Primary orchiectomy versus estrogen therapy in advanced prostatic cancer--a randomized study: results after 7 to 10 years of followup

Parenteral oestrogen in the treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review

The objectives of this study were to assess the effectiveness and safety of parenteral oestrogen in the treatment of prostate cancer, and to examine any dose relationship. A systematic review was undertaken. Electronic databases, published paper and internet resources were searched to locate published and unpublished studies with no restriction by language or publication date. Studies included were randomised controlled trials of parenteral oestrogen in patients with prostate cancer; other study designs were also included to examine dose-response. Study selection, appraisal, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by one reviewer and independently checked by another. Twenty trials were included in the review. The trials differed with regard to the included patients, formulation and dose of parenteral oestrogen, comparator used, outcome measures reported and the duration of follow-up. The results provide no evidence to suggest that parenteral oestrogen, in doses sufficient to produce castrate levels of testosterone, is less effective than luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) or orchidectomy in controlling prostate cancer, or that it is consistently associated with an increase in cardiovascular mortality. Further well-conducted trials of parenteral oestrogen are required. A pilot randomised controlled trial comparing transdermal oestrogen to LHRH analogues in men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer is underway in the United Kingdom.

The evolving role of estrogen therapy in prostate cancer

Estrogens, including diethylstilbestrol (DES), were used as the primary medical treatment for metastatic prostate cancer for many years but have been superceded in the past two decades by luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists, primarily because of the cardiovascular toxicity associated with oral estrogen therapy. Recently, a renewed interest in estrogen therapy for prostate cancer in the United States has developed as a result of 3 major issues. First, when measured by declines in prostate-specific antigen of > or = 50%, clinical trials have demonstrated activity of DES, DES-diphosphate, and the estrogenic herbal therapy PC-SPES in 21%-86% of patients treated in phase II trials of androgen-independent prostate cancer patients. Second, the recent description of estrogen receptor (ER)-b has led to a reevaluation of the role of estrogens in normal prostate development and cancer pathogenesis. In contrast to ER-a, ER-b is strongly expressed in normal prostate epithelium. Furthermore, loss of ER-b expression has been demonstrated in prostate cancers, suggesting a possible role for this pathway in the development of cancer. Finally, the issues of cost and safety of estrogens are being reassessed in the current environment of rising health care costs and improved cardiovascular care. In Europe, estrogen therapy is more accepted as a low-cost and effective alternative to LHRH agonists and antiandrogens. Toxicity of DES and other estrogens has also been attenuated by strategies that use lower doses and parenteral routes of administration, thereby avoiding hepatic first-pass metabolism and decreasing the risk of thromboembolism. Nonetheless, there remain many unanswered questions about the role of estrogen therapy in prostate cancer, including differences between specific drugs, optimal dose, timing, and patient selection. Further research is needed.

Prostate cancer and bone metastases: medical treatment

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

Medical versus surgical androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer: a 10-year longitudinal cost study

PURPOSE

We provide a relative cost comparison of medical versus surgical androgen suppressive therapy for prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Comparison is based on a cohort of 96 patients who began androgen suppressive therapy for prostate cancer between 1988 and 1990. Patients were followed until death or the end point of study in June 2000 at which time 15% were alive. Current Medicare orchiectomy reimbursements were compared to 1999 wholesale drug costs.

RESULTS

For an individual patient the cost of luteinizing hormone releasing hormone (LH-RH) agonist treatment surpassed the cost of surgery at less than 4.2 to 5.3 months, and for combined androgen blockade (LH-RH agonists and nonsteroidal antiandrogens) at less than 2.7 to 3.4 months. For 5 (5.2%) patients on combined androgen blockade and 6 (6.3%) on LH-RH agonists alone, medical therapy would have had a cost advantage over bilateral orchiectomy. For the androgen suppression cohort the cost of LH-RH agonist treatment was 10.7 to 13.5 times and combined androgen blockade was 17.3 to 20.9 times the cost of bilateral orchiectomy. Urology resource use comparisons are provided. These findings significantly underestimate the cost advantage of surgery. A seventh of the patients were alive at study end point, and prostate specific antigen induced stage shifting and changes in practice patterns resulted in earlier and more frequent androgen suppressive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Except for patients with short anticipated survivals current medical androgen suppressive treatment options are more costly than bilateral orchiectomy. There is a need for a cost comparable medical option to orchiectomy.

A prospective study of smoking and risk of prostate cancer

We evaluated the hypothesis that smoking increases the incidence of and mortality from prostate cancer. High-quality smoking information was collected in 1971-1975 in a nation-wide cohort of 135,006 male construction workers in Sweden. We achieved virtually complete follow-up through record linkages and ascertained as of December 1991 2,368 incident cases of prostate cancer and 709 deaths due to this disease. Rate ratios (RR) of prostate cancer incidence and mortality, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), were estimated in Poisson-based age-adjusted models, with amount and duration of smoking as independent variables. We found no convincing association between current smoking status, number of cigarettes smoked or years since onset and risk of prostatic cancer. The age-adjusted incidence RR among previous smokers was 1.09 and among current smokers 1.11 compared with non-smokers. Weak and inconsistent trends were seen with increasing number of cigarettes smoked per day and increasing duration among current smokers. Smokers of 15 or more cigarettes daily for at least 30 years experienced an incidence RR of 1.30. Mortality in ex-smokers was similar to that in never-smokers; it was, however, slightly increased among current smokers without any trend with amount smoked or duration. The weak and inconsistent associations between smoking and prostate cancer could easily have arisen due to bias or confounding. We therefore conclude that smoking is most likely not causally linked to the occurrence of prostate cancer.

Goserelin versus orchiectomy in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer: final results of a randomized trial. Zoladex Prostate Study Group

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of goserelin and orchiectomy in patients with stage D2 prostate cancer.

METHODS

A randomized, open, multicenter study was conducted in 283 patients. Patients were allocated to goserelin, 3.6 mg every 28 days or to orchiectomy. Study end points were endocrine response, objective response, time to treatment failure, survival, and tolerability. Objective response was based on modified criteria of the National Prostate Cancer Project.

RESULTS

Serum testosterone decreased from baseline to castrate levels by week 4 in each group and remained below castrate levels thereafter. Acid phosphatase and alkaline phosphatase concentrations also decreased in each group. The goserelin and orchiectomy groups had similar results for objective response (82% versus 77%) and had similar medial times to treatment failure (52 versus 53 weeks) and survival (119 versus 136 weeks). No significant interactions between treatments and prognostic factors were observed. Adjusting for baseline testosterone concentration had no effect on survival outcome. Race had no influence on outcome or efficacy end points. Common adverse events in both groups were pain, hot flushes, and lower urinary tract symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Goserelin is well tolerated and as effective as orchiectomy in patients with Stage D2 prostate cancer.

Changing trends in the management of prostatic disease in a single private practice: a 5-year followup

Evaluation and management services provided by the practicing urologist have changed dramatically during the last few years. This is particularly evident in the approach to men with bladder outlet symptoms and in those in whom the diagnosis of prostate cancer is a distinct possibility. The impact of medical management/observation of symptomatic benign prostatic hypertrophy, as well as the influence of prostate specific antigen, transrectal ultrasound and biopsy, radical prostatectomy and hormonal agents in a 3-man private clinical practice is analyzed. The records of 2,206 patients new to the practice who presented with a variety of prostate-related complaints from July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1991 were reviewed. Of these patients 1,822 (82%) were evaluated for presumed benign bladder outlet symptoms. During year 1 of the study, ending on June 30, 1987, 28% of the presumed benign prostatic hypertrophy patients were treated with transurethral prostatectomy, compared to only 8% of such patients in 1991. In contrast, alpha-blocking agents were used to treat 21% of these patients in 1991. Transrectal ultrasound biopsy currently accounts for 87% of all prostatic biopsies, increasing 4-fold during 5 years. Radical prostatectomy has increased 6-fold during the course of the study. Administration of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue has supplanted orchiectomy and estrogen therapy for the treatment of disseminated disease, as witnessed by a 4-fold increase in its use. While it is recognized that these trends are presently applicable to our local metropolitan region, they may reflect practice patterns in similar demographic groups, as well as predict future tendencies nationwide.

Erythrocyte sedimentation rate as a tumor marker in human prostatic cancer. An analysis of prognostic factors in 300 population-based consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

The natural history of prostatic cancer is variable. Our knowledge of prognostic factors is limited; therefore, research is needed.

METHODS

The cases of 300 population-based consecutive patients with a diagnosis of cancer of the prostate were analyzed regarding different prognostic factors (but with special reference to the erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]).

RESULTS

After a mean observation time of 100 months, M category, ESR, grade, performance status, hemoglobin level, and T category were found to correlate with disease-specific death using multivariate analysis. The variables correlating with progression in the multivariate model were M category, ESR, T category, grade, treatment, and age. Patients treated with estrogen had a significantly lower risk (relative hazard, 0.3) of relapse. ESR was highly statistically significant (P less than 0.0001) as a prognostic factor. With the variable in linear form, a 20-mm/h higher level suggested a 29% increased risk, on average, for dying of prostatic cancer (using a best-fit multivariate model). However, the relationship was not linear. After correcting for the effect of other factors, the risk for dying of prostatic cancer was lowest when the ESR was 40-50 mm/h and highest when its values were highest.

CONCLUSIONS

ESR is an indicator of increased risk of progression and death in prostatic cancer. Other prognostic factors such as M and T categories, grade, performance status, hemoglobin level, and age currently are more important when planning treatment. It is possible that the ESR reflects aspects of tumor-host relationship and that both a low and high ESR are markers for patients with receding host defence mechanism.

Prognostic factors in progression-free survival and corrected survival in patients with advanced prostatic cancer: results from a randomized study comprising 150 patients treated with orchiectomy or estrogens

In a population-based randomized study comparing 150 patients with advanced prostatic cancer treated with orchiectomy or estrogen, some possible prognostic factors were analyzed. The observation period was 78 to 114 months. M category, T category, tumor grade, performance status, pain, prostatic acid phosphatase, sedimentation rate, hemoglobin and serum creatinine level were all statistically significantly related to the interval to progression and to disease-specific death on univariate analyses. Variables that were statistically significant on multivariate analyses were M category, T category, sedimentation rate and patient age. The sedimentation rate predicted the intervals to progression and to disease-specific death, with the relative hazard and 95% confidence interval for the latter end point being 1.018 (range 1.010 to 1.027) for each millimeter increase in sedimentation rate per hour. An analysis that was stratified according to the extent of the disease as measured on a bone scan showed that the sedimentation rate was the only prognostic factor of statistical significance with an estimate of relative hazard of 1.52 if the sedimentation rate was elevated 20 mm. per hour. Progression-free survival but not disease-specific survival was statistically significantly better in the estrogen group (relative hazard 0.47), as assessed by multivariate analysis in which all variables were taken into account.