Optimizing outcomes and quality of life in the hormonal treatment of prostate cancer

RETRACTED: Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l’AFU – Actualisation 2018–2020 : cancer de la prostate French ccAFU guidelines – Update 2018–2020: Prostate cancer

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). Cet article est retiré de la publication à la demande des auteurs car ils ont apporté des modifications significatives sur des points scientifiques après la publication de la première version des recommandations. Le nouvel article est disponible à cette adresse: DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007. C’est cette nouvelle version qui doit être utilisée pour citer l’article. This article has been retracted at the request of the authors, as it is not based on the definitive version of the text because some scientific data has been corrected since the first issue was published. The replacement has been published at the DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.007. That newer version of the text should be used when citing the article.

[CCAFU french national guidelines 2016-2018 on prostate cancer]

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the guidelines national committee CCAFU was to propose updated french guidelines for localized and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A Medline search was achieved between 2013 and 2016, as regards diagnosis, options of treatment and follow-up of PCa, to evaluate different references with levels of evidence.

RESULTS

Epidemiology, classification, staging systems, diagnostic evaluation are reported. Disease management options are detailed. Recommandations are reported according to the different clinical situations. Active surveillance is a major option in low risk PCa. Radical prostatectomy remains a standard of care of localized PCa. The three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy is the technical standard. A dose of > 74Gy is recommended. Moderate hypofractionation provides short-term biochemical control comparable to conventional fractionation. In case of intermediate risk PCa, radiotherapy can be combined with short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In case of high risk disease, long-term ADT remains the standard of care. ADT is the backbone therapy of metastatic disease. In men with metastases at first presentation, upfront chemotherapy combined with ADT should be considered as a new standard. In case of metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC), new hormonal treatments and chemotherapy provide a better control of tumor progression and increase survival.

CONCLUSIONS

These updated french guidelines will contribute to increase the level of urological care for the diagnosis and treatment for prostate cancer. © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Cognitive impairment among prostate cancer patients: An overview of reviews

To identify and clarify definitions and methods of measuring cancer-related cognitive impairment among prostate cancer patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and to assess the incidence and prevalence of cognitive impairment. A systematic review of Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to December 2015 was undertaken to identify English-language reviews. A total of 28 reviews were identified describing 20 primary studies. There were no studies of incidence. Reported prevalence rates varied between 10% and 69%. Cognitive domains impaired by ADT included: verbal memory, visuospatial ability and executive functions. Cognitive impairment was infrequently defined and four definitions were reported. A variety of measures and methods were used to assess cognitive function including neuropsychological tests, self-report measures and clinical assessments. The finding that, often, one measure was used to assess more than one aspect of cognition is likely to have contributed to imprecise estimates. There is a need to agree a definition of cognitive impairment in the clinical epidemiology of cancer and to standardise the selection of measures in order to aid accurate assessment and fair comparisons across studies regarding the prevalence of cognitive impairment among prostate cancer patients.

Androgen deprivation increases the risk of fracture in prostate cancer patients: a population-based study in Chinese patients

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) or orchiectomy is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis or fracture. In this nationwide database analysis, we found that ADT or orchiectomy increased the risk of fracture in Chinese patients with prostate cancer. However, the magnitude of increase is seemingly not as large as that in Western populations.

INTRODUCTION

ADT using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists or orchiectomy is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis or fracture. To investigate the effects of ADT duration or orchiectomy on any type of fracture in Asian patients with prostate cancer, we conducted this retrospective analysis using a nationwide database in Taiwan.

METHODS

We included 17,359 subjects who were newly diagnosed with prostate cancer between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2007. The risk of first fracture was our primary endpoint.

RESULTS

The rates of fracture from 12 months after prostate cancer diagnosis until the last follow-up date were 8.7 % for all patients, 7.1 % for patients who did not receive ADT or orchiectomy, 9.8 % for patients who received ADT, and 14.4 % for patients who received orchiectomy with or without ADT (P < 0.0001). In a Cox proportional hazard analysis, the relative risk of fracture increased steadily with the number of doses of GnRH agonists received during the first year after cancer diagnosis and with dose density. A significant hazard ratio was observed in patients who received at least nine doses within 1 year after diagnosis and in those whose dose density exceeded two doses per year. Age greater than or equal to 65 years was associated with a significantly lower risk of fracture.

CONCLUSION

ADT or orchiectomy increases the risk of fracture in Chinese patients with prostate cancer. However, the magnitude of this increase is seemingly not as large as that in Western populations.

Long Term Progression-Free Survival in a Patient with Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer under Low Dose Intermittent Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Bicalutamide Only

Androgen deprivation is a common treatment option in patients with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. No case of long term treatment with an intermittent approach with only low dose bicalutamide (50 mg daily) has been described yet. We report a 60-year-old patient, initially presenting with a PSA elevation of 19.2 ng/mL in 1996. After diagnosis of well to moderately differentiated prostate cancer by transrectal biopsy, the patient underwent an open radical prostatectomy. Final diagnosis was adenocarcinoma of the prostate, classified as pT3a, pR1, pV0, and pL1. Adjuvant intermittent androgen deprivation therapy with flutamide 250 mg was applied, which was changed to bicalutamide 50 mg once daily when it became available in 2001. Six on-phases were performed and PSA values never exceeded 20 ng/mL. The patient did not experience any serious side effects. To date, there are no clinical or radiological signs of progression. Current PSA value is 3.5 ng/mL.

Adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: prevention and management

The prostate is an androgen-dependent organ. The increase, growth, homeostasis, and function of the prostate largely depend upon the intraprostatic and serum concentrations of androgens. Therefore, androgens are essential for the physiologic growth of prostatic epithelium. Prostate cancer, the second leading cause of death for men, is also androgen dependent, and androgen suppression is the mainstay of treatment for advanced and metastatic disease. In the state of metastatic disease, androgen suppression is a palliative treatment leading to a median progression-free survival of 18–20 months and an overall survival of 24–36 months. Theoretically, the majority of patients will develop hormone-refractory disease provided that they will not die from other causes. Although androgen suppression therapy may be associated with significant and sometimes durable responses, it is not considered a cure, and its potential efficacy is further limited by an array of significant and bothersome adverse effects caused by the suppression of androgens. These effects have potentially significant consequences on a variety of parameters of everyday living and may further decrease health-related quality of life. This review focuses on the aetiology of these adverse effects and provides information on their prevention and management.

The side effects of hormonal therapy at the patients with prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is one of most frequent malignant tumours at men. The androgen-deprivation therapy is the part of cancer treatment. It could be used both in the early stage of prostate cancer and in the bone metastates. From this reason the antiandrogen drugs waste systematically grows. Unfortunately androgen-deprivation therapy has numerous side effects such as: the inferior quality of live, sexual disturbances, the fatigue, the anaemia, the bone mineral density loss and the increase of the risk of breaks the bone, the increase of body mass, insulinresistance, hypercholesterolemia, the increase risk of cardiac disorders. The aim of this article is the introduction of the reader with possibly complications androgen-deprivation therapy and with possibilities in diagnosis and treatment.

Do patient-reported androgen-deprivation therapy side effects predict anxiety and depression among prostate cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy? Implications for psychosocial therapy interventions

Antiandrogen therapy (AAT) is a common adjunct treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) patients and has shown significant benefits to long-term outcomes from radiation or surgery. Although AAT has some adverse side effects and data from breast cancer patients indicate that such side effects from hormonal therapies may contribute to anxiety and depression and may also hinder AAT treatment compliance, this issue has not been investigated within a sample of PCa patients. This study explores the incidence of AAT side effects in a sample of PCa patients, the links between those side effects and anxiety and depression, the possible ways in which these factors may contribute to AAT treatment noncompliance in PCa patients, and how psychosocial treatments might be developed to attend to this issue. 147 PCa patients completed questionnaires on demographic factors, treatment compliance, AAT side effects, anxiety and depression. About 18% of the sample reported AAT side effects, and there was a significant association between the presence of side effects and elevated anxiety and depression scores. Increased frequency of side effects was significantly associated with elevated anxiety, but not depression. The most powerful relationship between AAT side effects and anxiety-depression was for the subfactors of (1) Fatigue, Pain and Discomfort, and (2) Psychological Agitation and Pessimism. Although fatigue, pain, and discomfort may be outcomes of the hormonal treatment itself, psychological agitation and pessimism represent a discrete psychological pathway between AAT side effects and anxiety and depression and (potentially) treatment noncompliance. Methods of addressing patients' loss of optimism in their treatment outcomes are discussed.

Trends in the treatment of localized prostate cancer using supplemented cancer registry data

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an analysis of localized prostate cancer treatment in the USA between 1998 and 2002.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Results from the National Cancer Institute's Patterns of Care study from 10 regional cancer registries in 1998 and 14 registries in 2002 were compared using univariate and multivariate statistical methods.

RESULTS

Patients with localized prostate cancer in 2002 were younger, had lower prostate-specific antigen values, and higher Gleason scores compared with those diagnosed in 1998. Little change occurred in age-adjusted percentages of men who were treated with a radical prostatectomy (45-46%) or by external beam radiation (EBRT) alone (19-20%). The proportion receiving brachytherapy (BT), alone or with EBRT, increased from 14.9 to 17.7%, while the proportion receiving watchful waiting declined from 12.6 to 9.0%. Younger African-American men with intermediate/high-risk disease were less likely to receive any type of aggressive therapy in comparison with Non-Hispanic White men. Over 70% of men who were ≥ 75 years of age, with low-risk disease, were treated with EBRT or BT.

CONCLUSIONS

Older men with low-risk disease might be overtreated with aggressive therapy, while younger intermediate/high-risk African-American men appear less likely to receive indicated aggressive therapy.

Degarelix for prostate cancer

The growth of prostate cancer cells is hormone dependent in the majority of patients with the disease. Lowering testosterone either surgically or medically (usually with a gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist) is the standard of care in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Degarelix is a new GnRH antagonist for the treatment of patients with prostate cancer. In contrast to GnRH agonists, the development of GnRH antagonists was hindered for a long time owing to histamine-releasing activity and lack of potency and water solubility. Recently, however, degarelix has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. This review summarizes the preclinical and clinical data available for degarelix and describes its potential role in the market of prostate cancer therapeutics.

Degarelix and its therapeutic potential in the treatment of prostate cancer

Degarelix is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the treatment of patients with prostate cancer in whom hormonal therapy is indicated. Two phase II trials and one phase III have been published as full papers in the literature. In the dose-finding phase II studies an initial dose of 240 mg degarelix sc followed by a monthly injection of 80 mg or 160 mg degarelix sc was sufficient to keep testosterone levels < or = 0.5 ng/ml. In a phase III trial it was demonstrated that degarelix was not inferior (in terms of testosterone suppression and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] decline) compared to standard hormonal therapy, ie, a GnRH agonist such as leuprolide. In fact, degarelix was associated with a faster testosterone suppression and PSA decline than leuprolide. Adverse events such as injection site reactions (40% vs <1%) and chills (4% vs 0%) were more commonly associated with degarelix. Also, degarelix is currently only available as one-month depot whereas in daily practice three-month depots (of GnRH agonists) are the preferred regimen. However, degarelix was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

Diagnostic evaluation of PSA recurrence and review of hormonal management after radical prostatectomy

The aim of this review is to provide a discussion of the diagnostic evaluation of biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy (RP) and an overview of the postoperative hormonal treatment (HT) options. As no randomized trials in the clinical setting of postoperative prostate-specific antigen recurrence have been reported, there is no conclusive evidence that HT after RP will prolong survival or reduce morbidity. Non-traditional approaches, such as intermittent androgen deprivation, non-steroidal anti-androgens and combination of finasteride and non-steroidal anti-androgen, are investigated and may be acceptable options. Combinations of HT with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy for treatment of recurrent prostate cancer are under study.

Management of painful bone metastases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines recent data on the pathophysiology and mechanisms of bone pain; it highlights the use of multiple and interdisciplinary treatments rather than sole use of traditional analgesics.

RECENT FINDINGS

Bone pain has been shown to have a unique pathophysiology. Recent experimental (animal) models have revealed that, parallel to increased bone destruction, ipsilateral spinal cord segments that receive primary input from the cancerous femur exhibit several notable neurochemical changes. These mandate the use of opioid doses sufficient to inhibit the observed nociceptive behaviours; these doses are greater than those required to alleviate pain behaviours of comparable magnitude generated by inflammatory pain. Several substances have been tested in this animal model.

SUMMARY

According to new preclinical data, treatment of bone cancer pain requires multidisciplinary therapies such as radiotherapy applied to the painful area along with systemic treatment (hormone therapy or chemotherapy) and supportive care (analgesic therapy and bisphosphonates). In some selected cases use of radioisotopes and other noninvasive or minimally invasive techniques may be useful in the management of metastatic bone pain. The treatment should be individualized according to the patient's clinical condition, life expectancy, and quality of life.

Contemporary use of hormonal therapy in prostate cancer: managing complications and addressing quality-of-life issues

While both short- and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are effective for treating prostate cancer, with the clinical benefits patients can often have significant side-effects. It is important that these complications are recognized and managed appropriately so that adverse effects on the patient's quality of life (QoL) are minimized. The incidence of deaths from prostate cancer has decreased over the last decade, probably as a result of various factors including improved screening and diagnosis, improved treatments, and better risk assessment to help guide therapy. A meta-analysis of prostate cancer trials comparing the use of early vs late hormonal therapy found that 10-year overall survival increased by up to 20% between 1990 and 2000, and this was attributed to the earlier use of hormone therapy (HT) in these patients. Data from the USA Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urological Research Endeavor database also suggest a significant decrease in risk in the last two decades in the USA, with more patients being identified with low-risk disease at diagnosis. In addition, there has been an increase in recent years in the use of HT at all stages of prostate cancer. The extensive use of ADT has raised concerns about potential adverse effects. ADT might be associated with a range of adverse effects that vary in their degree of morbidity and effect on the patient's QoL. They include hot flashes, osteoporosis, loss of libido or impotence, and psychological effects, e.g. depression, memory difficulties or emotional lability. Effective strategies are available for managing the major side-effects of HT, but to many patients these unwanted effects are often less important than the benefits of treatment. An investigation of health-related QoL found that men with prostate cancer receiving ADT had a poorer QoL than those not receiving ADT, but the difference was less pronounced after controlling for comorbidities. Many new therapies are currently under investigation which aim to maximize the clinical effects of ADT while reducing the adverse effects.

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists in the treatment of prostate cancer: A review of their discovery, development, and place in therapy

BACKGROUND

Early identification of the biological activity of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) paved the way for the synthesis of analogues with enhanced potency and biological properties. Early testing in animal models and humans provided insight into the potential clinical uses of these substances, and, within 10 years, LHRH-agonist therapy had become available for use in patients with advanced prostate cancer (PC). Over time, the role of LHRH-agonist therapy has expanded to include use as part of multimodal treatment regimens throughout the course of the disease.

OBJECTIVES

This article reviews the discovery and development of LHRH agonists and summarizes the clinical evidence for their efficacy in PC.

METHODS

Relevant clinical studies were identified through searches of the English-language literature indexed on MEDLINE through May 2006. The main search terms were prostate cancer and LHRH agonist.

RESULTS

Results of the initial therapeutic trials of sustained-release depot formulations of LHRH agonists in patients with PC were reported in the mid-1980s, indicating that these agents were effective and well tolerated in improving clinical symptoms and producing medical castration. Longer-term studies and subsequent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials in patients with advanced PC found no significant differences in overall survival when single-therapy androgen suppression was achieved through the use of LHRH-agonist therapy or orchiectomy. Randomized trials have reported significant improvements in disease-free and overall survival in patients with locally advanced or high-grade PC treated with LHRH agonists in addition to radiotherapy. Several prospective randomized trials have reported decreases in rates of positive surgical margins with short-term (6 weeks to 4 months) neoadjuvant LHRH-agonist therapy in patients with stage T1 to T3a PC undergoing prostatectomy. Definitive comparisons of immediate and delayed treatment in patients with biochemical relapse have not been reported. However, the results of several studies suggest that immediate LHRH-agonist therapy (or orchiectomy) may improve the course of disease progression and survival. The risks of long-term treatment (eg, osteoporosis; fracture; anabolic loss of muscle mass, with a tendency toward weight gain) must be considered carefully in patients who are likely to receive chronic LHRH-agonist therapy. Intermittent schedules have been developed to reduce the adverse effects associated with LHRH-agonist therapy; some reports support sparing effects on bone and muscle mass and relative improvements in toxicities during off-therapy periods, whereas others have documented continuing decreases in bone mineral density (BMD), with the rate of bone loss highest during the early cycles of therapy. Bisphosphonate therapy has been shown to increase BMD in patients with PC and may therefore be beneficial when overt symptoms of osteopenia or osteoporosis are present.

CONCLUSIONS

LHRH-agonist therapy has been the mainstay of treatment for advanced PC for >20 years. Clinical evidence supports expanding use of these agents at an earlier stage of disease and as part of multimodal regimens that include radiotherapy. There is a need for further study of the efficacy of adjuvant LHRH-agonist therapy along with prostatectomy, in patients with biochemical failure, in intermittent regimens, and in conjunction with cytotoxic therapies in late-stage disease.