidence is hampered by risk of bias. Use of non-steroidal antiandrogens decreased overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.48, six studies, 2712 participants) and increased clinical progression (one year: risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45, five studies, 2067 participants; 70 weeks: RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45, six studies, 2373 participants; two years: RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.25, three studies, 1336 participants), as well as treatment failure (one year: RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.38, four studies, 1539 participants; 70 weeks: RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.52, five studies, 1845 participants; two years: RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.24, two studies, 808 participants), compared with medical or surgical castration. The quality of evidence for overall survival, clinical progression and treatment failure was rated as moderate according to GRADE. Predefined subgroup analyses showed that use of non-steroidal antiandrogens, compared with castration, was less favourable for overall survival, clinical progression (at one year, 70 weeks, two years) and treatment failure (at one year, 70 weeks, two years) in men with metastatic disease. Use of non-steroidal antiandrogens also increased the risk for treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.94, eight studies, 1559 participants), including events such as breast pain (RR 22.97, 95% CI 14.79 to 35.67, eight studies, 2670 participants), gynaecomastia (RR 8.43, 95% CI 3.19 to 22.28, nine studies, 2774 participants) and asthenia (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.31, five studies, 2073 participants). The risk of other adverse events, such as hot flashes (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.27, nine studies, 2774 participants), haemorrhage (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.54, two studies, 546 participants), nocturia (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.69, one study, 480 participants), fatigue (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.88, one study, 51 participants), loss of sexual interest (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.83, one study, 51 participants) and urinary frequency (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.47, one study, 480 participants) was decreased when non-steroidal antiandrogens were used. The quality of evidence for breast pain, gynaecomastia and hot flashes was rated as moderate according to GRADE. The effects of non-steroidal antiandrogens on cancer-specific survival and biochemical progression remained unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently available evidence suggests that use of non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy compared with medical or surgical castration monotherapy for advanced prostate cancer is less effective in terms of overall survival, clinical progression, treatment failure and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. Evidence quality was rated as moderate according to GRADE. Further research is likely to have an important impact on results for patients with advanced but non-metastatic prostate cancer treated with non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy. However, we believe that research is likely not necessary on non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy for men with metastatic prostate cancer. Only high-quality, randomised controlled trials with long-term follow-up should be conducted. If further research is planned to investigate biochemical progression, studies with standardised follow-up schedules using measurements of prostate-specific antigen based on current guidelines should be conducted.

[Observational survey of the French Urological Association evaluating intermittent hormonal modalities treatment in prostate cancer in France]

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinical practice of intermittent hormone therapy (IHT) among urologists members of the French Association of Urology.

METHODS

Internet-based observational survey evaluating IHT modalities in prostate cancer using questionnaire sent to 941 urologists.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty nine urologists participated in the survey (response rate 28.6 %) including 90.3 % prescribing IHT. The main reasons for IHT were improvement of quality of life in 94.2 %, clinical tolerance in 73.7 %, decreased costs and oncological equivalence in 44 %. The indications were localized prostate cancer (low risk 22.6 %, intermediate 19.8 %, high 14 %), locally advanced (59.7 %), metastatic (63.4 %), biochemical recurrence after local treatment (prostatectomy 62.1 %, radiotherapy 73.7 %). A PSA <2 ng/mL was considered as the threshold for androgen deprivation therapy break in 70 % of cases regardless of the IHT indication. The PSA threshold selected for the re-initiation of treatment was 4 ng/mL in 37.9 % and 10 ng/mL in 36.6 % of cases. The cycle of IHT was 6 months in 60 % of cases.

CONCLUSION

This survey provided a snapshot of the practice of IHT in France. Even in the absence of level of evidence 1 trials in the literature, most urologists used IHT in their clinical practice, for many indications, especially in case of biochemical recurrence after local treatment.

LEVEL OF PROOF

3.

Androgen deprivation therapy and cardiovascular risk in chinese patients with nonmetastatic carcinoma of prostate

Background. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in nonmetastatic prostate cancer is unclear. Recent data suggests possible increase in the cardiovascular risks receiving ADT. The aim of the study was to investigate the cardiovascular outcomes in a cohort of Chinese nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients with no previously documented cardiovascular disease. Methods and Results. 745 patients with no previously documented cardiovascular disease and/or diabetes mellitus diagnosed to have nonmetastatic prostate cancer were recruited. Of these, 517 patients received ADT and the remaining 228 did not. After a mean follow-up of 5.3 years, 60 patients developed primary composite endpoint including (1) coronary artery disease, (2) congestive heart failure, and (3) ischemic stroke. Higher proportion of patients on ADT (51 patients, 9.9%) developed composite endpoint compared with those not on ADT (9 patients, 3.9%) with hazard ratio (HR) of 2.06 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03–3.24, P = 0.04). Furthermore, Cox regression analysis revealed that only the use of ADT (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.03–4.25, P = 0.04) and hypertension (HR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.21–3.33, P < 0.01) were independent predictors for primary composite endpoint. Conclusion. ADT in Chinese patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer with no previously documented cardiovascular disease was associated with subsequent development of cardiovascular events.

The efficacy of surgical treatment of cancer - 20 years later

INTRODUCTION

Cancer treatment will be effective only if it is be based on a valid paradigm of what cancer is and therefore capable of affecting the course of the disease. A review in 1993 found no evidence that surgery affected the course of the disease and an alternative paradigm was proposed. A review of mammography screening trials in 1996 found no benefits from breast cancer screening. This was predicted by this alternative paradigm. This review updates the evidence twenty years later.

AIM

To identify evidence that the primary treatment of cancer, surgery, has been shown to affect the course of the disease. If there is no such evidence, then to identify the correct paradigm of what cancer is from other cancer treatments that have been shown to be effective.

METHOD

Because surgery has never been shown in a randomised controlled trial to affect the course of cancer seven other indirect methods were used to evaluate its efficacy.

RESULTS

None of the seven indirect methods used showed that surgery clearly affects the course of the disease for any type of cancer. The lack of benefits from cancer screening now includes not only from breast cancer but also from bowel, lung, prostate and ovarian cancer screening. This confirms that cancer surgery is based on an invalid paradigm of what cancer is. Survival figures following treatments based on an alternative paradigm that assumes cancer is a systemic disease were found to be superior to those following surgery, reinforcing the conclusion that cancer is a systemic disease and that cancer surgery is unlikely to be of benefit in most cases.

CONCLUSION

No benefits can be expected to be achieved from using cancer surgery except in a few immediately life-threatening situations. Surgery appears to be based on an invalid paradigm of what cancer is. Cancer appears to be a systemic disease and therefore standard treatments need to be reassessed in this light.

CYP17 inhibitors--abiraterone, C17,20-lyase inhibitors and multi-targeting agents

As the first in class steroid 17α-hydroxylase/C17,20-lyase (CYP17) inhibitor, abiraterone acetate (of which the active metabolite is abiraterone) has been shown to improve overall survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC)--in those who are chemotherapy-naive and those previously treated with docetaxel. Furthermore, the clinical success of abiraterone demonstrated that CRPC, which has previously been regarded as an androgen-independent disease, is still driven, at least in part, by androgens. More importantly, abiraterone is a 'promiscuous' drug that interacts with a number of targets, which dictate its clinical benefits and adverse effects profile. Besides CYP17 inhibition, abiraterone acts as an antagonist to the androgen receptor and inhibits 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase--two effects that potentially contribute to its antitumour effects. However, the inhibition of the 17α-hydroxylase activity of CYP17, CYP11B1 and a panel of hepatic CYP enzymes leads to adverse effects and toxicities that include secondary mineralocorticoid excess. Abiraterone is also associated with increased incidence of cardiac disorders. Under such circumstances, development of new CYP17 inhibitors as an additional line of defence is urgently needed. To achieve enhanced clinical benefits, new strategies are being explored that include selective inhibition of the C17,20-lyase activity of CYP17 and multi-targeting strategies that affect androgen synthesis and signalling at different points. Some of these strategies-including the drugs orteronel, VT-464 and galeterone--are supported by preclinical data and are being explored in the clinic.

Androgen deprivation therapy impact on quality of life and cardiovascular health, monitoring therapeutic replacement

INTRODUCTION

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is commonly utilized in the management of both localized and advanced adenocarcinoma of the prostate. The use of ADT is associated with several adverse events, physical changes, and development of medical comorbidities/mortality.

AIM

The current article reviews known adverse events associated with ADT as well as treatment options, where available. Current recommendations and guidelines are cited for ongoing monitoring of patients receiving ADT.

METHODS

A PubMed search of topics relating to ADT and adverse outcomes was performed, with select articles highlighted and reviewed based on level of evidence and overall contribution.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reported outcomes of studies detailing adverse effects of ADT were reviewed and discussed. Where available, randomized trials and meta-analyses were reported.

RESULTS

ADT may result in several adverse events including decreased libido, erectile dysfunction, vasomotor symptoms, cognitive, psychological and quality of life impairments, weight gain, sarcopenia, increased adiposity, gynecomastia, reduced penile/testicular size, hair changes, periodontal disease, osteoporosis, increased fracture risk, diabetes and insulin resistance, hyperlipidemia, and anemia. The definitive impact of ADT on lipid profiles, cardiovascular morbidity/mortality, and all-cause mortality is currently unknown with available data. Treatment options to reduce ADT-related adverse events include changing to an intermittent treatment schedule, biophysical therapy, counseling, and pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with ADT are at increased risk of several adverse events and should be routinely monitored for the development of potentially significant morbidity/mortality. Where appropriate, physicians should reduce known risk factors and counsel patients as to known risks and benefits of therapy.

Recent progress in pharmaceutical therapies for castration-resistant prostate cancer

Since 2010, six drugs have been approved for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer, i.e., CYP17 inhibitor Abiraterone, androgen receptor antagonist Enzalutamide, cytotoxic agent Cabazitaxel, vaccine Sipuleucel-T, antibody Denosumab against receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand and radiopharmaceutical Alpharadin. All these drugs demonstrate improvement on overall survival, expect for Denosumab, which increases the bone mineral density of patients under androgen deprivation therapy and prolongs bone-metastasis-free survival. Besides further CYP17 inhibitors (Orteronel, Galeterone, VT-464 and CFG920), androgen receptor antagonists (ARN-509, ODM-201, AZD-3514 and EZN-4176) and vaccine Prostvac, more drug candidates with various mechanisms or new indications of launched drugs are currently under evaluation in different stages of clinical trials, including various kinase inhibitors and platinum complexes. Some novel strategies have also been proposed aimed at further potentiation of antitumor effects or reduction of side effects and complications related to treatments. Under these flourishing circumstances, more investigations should be performed on the optimal combination or the sequence of treatments needed to delay or reverse possible resistance and thus maximize the clinical benefits for the patients.

Radical radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer in older men

Historical data for older men with high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy alone have demonstrated a 10-year prostate-cancer-specific mortality of around 30%. The development of dose escalation, using techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy, has enabled more targeted delivery of treatment with improved efficacy and a reduction in the risk of toxicity compared with conventional radiotherapy. The combination of radiotherapy and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been shown to improve overall survival compared with radiotherapy or ADT alone without a significant increase in toxicity in patients with minimal comorbidities. There is evidence that patient age has only a marginal effect on genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities following radiotherapy. Further research has shown that although age does have an effect on the likelihood of sexual dysfunction after radiation therapy, there is no significant difference in the proportion of men aged ≥ 75 years who feel that sexual dysfunction is a moderate or serious problem before or 24 months after diagnosis. Radical radiotherapy is effective and well tolerated in senior men with high-risk prostate cancer and should be offered in combination with long-term ADT to patients with minimal comorbidities. In case of significant comorbid conditions, shorter durations of ADT may be considered.

Early versus deferred androgen suppression therapy for patients with lymph node-positive prostate cancer after local therapy with curative intent: a systematic review

Background

There is currently no consensus regarding the optimal timing for androgen suppression therapy in patients with prostate cancer that have undergone local therapy with curative intent but are proven to have node-positive disease without signs of distant metastases at the time of local therapy. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the benefits and harms of early (at the time of local therapy) versus deferred (at the time of clinical disease progression) androgen suppression therapy for patients with node-positive prostate cancer after local therapy.

Methods

The protocol was registered prospectively (CRD42011001221; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, as well as reference lists, the abstracts of three major conferences, and three trial registers, to identify randomized controlled trials (search update 04/08/2012). Two authors independently screened the identified articles, assessed trial quality, and extracted data.

Results

Four studies including 398 patients were identified for inclusion. Early androgen suppression therapy lead to a significant decrease in overall mortality (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.84), cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18-0.64), and clinical progression at 3 or 9 years (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.52 at 3 years and RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.67 at 9 years). One study showed an increase of adverse effects with early androgen suppression therapy. All trials had substantial methodological limitations.

Conclusions

The data available suggest an improvement in survival and delayed disease progression but increased adverse events for patients with node-positive prostate cancer after local therapy treated with early androgen suppression therapy versus deferred androgen suppression therapy. However, quality of data is low. Randomized controlled trials with blinding of outcome assessment, planned to determine the timing of androgen suppression therapy in node-positive prostate cancer using modern diagnostic imaging modalities, biochemical testing, and standardized follow-up schedules should be conducted to confirm these findings.

Androgen-deprivation therapy in treatment of prostate cancer and risk of myocardial infarction and stroke: a nationwide Danish population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been suggested to increase the risk for cardiovascular diseases, including myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke, but data are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association between ADT and risk for MI and stroke in Danish men with prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A national cohort study of all patients with incident prostate cancer registered in the Danish Cancer Registry from January 1, 2002, through 2010 was conducted.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We used Cox regression analysis to estimate hazard ratios (HR) of MI and stroke for ADT users versus nonusers, adjusting for age, prostate cancer stage, comorbidity, and calendar period. Additionally, we stratified the analysis on preexisting MI/stroke status.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 31,571 prostate cancer patients, 9204 (29%) received medical endocrine therapy and 2060 (7%) were orchidectomized. Patients treated with medical endocrine therapy had an increased risk for MI and stroke with adjusted HRs of 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.49) and 1.19 (95% CI, 1.06-1.35), respectively, compared with nonusers of ADT. We found no increased risk for MI (HR: 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-1.29) or stroke (HR: 1.11; 95% CI, 0.90-1.36) after orchiectomy. One limitation of the study is that information on prognostic lifestyle factors was not included and might have further informed our estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide cohort study of >30 000 prostate cancer patients, we found that endocrine hormonal therapy was associated with increased risk for MI and stroke. In contrast, we did not find this association after orchiectomy.

Metabolic complications of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Androgen deprivation therapy has a variety of well recognized adverse effects including vasomotor flushing, loss of libido, fatigue, gynecomastia, anemia and osteoporosis. This review focuses on the more recently described metabolic complications of androgen deprivation therapy including obesity, insulin resistance and lipid alterations as well as the association of androgen deprivation therapy with diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed the medical literature using the PubMed® search terms prostate cancer, androgen deprivation therapy, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, obesity, insulin resistance, lipids, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and myocardial infarction. We provide a focused review and our perspective on the relevant literature.

RESULTS

Androgen deprivation therapy decreases lean mass and increases fat mass. It also decreases insulin sensitivity while increasing low density lipoprotein cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides. Consistent with these adverse metabolic effects, androgen deprivation therapy may be associated with a greater incidence of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Some of these androgen deprivation therapy related metabolic changes (obesity, insulin resistance and increased triglycerides) overlap with features of the metabolic syndrome. However, in contrast to the metabolic syndrome, androgen deprivation therapy increases subcutaneous fat and high density lipoprotein cholesterol.

CONCLUSIONS

Androgen deprivation therapy increases obesity, decreases insulin sensitivity and adversely alters lipid profiles. It may be associated with a greater incidence of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The benefits of androgen deprivation therapy should be weighed against these and other potential harms. Little is known about the optimal strategy to mitigate the adverse metabolic effects of androgen deprivation therapy. Thus, we recommend an emphasis on existing strategies for screening and treatment that have been documented to reduce the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease in the general population.

Triptorelin in the management of prostate cancer

Among the therapies to achieve medical castration, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists have better safety profiles than estrogens and anti-androgens. In addition, slow-release formulations of GnRH agonists offer patients flexibility, improve quality of life and eventually reduce cost. To illustrate the role of medical castration in prostate cancer, this paper reviews data on the GnRH agonist triptorelin long-duration and shorter-duration formulations. A similar proportion of patients achieved and maintained castration levels of serum testosterone (≤50 ng/dl) with all triptorelin formulations. Moreover, using a stricter definition of medical castration (serum testosterone <20 ng/dl), castration was maintained in >90% of patients with the 6-month triptorelin formulation. The new formulation was also well-tolerated, whilst being more convenient for patients. This short review assesses the role of this GnRH agonist in the treatment of prostate cancer.

Primary androgen deprivation (AD) followed by active surveillance (AS) for newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PC): A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) is only recommended for Low-Risk prostate cancer (PC) with <34% biopsies positive. Studies describing the long-term outcome of men treated with androgen deprivation (AD) followed by AS are sparse.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred two men were treated with 12 months of AD in a medical oncology clinic specializing in PC between 1998 and 2007 and were followed for a median of 7.25 years. The biopsy complete response rate after AD and the incidence of disease progression while on subsequent AS was assessed. Baseline age, D'Amico risk category, PSA velocity, percentage core biopsies, and prostate volume were evaluated as potential predictors of disease progression.

RESULTS

D'Amico risk category for the 102 men: Low: n = 22, Intermediate: n = 30, and High: n = 50. Medians: Age 67.3, PSA 7.8, Gleason 3 + 4, >50% core biopsies positive, stage T1c. Seventy men had a clear biopsy and 31 of these had disease progression leading to additional treatment after a median of 52 months. D'Amico risk category of the 57 men with a positive biopsy after AD or disease progression on AS was: Low: n = 4 (18%), Intermediate: n = 16 (53%), and High: n = 37 (74%). No PC deaths occurred. Three men had clinical progression. In stepwise logistic regression analysis only higher D'Amico risk category and lower prostate volume predicted disease progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high prevalence of ≥50% core biopsies positive at baseline, AD induces durable remissions in most men with Low-Risk and about half with Intermediate-Risk PC.

The relation between age and androgen deprivation therapy use among men in the Medicare population receiving radiation therapy for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ncADT) is recommended for men with high-risk prostate cancer, but not low-risk cancer or short life expectancy. It is unclear whether the use of ncADT among older men in the community setting is aligned with the potential for clinical benefit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare database to assess patterns of ncADT use among men diagnosed with prostate cancer during 2004–2007 who received radiation therapy. Men were stratified according to tumor risk groups and life expectancy. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with ncADT use within each risk group.

RESULTS

There were 10,686 men in the sample (mean age 74.2 years; 83.4% white). The use of ncADT was 80.7%, 54.1%, and 27.8% in the high-, intermediate-, and low-risk groups, respectively. Men with a life expectancy<5 years had higher rates of ncADT use than men with a life expectancy≥10 years in all risk groups. Within each risk group, advancing age was associated with higher likelihood of receiving ncADT (odds ratio for men aged 80–84 compared to 67–69=1.93 (95% CI 1.37–2.70); 1.51 (95% CI 1.22–1.87); and 1.71 (95% CI 1.14–2.57) for high-, intermediate-, and low-risk groups, respectively).

CONCLUSION

ncADT use is not consistent with guideline recommendations and is more frequent among men who are older, have shorter life expectancy, and are less likely to benefit from therapy.