The effect of short term neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation on erectile function in patients treated with external beam radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: an analysis of the 4- versus 8-month randomised trial (Irish Clinical Oncology Research Group 97-01)

Sexual function outcomes of radiation and androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer in men with good baseline function

BACKGROUND

Sexual dysfunction, including erectile dysfunction and loss of libido, are common among men undergoing treatment for localized prostate cancer. Both local treatments and systemic androgen deprivation therapy may contribute to these outcomes and are differentially indicated based on disease characteristics. We sought to compare sexual function through 5 years after radiation treatment with and without androgen deprivation therapy in men with good baseline sexual function to better understand long-term effects in this understudied subset of patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively assembled population-based cohort of men who underwent radiation with and without androgen deprivation therapy for intermediate or high-risk localized prostate cancer. Sexual function was assessed longitudinally over 5 years. Men with erections sufficient for intercourse at baseline were selected for inclusion.

RESULTS

Out of 167 patients included, 73 underwent radiation alone and 94 received androgen deprivation therapy plus radiation (51 with intermediate and 43 with high-risk disease). Androgen deprivation therapy use was associated with worse sexual function through 1 year regardless of disease risk. This difference was no longer statistically significant at 3 years in the intermediate-risk group. Compared to radiation alone, androgen deprivation therapy in high-risk disease was associated with worse sexual function at 3 years (effect: -20.3 points, CI [-31.8, -8.8], p < 0.001) but not at 5 years (effect: -3.4, CI [-17.2, 10.5], p = 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

Androgen deprivation therapy plus radiation is associated with worse sexual function through 3-years follow-up in men with high-risk prostate cancer compared to radiation alone. The addition of androgen deprivation therapy in the treatment of intermediate-risk disease does not appear to result in worse sexual function at 3 or 5-year follow-up compared to radiation alone.

Incidence of the adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic literature review

PURPOSE

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has broad application in the treatment of prostate cancer (PC) and is associated with numerous, debilitating adverse effects. Increasing use of ADT for PC, longer timeframe for treatment (increased uptake of PSA testing and earlier diagnosis), as well as improved survival and an ageing population, means patients can live for a considerable period of time on or after ADT, experiencing these adverse effects. A number of systematic reviews of adverse effects of ADT for PC exist; however, no single systematic review has previously examined the evidence for all adverse effects, including newer forms of ADT.

METHODS

A systematic review of existing systematic reviews of ADT for PC was conducted (2010-February 2019), as per Cochrane guidelines, to identify the highest level of risk/incidence evidence available, supplemented by evidence drawn from individual studies where no systematic review existed.

RESULTS

Incidence data was generated for 19 adverse effect subgroups, classified according to the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE).

CONCLUSION

Incidence of adverse effects provides valuable information for future burden of disease studies. This information can better guide clinical management to reduce symptoms for patients and assist patients to make more informed decisions about their treatment, potentially improving disease outcomes. It also highlights the importance of supportive care for PC patients receiving ADT and their carers. For analysts conducting economic evaluations, the inclusion of adverse effects in PC decision analytic models can provide more comprehensive and accurate information for decision makers.

Reporting Erectile Function Outcomes After Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Challenges in Data Interpretation

BACKGROUND

Choice of prostate cancer treatment is frequently influenced by the expected chance of treatment-induced side effects such as erectile dysfunction (ED). However, great discrepancy in cited ED rates exists in the contemporary radiation therapy literature.

AIM

To analyze the reported ED rates and cause of discrepancies and explore the strengths and limitations in the literature on radiation-induced ED.

METHODS

We performed a PubMed literature search and reviewed the literature on ED rates associated with external-beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy from the past 10 years. Eighteen studies were eligible for inclusion and subsequently reviewed.

OUTCOMES

Variables required for interpretation of erectile function outcomes, including patient demographics, treatment characteristics, and sexual function outcomes.

RESULTS

A large variety in the reported incidence of ED was found among studies. In part, these differences resulted from large variations in (i) study populations, (ii) patient characteristics, (iii) treatment characteristics, (iv) prescription of androgen deprivation therapy, (v) means of data acquisition, (vi) definitions of ED, (vii) temporal considerations, and (viii) erectile aid use. Relevant data required for adequate appraisal of sexual function outcomes were not always reported.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Based on the present findings, we present general recommendations for reporting of erectile function outcomes after radiotherapy for prostate cancer. These should improve future reports.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

This is the first report that presents general requirements on reporting erectile function outcomes in the setting of radiotherapy for prostate cancer. We did not conduct a formal meta-analysis because we focused on concepts of research design; this might be considered a limitation.

CONCLUSION

In this review, we have highlighted the strengths and deficiencies of the current literature on ED after external-beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for prostate cancer. We have made general recommendations to achieve some degree of standardization among reports and improve clinical interpretability. Wortel RC, Incrocci L, Muhall JP. Reporting Erectile Function Outcomes After Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Challenges in Data Interpretation. J Sex Med 2017;14:1260-1269.

Testosterone therapy improves erectile function and libido in hypogonadal men

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Erectile dysfunction and decreased libido are common complaints in the older male population. Recent studies have elucidated the role testosterone therapy (TTh) can play in men with low testosterone levels. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of these findings and the utility of TTh. We specifically examine the role of TTh on erectile function, coadministration with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, and libido.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent publications suggest that TTh improves mild erectile dysfunction, though may be less useful in men with more severe erectile dysfunction. In men unresponsive to phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors and with mild erectile dysfunction, TTh can further improve erectile function. TTh has also shown consistent benefit in improving libido in men with low testosterone levels at baseline, with no additional improvements once testosterone levels are normalized.

SUMMARY

The available literature supports a role for TTh in men with low testosterone levels, erectile dysfunction, and low libido, with symptomatic improvement in these men.

Personalized medicine in Europe: not yet personal enough?

Background

Personalized medicine has the potential to allow patients to receive drugs specific to their individual disease, and to increase the efficiency of the healthcare system. There is currently no comprehensive overview of personalized medicine, and this research aims to provide an overview of the concept and definition of personalized medicine in nine European countries.

Methods

A targeted literature review of selected health databases and grey literature was conducted to collate information regarding the definition, process, use, funding, impact and challenges associated with personalized medicine. In-depth qualitative interviews were carried out with experts with health technology assessment, clinical provisioning, payer, academic, economic and industry experience, and with patient organizations.

Results

We identified a wide range of definitions of personalized medicine, with most studies referring to the use of diagnostics and individual biological information such as genetics and biomarkers. Few studies mentioned patients’ needs, beliefs, behaviour, values, wishes, utilities, environment and circumstances, and there was little evidence in the literature for formal incorporation of patient preferences into the evaluation of new medicines. Most interviewees described approaches to stratification and segmentation of patients based on genetic markers or diagnostics, and few mentioned health-related quality of life.

Conclusions

The published literature on personalized medicine is predominantly focused on patient stratification according to individual biological information. Although these approaches are important, incorporation of environmental factors and patients’ preferences in decision making is also needed. In future, personalized medicine should move from treating diseases to managing patients, taking into account all individual factors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2205-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acute and Late Adverse Events Associated With Radical Radiation Therapy Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Clinician and Patient Toxicity Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

This review aimed to determine the clinician and patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments currently usedin randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of radical radiation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer to report acute and late adverse events (AEs), review the quality of methodology and PRO reporting, and report the prevalence of acute and late AEs.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched between April and August 2014 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Identified reports were reviewed according to the PRO Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. In all, 1149 records were screened, and 21 articles were included in the final review.

RESULTS

We determined the acute and late AEs for 9040 patients enrolled in 15 different RCTs. Only clinician reported instruments were used to report acute AEs <3 months (eg, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]). For late clinician reporting, the Late Effects on Normal Tissues-Subjective, Objective, Management and Analytic scale and RTOG were used and were often augmented with additional items to provide comprehensive coverage of sexual functioning and anorectal symptoms. Some late AEs were reported (48% articles) using PROs (eg, ULCA-PCI [University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index], FACT-G and P [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General & Prostate Module], EORTC QLQC-30 + PR25 [European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire & Prostate Module]); however, a definitive "preferred" instrument was not evident.

DISCUSSION

Our findings are at odds with recent movements toward including patient voices in reporting of AEs and patient engagement in clinical research. We recommend including PRO to evaluate radical radiation therapy before, during, and after the treatment to fully capture patient experiences, and we support the development of predictive models for late effects based on the severity of early toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Patient reporting of acute and late AEs is underrepresented in radiation therapy trials. We recommend working toward a consistent approach to PRO assessment of radiation therapy-related AEs.

The Role of Proteomics in Biomarker Development for Improved Patient Diagnosis and Clinical Decision Making in Prostate Cancer

Prostate Cancer (PCa) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in men worldwide. Although increased expression of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is an effective indicator for the recurrence of PCa, its intended use as a screening marker for PCa is of considerable controversy. Recent research efforts in the field of PCa biomarkers have focused on the identification of tissue and fluid-based biomarkers that would be better able to stratify those individuals diagnosed with PCa who (i) might best receive no treatment (active surveillance of the disease); (ii) would benefit from existing treatments; or (iii) those who are likely to succumb to disease recurrence and/or have aggressive disease. The growing demand for better prostate cancer biomarkers has coincided with the development of improved discovery and evaluation technologies for multiplexed measurement of proteins in bio-fluids and tissues. This review aims to (i) provide an overview of these technologies as well as describe some of the candidate PCa protein biomarkers that have been discovered using them; (ii) address some of the general limitations in the clinical evaluation and validation of protein biomarkers; and (iii) make recommendations for strategies that could be adopted to improve the successful development of protein biomarkers to deliver improvements in personalized PCa patient decision making.

Surgery and hormonal treatment for prostate cancer and sexual function

Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common cancers effecting men today. With earlier detection and improvements in available treatment modalities, there still remains significant morbidity associated with the treatment of PC. Male sexual health and erectile function are greatly impacted by these therapies and remain a concern to PC survivors. This article reviews the current literature on male sexual health following radical prostatectomy (RP) or androgen ablation therapy for PC. Each treatment modality affects male sexual function to an appreciable level, although certain patients have better outcomes if they have preoperative potency, are younger, or have nerve-sparing surgery. There is a delayed recovery up to 2 years seen in erectile function following RP. With androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), attempts can be made at different administration strategies and exercise may possibly play a role in maintaining erectile function. Penile rehabilitation protocols attempt to protect erectile function immediately following therapy through different modalities, although no one approach has been agreed upon.

National survey addressing the information needs of primary care physicians: Side effect management of patients on androgen deprivation therapy

OBJECTIVE

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a common treatment for prostate cancer with numerous side effects. We assess primary care physicians' (PCPs) knowledge of ADT side effects and their interest in increasing their knowledge in this area.

METHODS

A list of active Canadian PCPs was obtained using the Canadian Medical Directory. A cross-sectional survey was distributed to 600 randomly selected physicians. We collected PCPs' demographic information, experience with ADT management, knowledge regarding ADT side effects and desired sources for obtaining knowledge on ADT management.

RESULTS

In total, we received 103 completed questionnaires. Of these, 89% of PCPs had patients on ADT. One-third of respondents prescribed ADT and over half of them administered ADT annually. Thirty-eight percent felt their knowledge of ADT side effects was inadequate and 50% felt uncomfortable counselling patients on ADT. Many PCPs were less familiar with the incidence of functional side effects of ADT (i.e., hot flashes, fatigue and erectile dysfunction) compared to life-threatening side effects (i.e., cardiovascular events, metabolic syndrome, fractures). In terms of increasing their knowledge of ADT side effects, 82% of PCPs would use educational resources if they were available (52% and 32% preferred continued medical education [CME] events and educational pamphlets, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs play an important role in managing ADT side effects. There is poor awareness of the prevalence of ADT side effects, and many are uncomfortable in managing these side effects. These areas may be addressed through CME programs and educational pamphlets.

Current role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy for high-risk localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although most men are diagnosed with readily curable localized prostate cancer, those with high-risk features face a significant mortality risk. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a standard adjunct to radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer, but its role around prostatectomy has not been as clearly defined, and concerns over cardiovascular toxicity have led to decreasing use. The use of chemotherapy for localized disease remains experimental. We review the most recently published trials of neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy for prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

The optimal duration of ADT with higher dose modern radiation techniques is under active investigation, but current data support the use of longer duration as standard. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and MRI changes may be useful in future studies optimizing duration of neoadjuvant ADT. Two years of combined ADT after prostatectomy is associated with a lower risk of disease recurrence and better prostate cancer specific mortality than predicted. Persistence of intraprostatic androgens during neoadjuvant ADT may contribute to resistance.

SUMMARY

Androgen deprivation added to definitive radiation or surgery improves outcomes for high-risk prostate cancer, although the role of chemotherapy remains undefined. Molecular classification is needed to improve risk stratification.

Short-term versus long-term hormone therapy plus radiotherapy or prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of short-term versus long-term hormonotherapy (HT) plus radiotherapy (RT) or prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer.

METHODS

Literatures were searched from Embase, PubMed, Web of science and Cochrane Library up to October, 2012. Quality of the study was evaluated according to the Cochrane's risk of bias of randomized controlled trial (RCT); the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System was used to rate the level of evidence. RevMan 5.1 was used for statistical analysis. Two comparisons were of interest: RT plus short-term HT versus RT plus long-term HT and RP plus short-term HT versus RP plus long-term HT. Pooled risk ratio or standardized mean differences were calculated; HT adverse reactions were descriptively evaluated.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs (total 4,743 patients) were included, 7 RCTs compared RT plus short-term HT with RT plus long-term HT, 2 RCTs compared RP plus short-term HT with RP plus long-term HT. Meta-analysis showed there was no significant difference in overall survival, disease-free survival and PSA level before RP; long-term was superior to short-term hormonotherapy in biochemical failure rate, clinical progression rate, prostate cancer-specific mortality, positive surgical margin rate and prostate volume before RP. Systematic review demonstrated adverse events caused by the increased length of HT were more common.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term HT plus RT showed a trend toward improved overall survival; long-term HT plus RP declined positive surgical margin rate and prostate volume before RP. So, long-term HT may benefit more, but it did not significantly improve the patients' overall survival, and the adverse reactions are inevitable.