Prior Estrogen Therapy as a Predictor of Response to Subsequent Estramustine-Based Chemotherapy in Patients with Androgen-Independent Prostate Cancer

The past and present of prostate cancer and its treatment and diagnostics: A historical review

The prognosis of local prostate cancer has improved drastically during the past 60 years. Similarly, the prognosis in metastatic stage is constantly improving due to a number of new pharmaceuticals introduced over the past 10 years. Previously, only palliative treatments were available for prostate cancer, but today, there are multiple options for treatment with curative intent: robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, stereotactic radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Additionally, life-prolonging chemotherapeutic and androgen-suppressive treatments, as well as diagnostic imaging and staging, have improved considerably. This review summarizes the history of the treatment and diagnostics of prostate cancer, with a focus on the past 60 years. The aim was to provide a concise and easy-to-read introduction on the matter for all people that work with prostate cancer, as well as for patients. The literature was thoroughly examined covering the period from the earliest traceable records to the latest state-of-the-art studies.

Sorafenib sensitizes (-)-gossypol-induced growth suppression in androgen-independent prostate cancer cells via Mcl-1 inhibition and Bak activation

The natural BH3-mimetic (-)-gossypol shows promising efficacy in ongoing phase II/III clinical trials for human prostate cancer. Here, we show for the first time, that treatment with (-)-gossypol and multikinase inhibitor sorafenib synergistically suppresses the growth of androgen-independent prostate cancer cells (AI-PC) in vitro and in vivo. Our data suggest that sorafenib attenuates (-)-gossypol-induced Mcl-1 upregulation in AI-PCs. In this way, it serves as a potent chemosensitizer to affect cell death. Interestingly, (-)-gossypol and sorafenib induce cell death via two distinct pathways among different AI-PCs; DU145 cells via apoptosis and PC-3 via autophagy. The appointed death pathway may depend on the level of proapoptotic protein Bak, although the level of antiapoptotic protein Bcl-2 plays some role in it. DU145 cells with high Bak level prefer apoptosis induction, whereas PC-3 cells with low Bak prefer the induction of autophagy. Furthermore, inhibiting nondominant death pathways, that is, autophagy in DU145 and apoptosis in PC-3, enhances cell killing by (-)-gossypol/sorafenib combination therapy. Ultimately, our data expose a new action for sorafenib as an enhancer of (-)-gossypol-induced cell growth suppression and reveal a novel cell death mode by Bak activation manners in AI-PCs. These new insights may facilitate the rational design of clinical trials by selecting patients most likely to benefit from the Bcl-2-targeted molecular therapy.

Phase II trial of estramustine phosphate and oral etoposide in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

There is a need for active agents with a better safety profile than docetaxel, yet good activity, for patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). We carried out a phase II trial to determine the activity and safety of estramustine plus oral etoposide in HRPC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were given estramustine (280 mg twice daily) and etoposide (100 mg/day, days 1-21) in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end points were overall response rate and safety, as determined by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and lesion assessment.

RESULTS

From November 2001 to February 2007, 75 patients were enrolled. All patients were assessable for safety; 17 (22.6%) had grade 3/4 toxicity. PSA response was assessable in 69, 14 of whom had a >50% reduction in PSA. Of 10 patients with one or more measurable lesions, two (20%) had partial response and two (20%) disease stabilization. Overall, median time to progression was 4.4 months (range 1 week-43 months); median survival was 23 months (range 3 weeks-64+ months).

CONCLUSIONS

Estramustine plus etoposide is active and has a manageable safety profile in patients with HRPC. In asymptomatic patients with nonaggressive disease this combination could be useful to delay the start of more demanding treatments.