Antiandrogen monotherapy: indications and results

Nonrandomized Comparison of Efficacy and Side Effects of Bicalutamide Compared With Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone (LHRH) Analogs in Combination With Radiation Therapy in the CHHiP Trial

PURPOSE

CHHiP is a randomized trial evaluating moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Of all participants, 97% of them had concurrent short-course hormone therapy (HT), either luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog (LHRHa) or 150 mg of bicalutamide daily. This exploratory analysis compares efficacy and side effects in a nonrandomized comparison.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In our study, 2700 patients received LHRHa and 403 received bicalutamide. The primary endpoint was biochemical/clinical failure. Groups were compared with Cox regression adjusted for various prognostic factors and stratified by radiation therapy dose. A key secondary endpoint was erectile dysfunction (ED) assessed by clinicians (using scores from Late Effects on Normal Tissues: Subjective/Objective/Management [LENT-SOM] subjective erectile function for vaginal penetration) and patients (single items within the University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index [UCLA PCI] and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC]-50 questionnaires) at 2 years and compared between HT regimens by χ2 trend test.

RESULTS

Bicalutamide patients were significantly younger (median 67 vs 69 years LHRHa). Median follow-up was 9.3 years. There was no difference in biochemical or clinical failure with an adjusted hazard ratio or 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.23; P = .8). At 2 years, grade ≥2 LENT-SOM ED was reported in significantly more LHRHa patients (313 out of 590; 53%) versus bicalutamide (17 out of 68; 25%) (P < .0001). There were no differences in ED seen with UCLA-PCI and EPIC-50 questionnaires.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nonrandomized comparison, there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy according to type of HT received. Bicalutamide preserved clinician assessed (LENT-SOM) erectile function at 2 years but patient-reported outcomes were similar between groups.

Salmon Protein Hydrolysate Potentiates the Growth Inhibitory Effect of Bicalutamide on Human Prostate Cancer Cell Lines LNCaP and PC3 by Modulating Iron Homeostasis

Prostate cancer is a common cause of cancer death in men. In advanced stages of prostate cancer, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is initiated. Despite ADT, prostate cancers invariably progress to become androgen independent. A growing body of evidence implicates iron dysmetabolism in prostate cancer progression. A bioactive peptide-rich salmon protein hydrolysate (SPH) has previously been demonstrated to modulate iron homeostatic mechanisms. In the present study, the anticancer effect of SPH and bicalutamide co-treatment on LNCaP and PC3 prostate cancer cell proliferation was investigated. Our results found that SPH potentiates the anti-proliferative effect of bicalutamide in a dose-dependent manner for both cell lines. In the presence of 160 µg/mL SPH, co-treatment with 1.0 µM bicalutamide decreased LNCaP cells’ relative colony survival from 25% (1.0 µM bicalutamide monotreatment) to 2% after culturing for 12 days. For PC3 cells, the relative colony survival diminished from 52% (10.0 µM bicalutamide) to 32% at an SPH concentration of 160 µg/mL. Gene expression profiling, employing quantitative real-time PCR, revealed that the inhibitory effects were related to significant FTH1 up-regulation with a concomitant TFRC down-regulation. In conclusion, our results provide in vitro evidence that SPH potentiates the growth inhibitory effect of bicalutamide on prostate cancer cells by modulating iron homeostasis mechanisms.

Administering Docetaxel for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer 1-6 Days Compared to More Than 14 Days after the Start of LHRH Agonist Is Associated with Better Clinical Outcomes Due to Androgen Flare

Simple Summary

Hormonal therapy with long-acting luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (MHSPC) results initially in testosterone flare followed by testosterone deprivation. Docetaxel is a chemotherapy that is effective against prostate cancer and specifically targets cells during cell division by stabilizing the mitotic spindle, which results in “mitotic catastrophe” and death of the dividing cancer cells. Combining LHRH and docetaxel was proved to be superior to LHRH treatment alone. Here, we show that simply by providing the first dose of docetaxel during testosterone flare, which occurs 1–6 days after LHRH initiation, patients could have better clinical outcomes, as testosterone drives specifically prostate cells into mitosis, priming them to cell kill by docetaxel.

Abstract

Docetaxel, when given at the beginning of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (MHSPC), results in significantly longer overall survival than ADT alone. We aimed to investigate if the delivery of the first dose of docetaxel during the testosterone flare associated with LHRH initiation results in better clinical outcomes, as testosterone induces mitosis of prostate cancer cells, and docetaxel specifically targets cells in mitosis. We analyzed data from the CHAARTED trial which randomized MHSPC patients to ADT alone or ADT plus docetaxel. We included only patients treated with LHRH agonist and docetaxel (n = 379). The only cutoff that resulted in differences in treatment outcomes was between patients who started docetaxel 1–6 days (n = 18) compared to more than 14 days from LHRH initiation (n = 297). Actuarial median overall survival was 72 versus 57 months (p = 0.2); progression-free survival was 49 versus 17 months (p = 0.06), and freedom from castrate-resistant prostate cancer was 51 versus 18 months (p = 0.04) for patients who started docetaxel 1–6 days compared to more than 14 days from LHRH initiation, respectively. Administering docetaxel 1–6 days from the initiation of LHRH agonist for patients with MHSPC could be associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Which Way to Choose for the Treatment of Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Case Report and Literature Review

Background

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer among males in the world and the majority of patients will eventually progress to the metastatic phase. How to choose an effective way for the treatment of metastatic PCa, especially in the later stage of the disease is still confusing. Herein we reported the case of a patient diagnosed with metastatic PCa and conducted a literature review on this issue.

Case Presentation

A 57-year-old man with metastatic PCa had been managed by Dr. J.P. since April 2012 when the patient was admitted to the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University by aggravating frequent urination and dysuria. The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration was 140 ng/ml, and the diagnosis of PCa was confirmed by prostate biopsy, with Gleason score 4 + 5 = 9. Chest CT and bone scan indicated multiple metastases in the lungs and bones. Triptorelin, bicalutamide, zoledronic acid, and docetaxel were then administered, six cycles later, the metastatic tumors in the lungs disappeared and those in the bones lessened significantly, along with a remarkable reduction in PSA level (< 2 ng/ml). Intermittent androgen deprivation was subsequently conducted until August 2018, when the serum PSA level was found to be 250 ng/ml, again docetaxel 75 mg/m² was administered immediately but the patient was intolerant this time. Instead, abiraterone was administered until March 2019 because of intolerable gastrointestinal side-effects and increasing PSA level. In October 2019, the patient came to our center, a modified approach of docetaxel (day 1 40 mg/m² + day 8 35 mg/m²) was administered. Luckily, the PSA level decreased rapidly, the bone pain was greatly relieved, and no obvious side effects occurred. However, four cycles later, docetaxel failed to work anymore, the metastatic tumor in the liver progressed. We proposed several regimens as alternatives, but they were soon denied due to the high prices or unavailability or uncertain effect of the drugs. In addition, the patient’s condition deteriorated speedily and can no longer bear any aggressive treatment. Finally, the patient died of multiple organ failure in August 2020.

Conclusion

The experiences of this case provide valuable evidence and reference for the treatment choices of metastatic PCa, in some circumstances modified and advanced regimens may produce unexpected effects.

Quo Vadis Advanced Prostate Cancer Therapy? Novel Treatment Perspectives and Possible Future Directions

Prostate cancer is a very common disease, which is, unfortunately, often the cause of many male deaths. This is underlined by the fact that the early stages of prostate cancer are often asymptomatic. Therefore, the disease is usually detected and diagnosed at late advanced or even metastasized stages, which are already difficult to treat. Hence, it is important to pursue research and development not only in terms of novel diagnostic methods but also of therapeutic ones, as well as to increase the effectiveness of the treatment by combinational medicinal approach. Therefore, in this review article, we focus on recent approaches and novel potential tools for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer; these include not only androgen deprivation therapy, antiandrogen therapy, photodynamic therapy, photothermal therapy, immunotherapy, multimodal therapy, but also poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase, Akt and cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Steroidal Anti-Androgens in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the sixth primary cause of cancer death. However, conflicts are present about the efficacy and safety of Non-steroidal anti-androgens (NSAA) for its treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of NSAAs versus any comparator for the treatment of advanced or metastatic PCa (mPCa).

METHODS

MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched. References of included studies and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for relevant studies. Only English language studies after 1990 were considered for review. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of NSAAs as compared with any other comparator including surgery or chemotherapy in mPCa patients were included. The outcomes include efficacy, safety and the tolerability of the treatment. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for quality assessment. Two authors were independently involved in the selection, extraction and quality assessment of included studies and disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third reviewer.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight out of 1307 non-duplicate RCTs with 29154 patients were considered for the review. NSAA showed significantly better progression-free survival [PFS] (Hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.78; P=0.0001), time to distant metastasis or death [TTD] (HR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.73-0.91; P<0.0001), objective response (Odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI 1.06-2.54; P=0.03) and clinical benefits (OR, 1.33; 95% CI 1.08-1.63; P=0.006) as compared to the control group. There was no significant difference observed between the groups in terms of overall survival (HR, 0.95; 95%CI, 0.87-1.03; P=0.18) and time to progression (HR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.77-1.11; P=0.43). Treatment-related adverse events were more with the NSAA group, but the discontinuation due to lack of efficacy reason was 43% significantly lesser than the control group in patients with mPCa. Rest of the outcomes were appeared to be non-significant.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with NSAA was appeared to be better efficacious with respect to PFS, TTD, and response rate with considerable adverse events when compared to the control group in patients with metastatic PCa.

EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II: Treatment of Relapsing, Metastatic, and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2016 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) - European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) - International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) Guidelines on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The working panel performed a literature review of the new data (2013-2015). The guidelines were updated, and the levels of evidence and/or grades of recommendation were added based on a systematic review of the literature.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Relapse after local therapy is defined by a rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level >0.2ng/ml following radical prostatectomy (RP) and >2ng/ml above the nadir after radiation therapy (RT). ¹¹C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography is of limited importance if PSA is <1.0ng/ml; bone scans and computed tomography can be omitted unless PSA is >10ng/ml. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and biopsy are important to assess biochemical failure following RT. Therapy for PSA relapse after RP includes salvage RT at PSA levels <0.5ng/ml and salvage RP, high-intensity focused ultrasound, cryosurgical ablation or salvage brachytherapy of the prostate in radiation failures. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the basis for treatment of men with metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). However, docetaxel combined with ADT should be considered the standard of care for men with metastases at first presentation, provided they are fit enough to receive the drug. Follow-up of ADT should include analysis of PSA, testosterone levels, and screening for cardiovascular disease and metabolic syndrome. Level 1 evidence for the treatment of metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) includes, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA/P), enzalutamide, radium 223 (Ra 223), docetaxel at 75 mg/m² every 3 wk and sipuleucel-T. Cabazitaxel, AA/P, enzalutamide, and radium are approved for second-line treatment of CRPC following docetaxel. Zoledronic acid and denosumab can be used in men with mCRPC and osseous metastases to prevent skeletal-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The knowledge in the field of advanced and metastatic PCa and CRPC is changing rapidly. The 2016 EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for use in clinical practice. These PCa guidelines are the first endorsed by the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and the International Society of Geriatric Oncology and reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. A full version is available from the EAU office or online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/).

PATIENT SUMMARY

In men with a rise in their PSA levels after prior local treatment for prostate cancer only, it is important to balance overtreatment against further progression of the disease since survival and quality of life may never be affected in many of these patients. For patients diagnosed with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer, several new drugs have become available which may provide a clear survival benefit but the optimal choice will have to be made on an individual basis.

The AVOCAT study: Bicalutamide monotherapy versus combined bicalutamide plus dutasteride therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the prostate-a long-term follow-up comparison and quality of life analysis

Purpose

Compare the efficacy and tolerability of dutasteride in combination with bicalutamide to bicalutamide monotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

One-hundred-fifty PCa patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg once daily (79 patients) or bicalutamide 150 mg plus dutasteride 0.5 mg once daily (71 patients). Treatment response was assessed by serum PSA level measurement, and standard procedures for diagnosis of clinical progression were used during follow-up. Patient-reported quality of life (QoL) was assessed using validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25).

Results

At 3 years follow-up, PSA progression was found in 52 patients [65.8 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 55.4–76.3] in the monotherapy group compared to 38 patients (53.5 %; 95 % CI 41.9–65.1) in the combined therapy group (p = 0.134). At the time of analysis 37 men (46.8 %; 95 % CI 35.8–57.8) in the monotherapy group had died versus 30 men (42.3 %; 95 % CI 30.8–53.7) in the combined therapy group. Median survival time was 5.4 and 5.8 years, respectively (p = 0.694). There was no statistically significant difference in the presentation frequency of adverse events between groups (p = 0.683). QoL was good and comparable between the two groups.

Conclusions

Both therapies were well tolerated with a good QoL. However, despite a trend toward higher efficacy of the combined therapy, progression-free survival and overall survival was not significantly different between the groups. Further research on this therapy should be performed.

Vitamin D3 regulates the formation and degradation of gap junctions in androgen-responsive human prostate cancer cells

1α-25(OH)2 vitamin D3 (1-25D), an active hormonal form of Vitamin D3, is a well-known chemopreventive and pro-differentiating agent. It has been shown to inhibit the growth of several prostate cancer cell lines. Gap junctions, formed of proteins called connexins (Cx), are ensembles of cell-cell channels, which permit the exchange of small growth regulatory molecules between adjoining cells. Cell-cell communication mediated by gap junctional channels is an important homeostatic control mechanism for regulating cell growth and differentiation. We have investigated the effect of 1-25D on the formation and degradation of gap junctions in an androgen-responsive prostate cancer cell line, LNCaP, which expresses retrovirally-introduced Cx32. Connexin32 is expressed by the luminal and well-differentiated cells of normal prostate and prostate tumors. Our results document that 1-25D enhances the expression of Cx32 and its subsequent assembly into gap junctions. Our results further show that 1-25D prevents androgen-regulated degradation of Cx32, post-translationally, independent of androgen receptor (AR)-mediated signaling. Finally, our findings document that formation of gap junctions sensitizes Cx32-expressing LNCaP cells to the growth inhibitory effects of 1-25D and alters their morphology. These findings suggest that the growth-inhibitory effects of 1-25D in LNCaP cells may be related to its ability to modulate the assembly of Cx32 into gap junctions.

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.

Retinoids regulate the formation and degradation of gap junctions in androgen-responsive human prostate cancer cells

The retinoids, the natural or synthetic derivatives of Vitamin A (retinol), are essential for the normal development of prostate and have been shown to modulate prostate cancer progression in vivo as well as to modulate growth of several prostate cancer cell lines. 9-cis-retinoic acid and all-trans-retinoic acid are the two most important metabolites of retinol. Gap junctions, formed of proteins called connexins, are ensembles of intercellular channels that permit the exchange of small growth regulatory molecules between adjoining cells. Gap junctional communication is instrumental in the control of cell growth. We examined the effect of 9-cis-retinoic acid and all-trans retinoic acid on the formation and degradation of gap junctions as well as on junctional communication in an androgen-responsive prostate cancer cell line, LNCaP, which expressed retrovirally introduced connexin32, a connexin expressed by the luminal cells and well-differentiated cells of prostate tumors. Our results showed that 9-cis-retinoic acid and all-trans retinoic acid enhanced the assembly of connexin32 into gap junctions. Our results further showed that 9-cis-retinoic acid and all-trans-retinoic acid prevented androgen-regulated degradation of gap junctions, post-translationally, independent of androgen receptor mediated signaling. Finally, our findings showed that formation of gap junctions sensitized connexin32-expressing LNCaP cells to the growth modifying effects of 9-cis-retinoic acid, all-trans-retinoic acid and androgens. Thus, the effects of retinoids and androgens on growth and the formation and degradation of gap junctions and their function might be related to their ability to modulate prostate growth and cancer.

Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer: Clinical Evidence and Future Perspectives

Androgens are involved in the development and progression of prostate cancer even if the mechanism is not well-recognized. For this reason androgen-deprivation therapy remains a milestone for the treatment of patients with advanced and metastatic disease and, in the last years, in conjunction with radiotherapy and surgery in locally advanced tumors. Alternative options, such as intermittent deprivation suppression, seem to be promising in terms of clinical benefits and toxicity profile. However, current therapies present side effects, such as testosterone surge with consequent clinical flare-up, metabolic syndrome and hormone-resistance, which develops after a variable number of years. Novel therapies such as LH-RH antagonists and prolonged depot LH-RH analogues have been developed in order to avoid clinical flare-up and testosterone microsurges. Novel androgen synthesis inhibitors, such as abiraterone acetate and MDV3100, have been recently discovered and tested as promising hormonal second-line agents in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. Finally, long-term side effects from androgen deprivation, such as osteoporosis, sarcopenic obesity and cardiovascular morbidity should be carefully monitored and properly treated.

Preservation of bone health in prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bone is the most common site of metastasis in prostate cancer. The burden of disease from bone metastasis has repercussions in terms of cost to society, decreased quality of life, and decreased survival. Given the magnitude of bone-related morbidity in advanced prostate cancer, physicians need to be aware of preventive and therapeutic measures, and to be proactive in implementing them.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with prostate cancer are often osteopenic at baseline. Implementing androgen-deprivation therapy further increases bone mineral density loss. Lifestyle changes, vitamin D and calcium supplementation may slow the rate of bone mineral density loss. Bisphosphonates reduce androgen-deprivation therapy-related bone loss in prostate cancer patients. Zoledronic acid is the only bisphosphonate proven to decrease skeletal-related events in a randomized controlled trial in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Newer agents such as selective oestrogen receptor modifiers and antibodies targeting receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand are under investigation.

SUMMARY

Bone mineral density loss and skeletal complications are directly related to androgen-deprivation therapy and metastases in prostate cancer patients. Preventive and therapeutic modalities are available to physicians, who should be proactive in implementing them. Novel agents are under investigation and data pertaining to their efficacy should become available in the near future.

[Androgen deprivation for advanced prostate cancer]

Androgen deprivation (ADT) by medical or surgical castration represents the standard therapeutic approach for managing prostate cancer (PCA) with systemic or locoregional metastases. Although ADT has been successfully used for more than 60 years, there are still major controversies with regard to the initiation (early versus delayed), type (complete versus monotherapy), and duration (continuous versus intermittent) of treatment. It is the purpose of this review to critically present the results of the various ADT options. Bilateral orchiectomy and subcutaneous application of luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogues represent the guideline-recommended standard treatment for metastatic PCA, whereas estrogens are no longer recommended because of significant cardiovascular side effects despite comparable therapeutic efficacy. Antiandrogen monotherapy with bicalutamide is comparable to LHRH analogues in men with minimal tumour burden. However, survival rates are inferior in patients with extensive metastatic disease, in whom medical or surgical castration should be favoured. Complete ADT results in a median survival benefit of about 5% in men with low metastatic tumour burden, and it cannot be recommended for routine use. Early ADT is associated with a significant advantage in terms of symptom-free survival and prevention of metastasis-associated complications, but it does not result in a prolonged progression-free and overall survival when compared with delayed ADT. Despite encouraging results, intermittent ADT remains an experimental therapeutic approach that should be considered on an individual basis in carefully selected patients. Adjuvant ADT is still discussed controversially for men after radical prostatectomy, whereas it has become the standard approach in patients who undergo external beam radiation for locally advanced PCA.

Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation continues to play a crucial role in the treatment of advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. In the 65 years since its use was first described, urologists and medical oncologists have developed new and innovative ways to manipulate the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis with the goal of alleviating symptoms and prolonging the life of men with prostate cancer. Despite the successes that androgen deprivation therapy has brought, each method and regimen possesses unique benefits and burdens, of which the clinician and patient must be cognizant. This review discusses the first-line androgen deprivation methods and regimens presently in use with special attention paid to their side effects and the management of them, as well as the question of when to initiate androgen deprivation therapy.

Long-term side effects of androgen deprivation therapy in men with non-metastatic prostate cancer: A systematic literature review

Increasing numbers of men with non-metastatic disease are receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for a variety of indications, some of which are supported by evidence from randomized trials. Balanced against possible survival benefits and better disease control are data that ADT adversely affects quality of life, particularly in the areas of sexual function, physical function, and energy. There is some evidence of worsening upper extremity physical strength but no clear evidence of decline in daily function with ADT. The impact of ADT on cognitive function is not clear at this time. ADT is associated with declines in bone mineral density within 6-12 months of commencing treatment, with increased fracture rates within 5 years of treatment. ADT use is also associated with a 10-15g/L decline in hemoglobin, although the clinical significance of this drop appears to be limited for most patients. It is reasonable for physicians who are about to start men on ADT to obtain a baseline bone mineral density, to counsel them about the impact on sexual function and possible treatments for sexual dysfunction, and to encourage regular exercise. Further insight into adverse effects of ADT and strategies to minimize these adverse effects await data from ongoing studies.

[The treatments of localized prostate cancer: the impact on sexuality]

Nowadays, taking into account the sexuality is an essential component of the management of prostate cancer patients. This implies the necessity for providing accurate, clear and transparent information about the potential adverse effects on the sexual functioning for each proposed treatment. This information is not only given to the patient, but also to his female partner. The association of extended radical prostatectomy (without preservation of neurovascular bundles) and androgen suppression therapy will be proposed for men with locally advanced prostate cancer at high-risk for recurrence. The impact of such combined management regarding sexual functioning is high in terms of erection and sexual interest. Early pharmacological treatment of erectile dysfunction (within the three months following surgical treatment) with phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors or intracavernous injections will allow an optimal recovery of a certain quality of erection. Moreover, monotherapy with bicalutamide will be associated with significant advantage in terms of sexual interest. The sexuality after treatment will certainly be different but will be accomplished.

Androgen-regulated formation and degradation of gap junctions in androgen-responsive human prostate cancer cells

The constituent proteins of gap junctions, called connexins (Cxs), have a short half-life. Despite this, the physiological stimuli that control the assembly of Cxs into gap junctions and their degradation have remained poorly understood. We show here that in androgen-responsive human prostate cancer cells, androgens control the expression level of Cx32-and hence the extent of gap junction formation-post-translationally. In the absence of androgens, a major fraction of Cx32 is degraded presumably by endoplasmic reticulum-associated degradation, whereas in their presence, this fraction is rescued from degradation. We also show that Cx32 and Cx43 degrade by a similar mechanism. Thus, androgens regulate the formation and degradation of gap junctions by rerouting the pool of Cxs, which normally would have been degraded from the early secretory compartment, to the cell surface, and enhancing assembly into gap junctions. Androgens had no significant effect on the formation and degradation of adherens and tight junction-associated proteins. The findings that in a cell culture model that mimics the progression of human prostate cancer, degradation of Cxs, as well as formation of gap junctions, are androgen-dependent strongly implicate an important role of junctional communication in the prostate morphogenesis and oncogenesis.

Bicalutamide 50 mg monotherapy in patients with isolated high-grade PIN: findings in repeat biopsies at 6 months

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate morphological findings in repeat biopsies in patients with isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) after a 6-month course of bicalutamide (Casodex) 50 mg/day.

METHODS

20 consecutive patients with isolated HGPIN in prostate biopsies were treated for 6 months with bicalutamide 50 mg/day. After treatment, the patients were resubmitted to prostate biopsy mapping. The control group included 22 untreated consecutive patients with isolated high-grade PIN with repeat biopsies taken 6 months after the initial biopsies.

RESULTS

In the initial biopsies of the treated group, HGPIN was monofocal in 12 patients and plurifocal in 8. In the repeat biopsies HGPIN was present in 2 patients, monofocal in both, whereas prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa) was discovered in one. In the control group, HGPIN was monofocal in 15 and plurifocal in 7. In the repeat biopsies HGPIN was present in six patients, being monofocal in three and plurifocal in the other three. PCa was present in one.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a lower incidence of HGPIN (treated group vs control: 10% vs 27.2%) after 6 months of bicalutamide. Reduction in its extent was also observed (treated group vs control: monofocal 100% vs 50%). Treatment did not affect the incidence of cancer (treated vs control: 5% vs 4.5%).

Pathological changes of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and prostate cancer after monotherapy with bicalutamide 150 mg

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the morphological changes induced by a 3-month course of neoadjuvant bicalutamide 150 mg/day before radical prostatectomy (RP) on prostatic adenocarcinoma and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 90 patients with cT1-T2 prostate cancer and HGPIN on prostatic biopsy were randomized to receive bicalutamide (150 mg/day for 3 months) before RP, or to have immediate surgery. Surgical specimens were assessed for the histopathological features of cancer, HGPIN and benign epithelium in a blinded manner. The volumes of prostate cancer and HGPIN were evaluated using a stereological (i.e. grid) method.

RESULTS

Compared with the bicalutamide-treated group, the ratio of stroma to epithelium, evaluated by visual microscopic assessment in the normal epithelium of the three prostate zones, was significantly lower in the control group, at 2.27 (sd 1.13), than in the treated group, at 1.87 (sd 0.72) (P = 0.048). The mean (sd) tumour volume was significantly lower in the bicalutamide-treated than in the control group, at 0.914 (0.13) vs 1.47 (0.24) mL (P = 0.044). Similarly, the mean (sd) volume of HGPIN was significantly lower in the bicalutamide-treated than in the control group, at 0.34 (0.06) vs 0.62 (0.07) mL (P = 0.003). At RP, specimen Gleason scores in the bicalutamide-treated group were similar to those in the control group, and were no different from the biopsy Gleason scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Involution and epithelial shrinkage of prostate cancer and HGPIN were evident after neoadjuvant treatment with bicalutamide 150 mg. There was no evidence of the emergence of higher-grade cancer after treatment.

Spontaneous reporting of hepatotoxicity associated with antiandrogens: data from the Spanish pharmacovigilance system

PURPOSE

To analyse the type and main features of the hepatotoxicity induced by steroidal and non-steroidal antiandrogens spontaneously reported by physicians, pharmacists and nurses. This analysis could increase the information related to these adverse reactions mainly available from the published isolated cases.

METHODS

Using the Spanish Pharmacovigilance database we searched for spontaneous reports recorded since the date of approval of each antiandrogen up to the present time. We analysed the frequency of liver disorders, the preferred terms coded, the presence of other hepatotoxic drugs, and the characteristics of cases of hepatitis.

RESULTS

Liver disorders were the most common adverse reactions associated with flutamide and bicalutamide, but not with cyproterone acetate. 'Hepatitis' and 'cholestatic hepatitis' were the most frequent terms coded. In 38% of the reports related to cyproterone acetate, 18% of those related to flutamide and 33% of those related to bicalutamide the patient had simultaneously received other hepatotoxic drugs. The disproportionality analysis of hepatitis showed a strong association with flutamide and a weak association with bicalutamide and cyproterone acetate. Mean doses of flutamide and bicalutamide were very close to their defined daily dose (DDD) to treat prostate cancer, although in the case of cyproterone acetate it was slightly higher. The latency period of hepatitis was between 3 and 10 months for the three antiandrogens, and the recovery period was shorter (0.5-3 months). The majority of the reported cases of hepatitis evolved favourably.

CONCLUSION

Our results highlight the hepatotoxic potential of flutamide compared to cyproterone acetate. The data related to bicalutamide should be cautiously considered due to the smaller number of reports.

Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: current status and future prospects

Androgens play a major role in promoting the development and progression of prostate cancer. As a result, androgen ablation or blockade of androgen action through the androgen receptor (AR) has been the cornerstone of treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Different strategies involving this hormonal therapy produce a significant clinical response in most of the patients, but most responders eventually lose dependency, resulting in mortality. Thus, whether hormonal therapy contributes to the improvement of overall survival rates, especially in patients with advanced prostate cancer, remains controversial. However, patients with advanced disease clearly have a benefit from androgen deprivation-based treatment for palliating their symptoms and for improving the quality of their lives. In order to improve overall survival, novel treatment strategies that prolong the androgen-dependent state and that are useful for androgen-independent disease based on specific molecular mechanisms need to be identified.

[Prostate cancer. Treatment]

The discovery and the utilisation of the prostate specific antigen (PSA) that allows early diagnosis of prostate cancer, have considerably improved the management of this disease. Before the PSA era, prostate cancer was just a disease of the old man, generally detected at an advanced stage and incurable, with a fatal outcome delayed by the androgenic deprivation. Since early 1990's, prostate cancer has become primarily a disease of the man of 60 years, detectable earlier, and curable provided no extraprostatic dissemination has occurred. Early treatment of prostate cancer has benefited from important advances in surgical and radio-therapeutic techniques (conformational irradiation, brachytherapy), with, as principal goal, the combination of a better survival and the reduction of the potential adverse effects that alter quality of life. A better definition of the characteristics of the tumours in terms of progression regarding various parameters (clinical stage, PSA, tumoral differentiation) have resulted, despite the heterogeneity of the disease, in the determination of subgroups of tumours with different prognosis, which leads to an improved therapeutic strategy. The assessment of men's life expectancy (< or > 10 years) is the second primary parameter on which is based the indication for curative or non curative therapy in case of localized tumour. Roughly, before the age of 75, a curative therapy is indicated whereas after this age a surveillance is reasonable as first-line treatment, followed by hormone therapy in case of onset of symptoms indicating some progression of the disease (urinary symptoms, bone lesion). At a Later stage, in case of a metastatic or locally advanced cancer, hormone therapy by androgenic deprivation is highly indicated. The hormone sensitivity characterizes prostate cancer; it has been discovered more than 50 years ago by Charles Huggins (Nobel prize-winner). This hormone therapy is a palliative treatment since its efficacy is transient (ineluctable occurrence of hormone resistance in a variable time delay), but it constitutes an essential therapeutic means with a well-established efficacy. Hormone therapy has progressively improved, with the renunciation of oestrogen therapy and surgical castration which has been replaced by luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) analogues, and/ or anti-androgens. Numerous works have resulted in a better rationalization of the prescription (date of treatment initiation, interest of combined androgenic deprivation, ...) but uncertainties remain, such as the therapeutic interest of intermittent treatment, or of earlier hormone therapy combined with the treatment of the primitive tumour (adjuvant hormone therapy). Finally, at the time of the hormonal escape of which the molecular mechanisms remain unclear, no therapy has proven any efficacy in survival lengthening, and the treatment remains palliative and symptomatic. Although improved knowledge of prostate cancer aetiology is expected for a real disease prevention, early diagnosis at a curable stage of the disease (by PSA assessment) remains the only means for mortality reduction.

Bone loss and the evolving role of bisphosphonate therapy in prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can result in significant loss of bone mineral density (BMD) but to date, there are no prospective studies that document the true severity of bone loss and resulting fracture rates. In the general population, however, the incidence of low BMD is increasing in elderly men. Men suffer more morbidity and mortality from fractures associated with low BMD than women. Problems of underdiagnosis and undertreatment in men can be addressed with enhanced awareness of the risk factors for bone loss in men and the available treatment options. Guidelines for diagnosis of low BMD in women can probably be applied to men. Treatment options have not been studied as extensively in men. For men treated with ADT for prostate cancer, however, use of intravenous zoledronic acid at the initiation of ADT has been shown to prevent and even reverse bone loss. Although the routine use of bisphosphonates to prevent bone loss is not yet recommended, zoledronic acid is a logical choice of therapy in men who have low BMD at baseline or who develop bone loss during the course of therapy. In addition to its effects on BMD, zoledronic acid has also been shown to decrease skeletal morbidity in men with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Whether zoledronic acid or other bisphosphonates might actually prevent or delay the development of bone metastases remains to be studied in randomized clinical trials.

Liminality as biographical disruption: unclassifiability following hormonal therapy for advanced prostate cancer

The hormonal treatment of advanced prostate cancer involves life disruptive side-effects, such as impotence, libido loss and bodily feminisation. Conflicting views on the weight of the disruption they cause as against the therapy's survival benefits currently underlie debates over its appropriate mode of administration and its optimal timing in cases that do not necessitate immediate intervention. On the basis of a study of the disruptions caused to various life domains of 15 Israeli patients receiving such treatment, the present paper illustrates an integrated approach to their analysis that sheds new light on their intensity. The study was conducted by means of in-depth interviews and its data were processed according to the constant comparative analysis method. Its findings indicate that the therapy allowed the patients to regain their strength, to retain their need of love, basic masculine self-identification and spousal ties, and to renew their past social contacts. On the other hand they could no longer define themselves as healthy, sexually competent and 'male' in all respects, and their pre-treatment relationships with partners and friends lost the sense of closeness. Further psychosocial costs that were detected include patients' deprivation of their sense of continuity, excitements, hopes and coping capabilities. An integrated analysis of the concurrent normalisation and deviantisation processes undergone by them yielded the conclusion that the therapy subjects them to a liminal state, that is, the inability to classify themselves into culturally available categories. The difficulties entailed in this state highlight the need to take them into consideration when patients' condition allows a choice between alternative forms of hormonal therapy and between its early or deferred commencement. The interpretation of the disruption to their lives in terms of liminality also clarifies former studies' confusing reference to this subject and points to issues that still await investigation.

Finasteride and bicalutamide as primary hormonal therapy in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the prostate

BACKGROUND

Medical or surgical castration is effective in advanced prostate cancer but with profound side-effects, particularly on sexual function. Effective, less toxic therapies are needed. This study examined whether the addition of finasteride to high-dose bicalutamide enhanced disease control, as measured by additional decreases in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-one patients with advanced prostate cancer received bicalutamide (150 mg/day). Finasteride (5 mg/day) was added at first PSA nadir. Serum PSA was measured every 2 weeks until disease progression. Questionnaires were administered to assess sexual function.

RESULTS

Median follow-up is 3.9 years. At the first PSA nadir, median decrease in PSA from baseline was 96.5%. Thirty of 41 patients (73%) achieved a second PSA nadir and median decrease of 98.5% from baseline. Median time to each nadir was 3.7 and 5.8 weeks, respectively. Median time to treatment failure was 21.3 months. Toxicities were minor, including gynecomastia. Seventeen of 29 (59%) and 12 of 24 (50%) men had normal sex drive at baseline and at second PSA nadir, respectively. One-third of men had spontaneous erection at both time points.

CONCLUSION

Finasteride provides additional intracellular androgen blockade when added to bicalutamide. Duration of control is comparable to castration, with preserved sexual function in some patients.

Luteinizing hormone–releasing hormone agonists in the treatment of men with prostate cancer: timing, alternatives, and the 1-year implant

This article reviews the evidence underlying hormone treatment decisions for men with advanced prostate cancer. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogs are the mainstays of therapy, but 3 areas of LHRH use need clarification: (1) when to start therapy, (2) what alternatives are available, and (3) how to incorporate a long-term strategy for the individual patient. The Medical Research Council (MRC) study, a randomized clinical trial in 938 patients, shows that immediate hormone therapy in men presenting with advanced prostate cancer (stage > or =T3) imparts a survival advantage over a delayed-treatment approach (7.5 years vs 5.8 years, P = 0.0003). LHRH analogs are also widely used (1) along with definitive radiation therapy, (2) when positive lymph nodes are found after radical prostatectomy, and (3) when prostate-specific antigen increases after any primary treatment (biochemical failure). In these situations, timing of therapy is somewhat controversial. Several new developments in hormone therapy are noteworthy, including high-dose antiandrogen monotherapy, a LHRH antagonist (abarelix), transdermal estrogens, and a subcutaneous implant that releases leuprolide acetate at a constant rate for 1 year (Viadur; Bayer Corporation, West Haven, CT). With 4 years of clinical experience with Viadur now available, the long-term data indicate continued, uniform testosterone suppression into the castrate range and a high degree of patient satisfaction. Thus, a long-term strategy-permitting increased patient freedom and decreased dependence on a fixed injection schedule-has for the first time become possible with the Viadur implant in men requiring hormone therapy for prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer and bone metastases: medical treatment

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

Advanced prostate cancer patients' relationships with their spouses following hormonal therapy

The paper analyses the adverse impact of the hormonal therapy's side-effects on advanced prostate cancer patients' capacity for maintaining their pre-treatment spousal relationships, the pros and cons of their ways of coping with the difficulties involved, and the implications of these issues for oncology nursing interventions. In-depth interviews were conducted with 15 Israeli prostate cancer patients, and the data were processed according to the constant comparative analysis method. The findings show that partners' supportive attitude and patients' attempts to stage resilience led to pre-treatment relationships' maintenance, and that, accordingly, patients' rejection by their partners and resignation to this difficulty resulted in spousal ties' disruption. However, whereas the relationships' maintenance came at the cost of burdensome constant pretence, their disruption was eventually reconstructed by the patients in positive terms. These findings are analysed against the backdrop of the constraints imposed by the hormonal therapy on patients' general coping competence and ability to enjoy non-sexual activities, which impair their capability to solve their marital problems more effectively. They would thus benefit from training oncology nurses who specialize in the unique difficulties facing them and their partners, and from oncology nursing interventions that focus on relevant information provision and counselling.

Emerging role of adjuvant hormonal therapy

Recent years have seen a downward shift in the most common disease stage at diagnosis and in the age of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. Although younger men with clinically localized disease are generally offered radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy, such treatment does not always produce a cure. Adjuvant hormonal therapy (medical or surgical castration) has been shown to extend progression-free survival in both the radiotherapy and surgical settings, and overall survival benefits have also been demonstrated in some studies. However, castration is associated with sexual dysfunction that may be unacceptable, particularly among younger patients. The ongoing bicalutamide (Casodex; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE) Early Prostate Cancer program is evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of bicalutamide 150 mg as immediate therapy, either alone or as an adjuvant to therapy of curative intent, in patients with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer. This is the largest clinical trial program in prostate cancer treatment to date, comprising 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with a total of 8113 patients. At median follow-up period of 3 years and after 922 progression events, the bicalutamide group had a significant reduction of 42% in the risk of objective progression compared with patients who received placebo plus standard care. The risk of prostate-specific antigen progression was also significantly reduced by 59%. As expected, gynecomastia and breast pain were the most frequently reported side effects of bicalutamide therapy. A longer follow-up period will determine whether the reduced risk of progression will translate into cause-specific and overall survival benefit for these patients.