GYNECOMASTIA AND BREAST PAIN INDUCED BY ADJUVANT THERAPY WITH BICALUTAMIDE AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER: THE ROLE OF TAMOXIFEN AND RADIOTHERAPY

Targeting the androgen receptor signaling pathway in advanced prostate cancer

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

This article summarizes current androgen receptor (AR)-directed therapies that have received regulatory approval for the treatment of advanced prostate adenocarcinoma (herein referred to as prostate cancer, PC).

SUMMARY

PC is an androgen-dependent malignancy in which ligands including testosterone and dihydrotestosterone bind to AR, initiating androgen-AR complex translocation to the nucleus followed by AR-mediated transcription of target genes. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), including gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists with or without AR antagonists (antiandrogens), GnRH antagonists, or bilateral orchiectomy, forms the backbone of treatment for patients with metastatic castration-naive PC and/or castration-resistant PC (CRPC). ADT is also an option for high-risk, early-stage PC after prostatectomy and/or radiation. While ADT is often very effective as initial therapy, resistance ultimately develops despite suppression of gonadal and/or adrenal androgens, leading to CRCPC, which is characterized by mechanisms such as reactivation of the AR signaling pathway, AR overexpression, and gene mutations in the ligand-binding domain of AR that lead to disease progression, resulting in increased symptom burden and ultimately death. However, disease in patients with CRPC is still dependent on androgen signaling, and these patients continue on ADT to maintain a castrate level of serum testosterone. Novel hormonal therapies including agents that target AR directly (eg, AR antagonists) are often added to ADT in this setting. Targeting the AR signaling pathway led to the development of second-generation AR antagonists, examples of which include enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide. These agents do not exhibit partial agonism or possess a higher affinity for AR and are not postulated to improve survival outcomes relative to their first-generation counterparts for patients with CRPC. Lastly, the emergence of ADT, including second-generation AR antagonists, has led to the development of supportive care for treatment-related adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Major advances have been made in targeting the AR signaling pathway in patients with advanced PC. Further studies are warranted to identify the optimal sequencing of therapies to maximize treatment benefit. Mitigation of treatment-related adverse effects presents new opportunities to advance clinical pharmacy practice.

Impacts of Neoadjuvant Hormonal Therapy Prior to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy on Postoperative Hormonal- and Sexual-Related Quality of Life – Assessment by Patient-Reported Questionnaire

Purpose

Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (HT) before radical prostatectomy (RP) is not recommended by current guidelines in terms of oncological outcomes. Despite this, neoadjuvant HT is sometimes conducted before RP for a small proportion of patients in clinical practice. This study evaluated the impacts of neoadjuvant HT on hormonal- and sexual-related quality of life (QOL) among patients who underwent robot-assisted RP (RARP).

Materials and Methods

Participants comprised 470 patients divided into a non-neoadjuvant HT group (n = 408) and a neoadjuvant HT group (n = 62). Hormonal- and sexual-related QOL were measured using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire.

Results

Hormonal summary scores at 6 and 9 months, function scores before and 3, 6, and 9 months and bother score at 6 months after RARP were significantly lower in the neoadjuvant HT group than in the non-neoadjuvant HT group. Sexual function scores were decreased in the neoadjuvant HT group compared to the non-neoadjuvant HT group before and 6 months after RARP. In the neoadjuvant HT group, sexual function at 3 months after RARP was significantly worse in patients with >5 months of neoadjuvant HT than in patients with ≤5 months of neoadjuvant HT. Conversely, sexual bother at 3 months after RARP was significantly worse in patients with ≤5 months of neoadjuvant HT than in patients with >5 months of neoadjuvant HT.

Conclusion

Vintage neoadjuvant HT prior to RARP should not be recommended due to not only oncological outcomes, but also the impacts on postoperative hormonal- and sexual-related QOL.

Canadian Urological Association guideline on androgen deprivation therapy: Adverse events and management strategies

NA

Radiotherapy for prevention or management of gynecomastia recurrence: Future role for general gynecomastia patients in plastic surgery given current role in management of high-risk prostate cancer patients on anti-androgenic therapy

PURPOSE

Several technologies and innovative approaches continue to emerge for the optimal management of gynecomastia by plastic surgeons; the present study investigates the role of radiation therapy in this context.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to evaluate the utility of radiotherapy for the prevention and treatment of gynecomastia incidence or recurrence by plastic surgeons.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria for review. The mean incidence of gynecomastia was 70% in the high-risk population examined representing prostate cancer patients on estrogen or anti-androgen therapy. Radiotherapy was shown to significantly reduce the incidence to a median of 23%, with all six randomized control studies assessed demonstrating a statistically significant decrease in incidence following radiotherapy prophylaxis. Doses examined ranged from 8 to 16 Gy, delivered between 1 and 11 fractions. Complications following radiotherapy were minor and self-limiting in all cases, restricted to minor skin reactions, and associated with larger radiotherapy doses delivered in fewer fractions. The median complication rate was 12.4% with no major complications, such as neoplastic, pulmonary, or adverse cardiac outcomes. While the efficacy of radiation therapy as a treatment modality for gynecomastia was also established, it was shown to be less effective than other available options.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose radiotherapy to the male breast might be a safe and effective strategy to prevent gynecomastia incidence or recurrence in high-risk patients; further studies are indicated within the common gynecomastia population managed by plastic surgeons to assess the clinical and economical utility of this intervention before a recommendation for its ubiquitous adoption in plastic surgery can be made to continue improving outcomes for high-risk gynecomastia patients.

Treatment strategies to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group prostate cancer

Aim

To provide an overview on the available treatments to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer.

Methods

The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published and assessed the validity of the information on efficacy and treatment-related toxicity.

Results

Eight randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. Two randomized trials demonstrated that prophylactic radiation therapy (RT) using 1 × 10 Gy or 2 × 6 Gy significantly reduced the rate of gynecomastia but not breast pain, as compared to observation. A randomized dose-finding trial identified the daily dose of 20 mg tamoxifen (TMX) as the most effective prophylactic dose and another randomized trial described that daily TMX use was superior to weekly use. Another randomized trial showed that prophylactic daily TMX is more effective than TMX given at the onset of gynecomastia. Two other randomized trials described that TMX was clearly superior to anastrozole in reducing the risk for gynecomastia and/or breast pain. One comparative randomized trial between prophylactic RT using 1 × 12 Gy and TMX concluded that prophylactic TMX is more effective compared to prophylactic RT and furthermore that TMX appears to be more effective to treat gynecomastia and/or breast pain when symptoms are already present. A meta-analysis confirmed that both prophylactic RT and TMX can reduce the risk of gynecomastia and/or breast pain with TMX being more effective; however, the rate of side effects after TMX including dizziness and hot flushes might be higher than after RT and must be taken into account. Less is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of different radiation fractionation schedules and more modern RT techniques.

Conclusions

Prophylactic RT as well as daily TMX can significantly reduce the incidence of gynecomastia and/or breast pain. TMX appears to be an effective alternative to RT also as a therapeutic treatment in the presence of gynecomastia but its side effects and off-label use must be considered.

Androgen deprivation and immunotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common newly diagnosed malignancy in men, and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in the United States. The primary treatment for recurrent prostate cancer is androgen deprivation, and this therapy is typically continued lifelong for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Androgens and androgen deprivation have profound effects on the immune system, a finding that has become more appreciated in an era where immune-based treatments for cancer are being increasingly explored. Preclinical studies suggest that androgen deprivation could potentially positively or negatively affect the use of approved immunotherapies, or those that are being developed for the treatment of prostate cancer. In this review, we provide a brief overview of the different types of androgen deprivation treatments used in the management of prostate cancer, discuss their effects on prostate tumors and the immune system and how they are being explored in combination with immunotherapy. Finally, we address some of the critical questions in the field that must be answered to identify the best approaches to combine androgen deprivation with immunotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer.

Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Preservation of Quality of Life and Well-being

Managing optimal health in castrate-resistant prostate cancer is a complex clinical challenge. Quality of life should be assessed with disease-specific validated tools and can be used in clinical practice to assist in considering management options.

Long-Term Follow-up of Recurrence and Patient Satisfaction After Surgical Treatment of Gynecomastia

BACKGROUND

"Gynecomastia" is an enlargement of the male breast. Our study aims to assess patient satisfaction as well as evaluate differences in recurrence rates in lipomatous and glandular gynecomastia 10-19 years postoperatively.

METHODS

Forty-one gynecomastia patients undergoing surgical treatment from 1997 to 2005 were invited for a follow-up examination 10-19 years postoperatively. Of these, 16 patients presented for a clinical examination. Patient satisfaction was measured with a validated questionnaire [consultation satisfaction questionnaire (CSQ)-9]. Furthermore, photo-material and patient charts were evaluated concerning preoperative macroscopical type of gynecomastia, BMI, and operative technique.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 13.8 years (range: 10.5-19 years). Eight patients (50%) had presented with lipomatous and eight patients (50%) with glandular gynecomastia prior to surgery. One of the patients with glandular gynecomastia (12.5%) presented with recurrence at the time of follow-up, while five of the eight patients showing lipomatous gynecomastia (62.5%) presented with recurrence. Interestingly, younger patient groups tend to be more satisfied with the operative treatment of gynecomastia than older patient groups, especially regarding the improvement of self-esteem.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term follow-up results showed that recurrence rates are significantly higher in patients with lipomatous gynecomastia than in patients with glandular gynecomastia, with BMI increase in patients with glandular and lipomatous gynecomastia showing no statistically significant differences. Furthermore, general patient satisfaction and improvement of self-esteem was higher in younger patient groups than older patient groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00009630.

Gynecomastia in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Gynecomastia and/or mastodynia is a common medical problem in patients receiving antiandrogen (bicalutamide or flutamide) treatment for prostate cancer; up to 70% of these patients result to be affected; furthermore, this can jeopardise patients' quality of life.

AIMS

To systematically review the quality of evidence of the current literature regarding treatment options for bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia, including efficacy, safety and patients' quality of life.

METHODS

The PubMed, Medline, Scopus, The Cochrane Library and SveMed+ databases were systematically searched between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014. All searches were undertaken between January and February 2015. The search phrase used was:"gynecomastia AND treatment AND prostate cancer". Two reviewers assessed 762 titles and abstracts identified. The search and review process was done in accordance with the PRISMA statement. The PICOS (patients, intervention, comparator, outcomes and study design) process was used to specify inclusion criteria. Quality of evidence was rated according to GRADE.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were: treatment effects, number of complications and side effects. Secondary outcome was: Quality of Life.

RESULTS

Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria and are analysed in this review. Five studies reported pharmacological intervention with tamoxifen and/or anastrozole, either as prophylactic or therapeutic treatment. Four studies reported radiotherapy as prophylactic and/or therapeutic treatment. Two studies compared pharmacological treatment to radiotherapy. Most of the studies were randomized with varying risk of bias. According to GRADE, quality of evidence was moderate to high.

CONCLUSIONS

Bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia and/or mastodynia can effectively be managed by oral tamoxifen (10-20 mg daily) or radiotherapy without relevant side effects. Prophylaxis or therapeutic treatment with tamoxifen results to be more effective than radiotherapy.

Adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy and strategies to mitigate them

CONTEXT

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

OBJECTIVE

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

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

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

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

PATIENT SUMMARY

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

Surgical treatment of primary gynecomastia in children and adolescents

PURPOSE

Idiopathic gynecomastia is a common diagnosis in children and adolescents. Though medical treatments reveal potentially harmful side effects, surgical interventions are performable in numerous techniques. In children and adolescents, only minimal evidence exists. This retrospective study presents our experiences with two common surgical techniques, namely subcutaneous mastectomy and combination with liposuction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included all patients <18 years who underwent surgery due to idiopathic gynecomastia. Height, weight and grade of gynecomastia according to Simon's classification before surgery were reviewed in all patients' files. Additionally, duration of surgery, inpatient stay and postoperative complications were documented. Follow-up examinations were performed with assessment of scar formation, numbness and retraction of the nipple region. Furthermore, patients were asked to report on general satisfaction with surgery (satisfactory/not satisfactory) and esthetic outcome on a numeric scale (1 = good, 6 = bad).

RESULTS

37 patients underwent surgery for verified idiopathic gynecomastia. Grade of gynecomastia was I° in 13.5% (n = 5), II° in 40.5% (n = 15) and III° in 46% (n = 17) of cases. Subcutaneous mastectomy was applied in 11 patients (group I, 30%) and both subcutaneous mastectomy and liposuction in 26 patients (group II, 70.3%). Postoperative complications occurred in two patients. Long-term follow-up was performed in 32 patients after a median of 34 months (range 6-96 months). Hypertrophic scar formation was seen in one patient (3%) and nipple retraction in two patients (5%). Recurrence of gynecomastia occurred in two patients (5%). Patient rating was satisfactory in 9% of cases and esthetic outcome was received with a median of 2.0 (1-5). In comparing both surgical techniques, combination of mastectomy and liposuction revealed better results in every measure except for surgical duration (median 73 vs. 90 min).

CONCLUSION

Surgical correction of gynecomastia remains a purely elective intervention. In contrast to adults, skin in children and adolescents provides high retractability. Therefore, open reduction combined with minimally invasive liposuction was proven useful.

Treatment of gynecomastia in patients with prostate cancer and androgen deprivation

CONTEXT

Gynecomastia, defined as benign proliferation of glandular breast tissue has a prevalence of 32% to 72% in the male. In the urology setting, it is associated to patients with prostate cancer and hormone treatment with a prevalence of 15% in the case of complete hormone blockage and 75% in monotherapy. The different options of treatment in prostate cancer have changed in recent decades. Thus, we have focused on this subject to evaluate the different therapy options of hormone manipulation induced gynecomastia in prostate cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the available evidence on the different therapeutic options in prostate cancer patients who develop gynecomastia due to the use of nonsteroidal antiandrogens and to generate a diagnostic algorithm and treatment.

ACQUISITION OF EVIDENCE

Using the PICO type structured search strategy (Patient or problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome or result) in the data bases of PubMed-Medline and Cochrane, identification was made of the relevant studies related to the treatment of gynecomastia in Prostate Cancer patients treated with nonsteroidal antiandrogens.

SYNTHESIS OF EVIDENCE

We have found 3 possible therapeutic options for the treatment of gynecomastia and mastodynia in patients with hormone deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. The 10Gy radiotherapy would be an option for the treatment of gynecomastia, although not all the patients need prophylactic treatment since only 50% report moderate-severe discomfort. Another option is the use of drugs such as tamoxifen 20mg/day that lead to a significant decrease in the mammary effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Gynecomastia and mastodynia, given their high incidence, make the physical examination a fundamental tool for all patients before initiating treatment with antiandrogens. The use of tamoxifen 20mg/day is the best treatment and prevention option against gynecomastia and mastodynia, while in the case of long-course established gynecomastia, surgery is the gold standard.

Androgen deprivation therapy toxicity and management for men receiving radiation therapy

Androgen deprivation therapy is commonly used in combination with radiotherapy as part of the definitive treatment for men with clinically localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. Androgen deprivation has been associated with a wide range of iatrogenic effects impacting a variety of body systems including metabolic, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, neurocognitive, and sexual. This review aims to provide the radiation oncology community with the knowledge to monitor and manage androgen deprivation therapy toxicity in an effort to provide the highest level of care for patients and to minimize the iatrogenic effects of androgen deprivation as much as possible.

A randomized trial comparing tamoxifen therapy vs. tamoxifen prophylaxis in bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia

BACKGROUND

Tamoxifen (TAM) has been shown to be active against the bicalutamide-induced breast events (BEs) gynecomastia, and breast pain in patients with prostate cancer (PC). Optimal doses and schedules are not yet established. Debate still exists about whether prophylaxis with TAM is more effective than treatment of BEs when diagnosed. The results of a randomized study comparing TAM prophylaxis vs. TAM therapy are presented.

METHODS

One hundred seventy-six patients with prostate cancer (PC) who were candidates for bicalutamide monotherapy were randomized to receive TAM 20 mg daily orally within 1 month from the onset of BEs (arm A) vs. TAM 10 mg daily starting simultaneously with bicalutamide (arm B). TAM was administered for up to 1 year. BEs were evaluated by a self-administered visual analogue scale. Neither ultrasonography nor calipers were used to measure the degree of gynecomastia.

RESULTS

In arm A, BEs showed a prevalence, increasing with time up to 78.3%. After therapy with TAM they persisted in 27.7% of cases. Two patients (3%) interrupted TAM therapy because of dizziness, and 3 patients (4%) interrupted bicalutamide therapy because of painful gynecomastia. In arm B, the prevalence of BEs was 35% after 12 months of therapy. The difference in BEs between the 2 arms was statistically significant (P < .0001). The differences in prevalence of gynecomastia and breast pain between the 2 arms both favored TAM prophylaxis (P < .0001 and P < .001, respectively). Up to 35% of patients had BEs of low intensity, never requiring bicalutamide withdrawal. Two patients (3%) interrupted the treatment because of gastrointestinal intolerance. No difference emerged between the 2 arms in terms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, plasma testosterone levels, and tumor progression.

CONCLUSION

Bicalutamide-induced BEs can be prevented to a significant degree by prophylaxis with TAM 10 mg/day or effectively treated with TAM therapy 20 mg/day. Persisting BEs are of higher intensity after therapy than after prophylaxis.

Tamoxifen for the management of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Tamoxifen has emerged as a potential management option for gynecomastia and breast pain due to non-steroidal antiandrogens, and it is considered an alternative to surgery or radiotherapy. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the benefits and harms of tamoxifen, in comparison to other treatment options, for either the prophylaxis or treatment of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens in prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists, the abstracts of three major conferences and three trial registers to identify ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two authors independently screened the articles identified, assessed the trial quality and extracted data. The protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42011001320; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

RESULTS

Four studies were identified. Tamoxifen significantly reduced the risk of suffering from gynecomastia (risk ratio 9RR0 0.10, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.22) or breast pain (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.17) at six months compared to untreated controls. Tamoxifen also showed a significant benefit for the prevention of gynecomastia (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58) and breast pain (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.64) when compared to anastrozole after a median of 12 months. One study showed a significant benefit of tamoxifen for the prevention of gynecomastia (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.65) and breast pain (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.65) when compared with radiotherapy at six months. Radiotherapy increased the risk of suffering from nipple erythema and skin irritation, but there were no significant differences for any other adverse events (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The currently available evidence suggests good efficacy of tamoxifen for the prevention and treatment of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens. The impact of tamoxifen therapy on long-term adverse events, disease progression and survival remains unclear. Further large, well-designed RCTs, including long-term follow-ups, are warranted. Also, the optimal dose needs to be clarified.

Optimal prophylactic and definitive therapy for bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia: results of a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Bicalutamide is approved as an adjuvant to primary treatments (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy) or as monotherapy in men with locally advanced, nonmetastatic prostate cancer (pca). However, this treatment induces gynecomastia in most patients, which often results in treatment discontinuation. Optimal therapy for these breast events is not known so far. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of various treatment options for bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia.

METHODS

The medline, cancerlit, and Cochrane library databases were searched and the Google search engine was used to identify prospective and retrospective controlled studies published in English from January 2000 to December 2010 comparing prophylactic or curative treatment options with a control group (no treatment) for pca patients who developed bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia. Radiotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The search identified nine controlled trials with a total patient population of 1573. Pooled results from prophylactic trials showed a significant reduction of gynecomastia in pca patients treated with prophylactic tamoxifen 20 mg daily (odds ratio: 0.06; 95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.09; p = 0.09), and pooled results from treatment trials showed a significant response of gynecomastia to definitive radiotherapy (odds ratio: 0.06; 95% confidence interval: 0.01 to 0.24; p < 0.0001). Aromatase inhibitors and weekly tamoxifen were not found to be effective as prophylactic and curative options. For the radiotherapy, skin-to-heart distance was found to be an important risk factor for cardiotoxicity (p = 0.006). A funnel plot of the meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity (Egger test p < 0.00001) because of low sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests using prophylactic tamoxifen 20 mg daily as the first-line preventive measure and radiotherapy as the first-line treatment option for bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia. Aromatase inhibitors and weekly tamoxifen are not recommended.

Expanded prostate cancer index composite for clinical practice: development and validation of a practical health related quality of life instrument for use in the routine clinical care of patients with prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Measuring the health related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer in routine clinical practice is hindered by the lack of instruments enabling efficient, real-time, point of care scoring of multiple health related quality of life domains. Thus, we developed an instrument for this purpose.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice is a 1-page, 16-item questionnaire that we constructed to measure urinary incontinence, urinary irritation, and the bowel, sexual and hormonal health related quality of life domains. We eliminated conceptually overlapping items from the 3-page Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 and revised the questionnaire format to mirror the AUA symptom index, thereby enabling practitioners to calculate health related quality of life scores at the point of care. We administered the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice to a new cohort of patients with prostate cancer in community based and academic oncology, radiation, and urology practices to evaluate instrument validity as well as ease of use in clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 175 treated and 132 untreated subjects with prostate cancer completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice. The domain scores of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice correlated highly with the respective domain scores from longer versions of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (r≥0.93 for all domains). The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.64-0.84) and sensitivity to prostate cancer treatment related effects (p<0.05 in each of 5 health related quality of life domains). Patients completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice efficiently (96% in less than 10 minutes and with 11% missing items). It was deemed very convenient by clinicians in 87% of routine clinical encounters and clinicians accurately scored completed questionnaires 94% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice is a valid instrument that enables patient reported, health related quality of life to be measured efficiently and accurately at the point of care, and thereby facilitates improved emphasis and management of patient reported outcomes.

Gynecomastia - evaluation and current treatment options

CLINICAL QUESTION

What is the best management approach for gynecomastia?

RESULTS

In most patients, surgical correction usually leads to immediate cosmetic and symptomatic improvement and is considered the best approach. In men who are being treated with antiandrogen therapies, pharmacological intervention with tamoxifen is the most effective approach, followed by radiotherapy.

IMPLEMENTATION

Pitfalls to avoid when treating gynecomastia Failure to detect the very rare male breast cancerOverly aggressive early intervention or evaluationAppropriate medical interventionWhen to refer to specialist treatment.

Bicalutamide 150 mg in addition to standard care for patients with early non-metastatic prostate cancer Updated results from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Period Group-6 Study after a median follow-up period of 7.1 years

OBJECTIVE

The Early Prostate Cancer (EPC) programme is evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of bicalutamide following standard care (radiotherapy, radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting) in patients with localized (T1-2, N0/Nx) or locally advanced (T3-4, any N; or any T, N + ) non-metastatic prostate cancer. Herein we report the latest findings after a median follow-up period of 7.1 years from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (SPCG)-6 study, one of three trials in the EPC programme.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 1218 patients were randomized on a 1:1 basis to either bicalutamide 150 mg/day (n=607) or placebo (n=611) following standard care; 81.4% were followed conservatively (watchful waiting). The primary endpoints were objective progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In patients with localized disease there was no significant difference in PFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85; 95% CI 0.69-1.06; p=0.15] and a trend towards decreased OS with bicalutamide plus standard care compared with standard care alone (HR 1.23; 95% CI 0.96-1.58; p=0.11). In patients with locally advanced disease, bicalutamide significantly improved PFS, reducing the risk of progression by 53% compared with standard care alone (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.37-0.59; p<0.001). The median time to progression was 8.8 years for bicalutamide plus standard care and 7.1 years for standard care alone. There was a significant improvement in OS with bicalutamide plus standard care, with a reduction in the risk of death of 35% versus standard care alone (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.85; p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

This analysis of the SPCG-6 study showed that bicalutamide plus standard care offers significant PFS and OS benefits for patients with locally advanced disease, but not for those with localized disease.

Hormonal therapy in the elderly prostate cancer patient

BACKGROUND

Prostatic cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men in Germany. The goal of this review is to define the indication for hormonal treatment in patients over age 70.

METHODS

A selective search of the literature up to 2008 for the terms "prostate cancer", "androgen suppression and deprivation", "hormone therapy", "LHRH analogs", "antiandrogens", "active surveillance", and "watchful waiting" was performed in the Medline and Cochrane databases. The guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO, 2007) and the European Society of Urology (EAU, 2008) were also taken into account.

RESULTS

Hormonal therapy is not indicated for patients with organ-confined, well-differentiated or moderately differentiated tumors who are otherwise in good health. It is beneficial in the treatment of locally advanced cancer with an unfavorable Gleason score. For patients with organ-confined cancers who are in poor general condition, hormonal therapy is deferred until symptoms arise. The guidelines recommend hormonal therapy in case of PSA elevations greater than 1.5 ng/mL after attempted curative treatment. Symptomatic metastases require immediate hormonal therapy. Intermittent androgen deprivation is an attractive alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients over age 70, an attempt at curative treatment is only reasonable if the life expectancy exceeds 10 years. Hormonal therapy is the treatment of choice for patients with undifferentiated, locally advanced prostate cancer, recurrences as defined by PSA elevation, and symptomatic metastases.

The social context for psychological distress from iatrogenic gynecomastia with suggestions for its management

INTRODUCTION

Gynecomastia (breast development in males) is a side effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa). Medical interventions to prevent or treat gynecomastia carry risk of additional detrimental side effects. However, untreated gynecomastia can be physically uncomfortable and psychologically distressing. Shame from gynecomastia can lead patients to stop otherwise beneficial exercise.

AIMS

Our first aim is to explore the social context for gynecomastia and how it is interpreted by men with the condition, as well as by others, both male and female. Subsequently, we use our understanding of why gynecomastia is psychologically distressing to propose psychosocial interventions that could help men accept this side effect of ADT.

METHODS

We draw on academic literature, media accounts, and web-based testimonials from men with gynecomastia, to understand how gynecomastia is perceived by both patients and the medical community. We examine these resources in light of gynecomastia's impact on sex roles, sexuality, and gender identity issues.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

By exploring what breasts in a male mean to the individual, we produce an understanding of the social context for distress from gynecomastia. From this understanding, we derive hypotheses about who might be most distressed from gynecomastia and strategies for alleviating this distress.

RESULTS

The shame and stigma of gynecomastia is linked to the objectification of women. We suggest that men fear that their breasts will marginalize and subordinate them within gender hierarchies. There is little evidence that breasts on a male erotically attract either men or women. Novel options for living with gynecomastia are contrasted with medicalized strategies including mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

Assessment instruments need to be developed to identify patients most likely to experience distress from gynecomastia and seek out medical interventions. Surgical, radiological, or pharmacological interventions may not be universally necessary if greater acceptance of gynecomastia is made available through psychosocial support programs. For example, PCa patients may learn to accept gynecomastia through reconceptualizing their breasts as autoerotic. Support programs modeled on those of the breast cancer community, including Encore and dragon boat racing, may also help to build communities to serve patients with gynecomastia while defending individuals against shame, isolation, and loss of self-esteem.

Prostate specific antigen recurrence after definitive therapy

PURPOSE

We estimate that approximately 70,000 men yearly have prostate specific antigen-only recurrence after failed definitive therapy. The ideal salvage therapy for these men is not clear. Treatment must be individualized based on the patient risk of progression, the likelihood of success and the risks involved with the therapy. However, to do so the risks and benefits of the various options must be known. Therefore, we provide a comprehensive overview of the natural history and treatment options for men with prostate specific antigen-only recurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review and overview of prostate specific antigen-only recurrence after failed definitive therapy was done.

RESULTS

The natural history after prostate specific antigen-only recurrence is long but variable. Median time from prostate specific antigen-only recurrence after radical prostatectomy to prostate cancer death exceeds 16 years, although some men die within 1 year after PSA recurrence. Rapid prostate specific antigen doubling time is the best prognostic factor for poor outcome. Salvage radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy results in a 45% 4-year prostate specific antigen response rate, although long-term outcomes appear poor. To our knowledge the effect on survival is not known. Salvage radical prostatectomy is rarely performed but in the highly selected patient it may provide some benefit. There are no randomized studies of early vs late hormonal therapy for men with prostate specific antigen-only recurrence. A retrospective study suggested delayed metastasis when therapy was begun early but only in men at high risk. This mirrors other data suggesting that men at high risk may derive significant benefits from early hormonal therapy, whereas men at low risk are unlikely to benefit and may be harmed by hormonal therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate specific antigen-only recurrence is the most common form of advanced prostate cancer. Optimal salvage treatments and timing of these treatments remain controversial.

Tamoxifen as Prophylaxis for Prevention of Gynaecomastia and Breast Pain Associated with Bicalutamide 150mg Monotherapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Dose–Response Study

OBJECTIVE

To define the optimum tamoxifen dose for reducing bicalutamide (CASODEX) 150 mg monotherapy-induced breast events (ie, gynaecomastia or breast pain or both) without compromising disease control.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial in which 282 patients with prostate cancer were randomised to receive bicalutamide 150 mg/d plus either daily tamoxifen (1, 2.5, 5, 10, or 20mg) or placebo for 12 mo, followed by 12 mo of treatment with bicalutamide only. Primary end points were incidence of breast events and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) inhibition and were analysed at 6 mo (the primary analysis) and also at 12 and 24 mo.

RESULTS

At 6 and 12 mo, tamoxifen decreased the incidence of breast events in a dose-dependent manner, with breast events observed in 86.2%, 60.0%, 55.3%, 23.5%, and 8.8% of patients receiving tamoxifen 1, 2.5, 5, 10, and 20 mg, respectively, compared with 96.7% of patients receiving placebo at 6 mo. At 24 mo (ie, after 12 mo of bicalutamide monotherapy), a high incidence of breast events was seen in all groups. There was no evidence of a negative effect on PSA inhibition at any assessment. Other nonbreast adverse effects were similar across groups, except for an increase in hot flushes with tamoxifen doses > or =5 mg.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that prophylactic tamoxifen 20 mg/d is an effective dose for reduction of bicalutamide-induced breast events and does not appear to affect disease control based on PSA suppression.

[Management of gynecomastia induced by bicalutamide]

Adjuvant bicalutamide monotherapy after radical prostatectomy improves the overall survival in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. The main adverse event of the nonsteroidal antiandrogen is the development of gynecomastia against which prophylactic breast irradiation can be administered. Therapeutic local radiotherapy using a very small number of fractions is a well-tolerated management option. Symptom improvement is observed in about half of the patients. Radiotherapy-related adverse effects are often mild (erythema, skin irritation) and transient. Tamoxifen has been also shown to be effective in prevention and treatment of gynecomastia induced by adjuvant therapy by bicalutamide in two-third of patients. Long-term safety of this prophylactic and therapeutic approach needs to be investigated through appropriate trials. Further evaluation of the optimal dose and duration of treatment with tamoxifen in this setting is required.

What implications do the tolerability profiles of antiandrogens and other commonly used prostate cancer treatments have on patient care?

PURPOSE

Increased awareness of prostate cancer has led to earlier initiation of therapy, and the potential for a longer duration of treatment has led to a stronger emphasis on tolerability. Historically, the mainstay of treatment of hormone-sensitive prostate cancer has been castration-based therapy, but antiandrogens are now emerging as an alternative. This article reviews the tolerability profiles of antiandrogens as well as other existing treatments for prostate cancer and examines their implications on patient care.

METHODS

A search of online literature databases was conducted to identify recent articles and studies (1990-2006) that have reported adverse effects associated with treatment approaches for men with prostate cancer. The therapies reviewed here include castration, antiandrogens, a combination of castration and antiandrogens (CAB), estrogens, and chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Castration offers significant clinical benefits when used as monotherapy or as adjuvant therapy; however, it is associated with loss of bone mineral density, and a reduction in physical activity and sexual function, which can have a negative impact on quality of life. Detrimental effects on muscle mass, fat deposition, and cognitive function have also been reported. Recent data suggest that the non-steroidal antiandrogen, bicalutamide, confers a significant overall survival benefit when used as adjuvant to radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced disease. However, the survival data for bicalutamide are not as extensive as those available for LHRH agonists. Although they do not appear to have a significant impact on sexual and physical activity, non-steroidal antiandrogens are frequently associated with gynecomastia and breast pain, and some are associated with diarrhea. Estrogens have been used in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer; however, cardiovascular toxicity has restricted their use. In patients whose prostate cancer has become hormone-refractory, treatment options include chemotherapeutic agents, such as docetaxel and mitoxantrone.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important for physicians to discuss the adverse effects of all the available treatment options with patients so that a therapy can be selected to meet their expectations in terms of overall survival and tolerability.

The addition of bicalutamide 150 mg to radiotherapy significantly improves overall survival in men with locally advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Castration therapy adjuvant to radiotherapy can significantly improve overall survival compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Although many of the adverse effects of castration therapy are manageable, they can have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Here we evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the non-castration-based therapy bicalutamide ('Casodex') 150 mg adjuvant to radiotherapy in patients with T1-4, M0, any n prostate cancer.

METHODS

The subset of patients within the early prostate cancer (EPC) program who received radiotherapy with curative intent (n = 1,370) were included in the analysis. These patients were randomized to receive oral bicalutamide 150 mg once daily (n = 699) or placebo (n = 671).

RESULTS

The median follow-up for patients included in this analysis was 7.2 years. In patients with locally advanced disease (n = 305), bicalutamide adjuvant to radiotherapy significantly improved: progression-free survival (PFS), reducing the risk of objective progression by 44% compared with radiotherapy alone [hazard ratio (HR) 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40, 0.78; P < 0.001). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-PFS, reducing the risk of PSA progression by 59% compared with radiotherapy alone (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.30, 0.55; P < 0.001). Overall survival, reducing the risk of death by 35% compared with radiotherapy alone (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.44, 0.95; P = 0.03). This significant overall survival benefit for bicalutamide was driven by a lower risk of prostate cancer-related deaths (16.1 vs 24.3%, respectively). There was no significant difference in PFS or overall survival in patients with localized disease (n = 1,065).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with locally advanced disease, bicalutamide 150 mg adjuvant to radiotherapy demonstrates significant clinical benefits in terms of overall survival, PFS and PSA-PFS compared with radiotherapy alone. The overall survival benefit in these patients is consistent with prior studies evaluating castration-based therapies adjuvant to radiotherapy (Bolla et al. in Lancet 360:103-108, 2002; Pilepich et al. in Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61:1285-1290, 2005). In addition, the clinical benefit of bicalutamide 150 mg in locally advanced patients, but not in those with localized disease, is consistent with the overall results from the EPC program (McLeod et al. BJU Int 97:247-254, 2006). Given the quality-of-life advantages of bicalutamide relative to castration, bicalutamide 150 mg adjuvant to radiotherapy is an attractive alternative for men with locally advanced prostate cancer.

Bicalutamide 150mg

Bicalutamide (Casodex) is a competitive androgen receptor antagonist that inactivates androgen-regulated prostate cell growth and function, leading to cell apoptosis and inhibition of prostate cancer growth. It is administered orally as a once-daily dose. In the EU and a number of other countries, bicalutamide 150 mg/day is approved in men with locally advanced nonmetastatic prostate cancer as immediate therapy either as an adjuvant to active treatment or as monotherapy as an alternative to surgical or medical castration. Combined analysis of the three trials that comprise the bicalutamide Early Prostate Cancer (EPC) programme showed that bicalutamide administered in conjunction with standard care in men with locally advanced prostate cancer offers disease-free survival benefits over standard care alone and is generally well tolerated. Overall survival was improved to a greater extent in the subgroup of patients who received bicalutamide plus radiation therapy compared with radiation therapy alone. Men with localised prostate cancer do not benefit from the addition of bicalutamide to standard care. Combined analysis of two other studies in men with locally advanced prostate cancer show that bicalutamide monotherapy offers better tolerability and higher health-related quality-of-life (HR-QOL) scores for sexual interest and physical capacity compared with surgical or medical castration, while achieving disease-free and overall survival durations that were not significantly different. Thus, when treatment options are being evaluated, bicalutamide as adjuvant therapy or monotherapy should be considered as an alternative to other available hormonal therapies in men with locally advanced prostate cancer, especially in those who wish to maintain an active lifestyle.