Improved survival in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy and goserelin

BACKGROUND

We conducted a randomized, prospective trial comparing external irradiation with external irradiation plus goserelin (an agonist analogue of gonadotropin-releasing hormone that reduces testosterone secretion) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.

METHODS

From 1987 to 1995, 415 patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy plus immediate treatment with goserelin. The patients had a median age of 71 years (range, 51 to 80). Patients in both groups received 50 Gy of radiation to the pelvis over a period of five weeks and an additional 20 Gy over an additional two weeks as a prostatic boost. Patients in the combined-treatment group received 3.6 mg of goserelin (Zoladex) subcutaneously every four weeks starting on the first day of irradiation and continuing for three years; those patients also received cyproterone acetate (150 mg orally per day) during the first month of treatment to inhibit the transient rise in testosterone associated with the administration of goserelin.

RESULTS

Data were available for analysis on 401 patients. The median follow-up was 45 months. Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at five years were 79 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 72 to 86 percent) in the combined-treatment group and 62 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 52 to 72 percent) in the radiotherapy group (P=0.001). The proportion of surviving patients who were free of disease at five years was 85 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 78 to 92 percent) in the combined-treatment group and 48 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 38 to 58 percent) in the radiotherapy group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant treatment with goserelin, when started simultaneously with external irradiation, improves local control and survival in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.

Radiotherapy and short-term androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

It is not known whether short-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) before and during radiotherapy improves cancer control and overall survival among patients with early, localized prostate adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

From 1994 through 2001, we randomly assigned 1979 eligible patients with stage T1b, T1c, T2a, or T2b prostate adenocarcinoma and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 20 ng per milliliter or less to radiotherapy alone (992 patients) or radiotherapy with 4 months of total androgen suppression starting 2 months before radiotherapy (radiotherapy plus short-term ADT, 987 patients). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included disease-specific mortality, distant metastases, biochemical failure (an increasing level of PSA), and the rate of positive findings on repeat prostate biopsy at 2 years.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 9.1 years. The 10-year rate of overall survival was 62% among patients receiving radiotherapy plus short-term ADT (the combined-therapy group), as compared with 57% among patients receiving radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio for death with radiotherapy alone, 1.17; P=0.03). The addition of short-term ADT was associated with a decrease in the 10-year disease-specific mortality from 8% to 4% (hazard ratio for radiotherapy alone, 1.87; P=0.001). Biochemical failure, distant metastases, and the rate of positive findings on repeat prostate biopsy at 2 years were significantly improved with radiotherapy plus short-term ADT. Acute and late radiation-induced toxic effects were similar in the two groups. The incidence of grade 3 or higher hormone-related toxic effects was less than 5%. Reanalysis according to risk showed reductions in overall and disease-specific mortality primarily among intermediate-risk patients, with no significant reductions among low-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with stage T1b, T1c, T2a, or T2b prostate adenocarcinoma and a PSA level of 20 ng per milliliter or less, the use of short-term ADT for 4 months before and during radiotherapy was associated with significantly decreased disease-specific mortality and increased overall survival. According to post hoc risk analysis, the benefit was mainly seen in intermediate-risk, but not low-risk, men. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; RTOG 94-08 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002597.).

Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Castration resistance occurs in most patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer who are receiving androgen-deprivation therapy. Replacing androgens before progression of the disease is hypothesized to prolong androgen dependence.

METHODS

Men with newly diagnosed, metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, a performance status of 0 to 2, and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 5 ng per milliliter or higher received a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue and an antiandrogen agent for 7 months. We then randomly assigned patients in whom the PSA level fell to 4 ng per milliliter or lower to continuous or intermittent androgen deprivation, with patients stratified according to prior or no prior hormonal therapy, performance status, and extent of disease (minimal or extensive). The coprimary objectives were to assess whether intermittent therapy was noninferior to continuous therapy with respect to survival, with a one-sided test with an upper boundary of the hazard ratio of 1.20, and whether quality of life differed between the groups 3 months after randomization.

RESULTS

A total of 3040 patients were enrolled, of whom 1535 were included in the analysis: 765 randomly assigned to continuous androgen deprivation and 770 assigned to intermittent androgen deprivation. The median follow-up period was 9.8 years. Median survival was 5.8 years in the continuous-therapy group and 5.1 years in the intermittent-therapy group (hazard ratio for death with intermittent therapy, 1.10; 90% confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.23). Intermittent therapy was associated with better erectile function and mental health (P<0.001 and P=0.003, respectively) at month 3 but not thereafter. There were no significant differences between the groups in the number of treatment-related high-grade adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings were statistically inconclusive. In patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, the confidence interval for survival exceeded the upper boundary for noninferiority, suggesting that we cannot rule out a 20% greater risk of death with intermittent therapy than with continuous therapy, but too few events occurred to rule out significant inferiority of intermittent therapy. Intermittent therapy resulted in small improvements in quality of life. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002651.).

Goserelin for ovarian protection during breast-cancer adjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Ovarian failure is a common toxic effect of chemotherapy. Studies of the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to protect ovarian function have shown mixed results and lack data on pregnancy outcomes.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 257 premenopausal women with operable hormone-receptor-negative breast cancer to receive standard chemotherapy with the GnRH agonist goserelin (goserelin group) or standard chemotherapy without goserelin (chemotherapy-alone group). The primary study end point was the rate of ovarian failure at 2 years, with ovarian failure defined as the absence of menses in the preceding 6 months and levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in the postmenopausal range. Rates were compared with the use of conditional logistic regression. Secondary end points included pregnancy outcomes and disease-free and overall survival.

RESULTS

At baseline, 218 patients were eligible and could be evaluated. Among 135 with complete primary end-point data, the ovarian failure rate was 8% in the goserelin group and 22% in the chemotherapy-alone group (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.97; two-sided P=0.04). Owing to missing primary end-point data, sensitivity analyses were performed, and the results were consistent with the main findings. Missing data did not differ according to treatment group or according to the stratification factors of age and planned chemotherapy regimen. Among the 218 patients who could be evaluated, pregnancy occurred in more women in the goserelin group than in the chemotherapy-alone group (21% vs. 11%, P=0.03); women in the goserelin group also had improved disease-free survival (P=0.04) and overall survival (P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although missing data weaken interpretation of the findings, administration of goserelin with chemotherapy appeared to protect against ovarian failure, reducing the risk of early menopause and improving prospects for fertility. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; POEMS/S0230 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00068601.).

Goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association Study

PURPOSE

Current adjuvant therapies have improved survival for premenopausal patients with breast cancer but may have short-term toxic effects and long-term effects associated with premature menopause.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days for 2 years; n = 817) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy (six 28-day cycles; n = 823) for adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer.

RESULTS

Analysis was performed when 684 events had been achieved, and the median follow-up was 6 years. A significant interaction between treatment and estrogen receptor (ER) status was found (P =.0016). In ER-positive patients (approximately 74%), goserelin was equivalent to CMF for disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.20). In ER-negative patients, goserelin was inferior to CMF for DFS (HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.44). Amenorrhea occurred in more than 95% of goserelin patients by 6 months versus 58.6% of CMF patients. Menses returned in most goserelin patients after therapy stopped, whereas amenorrhea was generally permanent in CMF patients (22.6% v 76.9% amenorrheic at 3 years). Chemotherapy-related side effects such as nausea/vomiting, alopecia, and infection were higher with CMF than with goserelin during CMF treatment. Side effects related to estrogen suppression were initially higher with goserelin, but when goserelin treatment stopped, reduced to a level below that observed in the CMF group.

CONCLUSION

Goserelin offers an effective, well-tolerated alternative to CMF in premenopausal patients with ER-positive and node-positive early breast cancer.

Zoledronic acid prevents cancer treatment-induced bone loss in premenopausal women receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone-responsive breast cancer: a report from the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group

PURPOSE

Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer can be associated with decreased bone mineral density (BMD) that may lead to skeletal morbidity. This study examined whether zoledronic acid can prevent bone loss associated with adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study is a randomized, open-label, phase III, four-arm trial comparing tamoxifen (20 mg/d orally) and goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days subcutaneously) +/- zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 6 months) versus anastrozole (1 mg/d orally) and goserelin +/- zoledronic acid for 3 years in premenopausal women with hormone-responsive breast cancer. In a BMD subprotocol at three trial centers, patients underwent serial BMD measurements at 0, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months.

RESULTS

Four hundred one patients were included in the BMD subprotocol. Endocrine treatment without zoledronic acid led to significant (P < .001) overall bone loss after 3 years of treatment (BMD, -14.4% after 36 months; mean T score reduction, -1.4). Overall bone loss was significantly more severe in patients receiving anastrozole/goserelin (BMD, -17.3%; mean T score reduction, -2.6) compared with patients receiving tamoxifen/goserelin (BMD, -11.6%; mean T score reduction, -1.1). In contrast, BMD remained stable in zoledronic acid-treated patients (P < .0001 compared with endocrine therapy alone). No interactions with age or other risk factors were noted.

CONCLUSION

Endocrine therapy caused significant bone loss that increased with treatment duration in premenopausal women with breast cancer. Zoledronic acid 4 mg every 6 months effectively inhibited bone loss. Regular BMD measurements and initiation of concomitant bisphosphonate therapy on evidence of bone loss should be considered for patients undergoing endocrine therapy.

Goserelin acetate and flutamide versus bilateral orchiectomy: a phase III EORTC trial (30853). EORTC GU Group and EORTC Data Center

Maximal androgen blockade (MAB), the eradication of the effects of adrenal androgens on prostate cancer cells after castration, has been used with differing success in the treatment of prostatic carcinoma. The aim of this randomized phase III study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of bilateral orchiectomy versus a combination of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRH-A) depot formulation, goserelin acetate (3.6 mg s.c. once every four weeks), and flutamide (250 mg three times daily), in patients with metastatic cancer. Treatment usually continued until disease progression (or for a minimum of three months). Efficacy was assessed by response, time to disease progression, and duration of survival. Clinical evaluations, standard laboratory tests, and imaging examinations were carried out regularly. A total of 327 patients were entered in this study. There was a difference in response only for prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) with a more frequent decrease of the serum values to normal in the serum in patients assigned to MAB treatment. The MAB treatment, however, proved significantly better for time to subjective progression, time to objective progression, time to first (subjective and objective) progression, and duration of survival. The most frequent side effects for both treatments included hot flushes and gynecomastia. In conclusion, significant time to progression and survival benefits are achieved by adding flutamide to an LHRH-A regimen, probably improving the quality of life of patients with metastatic cancer.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Goserelin Versus Either Modality Alone for Premenopausal Lymph Node-Negative Breast Cancer: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Although chemotherapy and ovarian function suppression are both effective adjuvant therapies for patients with early-stage breast cancer, little is known of the efficacy of their sequential combination. In an International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) randomized clinical trial (Trial VIII) for pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer, we compared sequential chemotherapy followed by the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist goserelin with each modality alone.

METHODS

From March 1990 through October 1999, 1063 patients stratified by estrogen receptor (ER) status and radiotherapy plan were randomly assigned to receive goserelin for 24 months (n = 346), six courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy (n = 360), or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin (CMF --> goserelin; n = 357). A fourth arm (no adjuvant treatment) with 46 patients was discontinued in 1992. Tumors were classified as ER-negative (30%), ER-positive (68%), or ER status unknown (3%). Twenty percent of patients were aged 39 years or younger. The median follow-up was 7 years. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Patients with ER-negative tumors achieved better disease-free survival if they received CMF (5-year DFS for CMF = 84%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 77% to 91%; 5-year DFS for CMF --> goserelin = 88%, 95% CI = 82% to 94%) than if they received goserelin alone (5-year DFS = 73%, 95% CI = 64% to 81%). By contrast, for patients with ER-positive disease, chemotherapy alone and goserelin alone provided similar outcomes (5-year DFS for both treatment groups = 81%, 95% CI = 76% to 87%), whereas sequential therapy (5-year DFS = 86%, 95% CI = 82% to 91%) provided a statistically nonsignificant improvement compared with either modality alone, primarily because of the results among younger women.

CONCLUSIONS

Premenopausal women with ER-negative (i.e., endocrine nonresponsive), lymph node-negative breast cancer should receive adjuvant chemotherapy. For patients with ER-positive (i.e., endocrine responsive) disease, the combination of chemotherapy with ovarian function suppression or other endocrine agents, and the use of endocrine therapy alone should be studied.

Altered cognitive function in men treated for prostate cancer with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogues and cyproterone acetate: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To report the first systematic investigation of the cognitive effects of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogues in male patients, as LHRH analogues have been associated with memory impairments in women using these drugs for gynaecological conditions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty-two men with extraprostatic prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive either continuous leuprorelin, goserelin (both LHRH analogues), cyproterone acetate (a steroidal antiandrogen) or close clinical monitoring. These patients underwent cognitive assessments at baseline and before starting treatment (77), and then 6 months later (65).

RESULTS

Compared with the baseline assessments, men receiving androgen suppression monotherapy performed worse in two of 12 tests of attention and memory; 24 of 50 men randomized to active treatment and assessed 6 months later had a clinically significant decline in one or more cognitive tests but not one patient randomized to close monitoring showed a decline in any test performance.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacological androgen suppression monotherapy for prostate cancer may be associated with impaired memory, attention and executive functions.

Fatigue in patients with prostate cancer receiving hormone therapy

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence, severity and correlates of fatigue in a convenience sample of outpatients with prostate cancer prior to and following 3-months treatment with first-line hormone therapy (cyproterone acetate and goserelin). 'Severe fatigue' in the patients (n=62) was defined as a score on the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) greater than the 95th percentile of a group of elderly volunteers without cancer. Subjects also completed other questionnaires about fatigue and about quality of life, anxiety/depression and personality. Subjects underwent a nutritional assessment, tests of voluntary muscle function and attention. The prevalence of 'severe fatigue' at baseline was 8/58 (14%). Median FSS scores increased significantly after 3 months treatment. On multivariate analysis psychological distress explained 28% of the variance in fatigue scores. Treatment was associated with a reduction in voluntary muscle function, loss of muscle bulk, a decline in virility and potency, an improvement in pain and a reduction in nausea/vomiting. Fatigue is an important but under-recognised side-effect of hormone therapy.

The effects of post-surgical administration of goserelin plus anastrozole compared to goserelin alone in patients with severe endometriosis: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Among patients using GnRH analogues for endometriosis it has been postulated that peripheral and inflammation-induced in-situ aromatization of adrenal androgens are probably the main reasons for the high rates of failure during follow-up. We hypothesized that in cases with premenopausal severe endometriosis, use of a combination of anastrozole and goserelin to achieve almost maximal endocrine blockade of estrogen synthesis after conservative surgery may increase the pain-free interval and reduce the recurrence rates as compared to goserelin alone.

METHODS

In a prospective randomized trial, we evaluated the efficacy of using either a combination of anastrozole and goserelin for 6 months or goserelin alone for 6 months after conservative surgery for severe endometriosis. The primary outcome measures were the symptom recurrence rates and the impact of treatment on endometriosis-related multidimensional score. The secondary outcome measures were the impact of allocated treatment regimens on menopausal quality of life and on lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD).

RESULTS

When we analyzed the Kaplan-Meier survival curves, we detected a statistically significant advantage of goserelin plus anastrozole as compared to goserelin only, in terms of the median time to detect symptom recurrence (>2.4 versus 1.7 months; log-rank test; P=0.0089). This statistically significant advantage occurred with a relative risk of 4.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-9.8]. Three cases out of 40 recurred in the goserelin plus anastrozole arm (7.5%), whereas we detected recurrences in 14 cases out of 40 cases in the goserelin-only arm (35%) during the follow-up period of 24 months. Based on these data, the interpretation of Kaplan-Meier curves indicates that at the end of follow-up, 54.7 versus 10.4%, respectively, of the patients were free of recurrence. The mean of the differences in terms of Deltabaseline-24 months post-medical therapy multidimensional score were statistically significant in favour of goserelin and anastrozole (9.2 +/- 2.1 versus 6.7 +/- 2.8; paired t-test; P<0.0001; 95% CI 1.5-4.0). We observed a statistically significant difference in suppression of estradiol concentrations and a significantly greater BMD loss at the end of treatment in the goserelin and anastrozole arm as compared to goserelin-only arm. However, this did not elicit deterioration in menopausal quality of life and the observed bone loss was not significant in terms of DeltaBMD between the groups at 2 years of treatment withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

Six months of treatment with anastrozole and goserelin as compared to goserelin alone increased the pain-free interval and decreased symptom recurrence rates in patients following surgery for severe endometriosis. Furthermore, menopausal quality of life and BMD at 2 years after medical therapy remained unaffected.

Risk of clinical fractures after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We assessed the relationship between GnRH agonists and the risk of clinical fractures in men with prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a database of medical claims from 16 large American companies we identified a study group of 3,779 men with prostate cancer who received treatment with a GnRH agonist and a control group of 8,341 with prostate cancer who were not treated with a GnRH agonist. Men with 1 or more medical claims for bone metastases were excluded. The rates of any clinical fracture, hip fracture and vertebral fracture were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The rate of any fracture was 7.91/100 vs 6.55/100 person-years at risk in men who received vs did not receive a GnRH agonist (relative risk 1.21, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.34). The rates of hip fracture (relative risk 1.76, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.33) and vertebral fracture (relative risk 1.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.48) were also higher in men who received a GnRH agonist. GnRH agonist treatment was independently associated with fracture risk on multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

GnRH agonists increase the risk of clinical fracture in men with prostate cancer.

Bone loss following hypogonadism in men with prostate cancer treated with GnRH analogs

It is known that bone mineral density (BMD) is low in men who are hypogonadal. However, the rate and sites of bone loss following testosterone deficiency are not known. The resulting hypogonadism after GnRH analog therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer allows us to examine bone loss and bone resorption immediately after testosterone withdrawal. Therefore, we examined the effects of GnRH analog treatment on bone loss and bone resorption in men with prostate cancer. BMD and serum and urine concentrations of markers of bone turnover were determined in men with prostate cancer and in age-matched controls. Measurements were taken before GnRH therapy and 6 and 12 months after instituting therapy. After 12 months of GnRH therapy, the BMD of the total hip and ultra distal radius decreased significantly (P < 0.001) in men with prostate cancer compared with the controls. The mean bone loss was 3.3% and 5.3%, respectively. The observed reduction in BMD in the spine (2.8%) and the femoral neck (2.3%) did not reach statistical significance. No significant bone loss was observed in the control subjects. The concentration of the urine marker of bone resorption, N-telopeptide, was significantly increased from baseline and from controls at both 6 and 12 months in patients treated with GnRH analog therapy compared with control subjects (P < 0.05). The concentration of a serum marker of bone formation, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, was not significantly different from baseline or from controls at 6 and 12 months. Thus, the decreased total hip and ultra distal radius BMD and increased urinary N-telopeptide concentration after testosterone withdrawal demonstrate an increase in trabecular bone loss and enhanced bone resorption. These findings demonstrate a significant loss of bone in men with prostate cancer after receiving GnRH therapy and suggest that the total hip and radius are the preferred sites for monitoring bone loss in older men. In addition, markers of bone resorption may be helpful.

Effect of endocrine treatment on sexuality in premenopausal breast cancer patients: a prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

To study the sexual effects of the 2-year adjuvant goserelin (Zoladex [Zeneca AB, Södertälje, Sweden]) alone, tamoxifen alone, and Zoladex and tamoxifen in combination (ZT) versus no adjuvant endocrine therapy among premenopausal breast cancer patients with or without chemotherapy in a controlled clinical trial (a European multicenter trial: Zoladex in Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study examined several aspects of sexuality through the use of self-administered questionnaires, which were completed by patients at seven points of assessment for 3 years after randomization.

RESULTS

Patients treated with chemotherapy had a higher level of sexual dysfunction than did patients who received no systemic treatment. The addition of endocrine treatment did not alter this result. In contrast, among patients who did not receive chemotherapy, Zoladex and ZT produced a significantly higher level of dysfunction from 1 to 2 years after inclusion, as compared with those who received no endocrine treatment. Tamoxifen alone did not produce side effects. After termination of endocrine treatment, sexual dysfunction began to diminish. Those with chemotherapy had high and frequently increasing levels of dysfunction even after 2 to 3 years of independent of endocrine treatment. Zoladex had a negative effect on sexual fear, which was reduced by the addition of tamoxifen.

CONCLUSION

Zoladex increased sexual dysfunction during treatment among patients without chemotherapy, but the disturbances of sexual functioning were reversible. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with continued sexual problems, even at 3 years after randomization.

Incidence of bone fracture in patients receiving luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the incidence of bone fractures in patients receiving luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRH-a) for prostate cancer (in whom a continued low testosterone level after the long-term administration of these drugs reduces bone mineral density), and thus determine the risk of secondary osteoporosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 1994 and 1999, 218 patients (mean age 77.3 years) were treated for >/= 6 months with LHRH-a for prostate cancer; of these, 14 (6%) had a bone fracture during their treatment. Patients with fracture associated with motor vehicle accidents were excluded. The bone density in the third lumbar vertebra was meas-ured using quantitative computed tomography. Osteocalcin, 1,25-(OH)2 vitamin D, urinary type 1 collagen cross-linked N-telopeptides (NTx), parathyroid hormone and calcitonin were measured as metabolic markers.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients with fracture was 78 years; the mean (range) interval from the start of treatment to fracture was 28 (11-46) months. There was no case of a bone fracture at the site of a metastasis from prostate cancer. The bone density was significantly lower in the patients with a fracture than in those without. Of the bone metabolic markers, NTx was higher in those with a fracture.

CONCLUSION

There is a need to measure bone mineral density and bone metabolic markers periodically, and to evaluate secondary osteoporosis in patients receiving long-term LHRH-a for prostate cancer.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Survival analyses from the ZEBRA study. goserelin (Zoladex) versus CMF in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer

The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association (ZEBRA) trial compared the efficacy and tolerability of goserelin (Zoladex) with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy in pre-/perimenopausal women with node-positive early breast cancer. The results of disease-free survival (DFS) analyses have already been published. Here we present an update including data on overall survival (OS) from the ZEBRA trial at a median follow-up of 7.3 years. In patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumours, non-inferiority of goserelin versus CMF for OS was shown; goserelin was again shown to be equivalent to CMF for DFS. This updated analysis has demonstrated that the two treatments are also equivalent for distant disease-free survival (DDFS). In patients with ER-negative disease, goserelin was inferior to CMF for DFS, DDFS and OS. This follow-up analysis confirms the previously reported outcomes from the ZEBRA trial and demonstrates that goserelin offers an effective alternative to CMF chemotherapy for adjuvant therapy of premenopausal patients with ER-positive, node-positive early breast cancer.

Bone mineral density among premenopausal women with early breast cancer in a randomized trial of adjuvant endocrine therapy

PURPOSE

To examine the effects on bone mineral density of 2 years of treatment with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist alone or in combination with tamoxifen or tamoxifen alone in premenopausal breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We recruited 89 women from two centers in Stockholm participating in a randomized multicenter trial of three different endocrine approaches in the adjuvant setting (Zoladex in Premenopausal Patients Trial). The women were assigned to receive the LHRH agonist goserelin with or without tamoxifen, tamoxifen alone, or no endocrine therapy. The treatment was given for 2 years. We measured total-body bone density before start of treatment and at 12, 24, and 36 months.

RESULTS

After 2 years of treatment, there was a significant loss of bone mineral density (mean change, -5%; P <.001) in the women receiving goserelin alone. The combined goserelin and tamoxifen treatment, as well as tamoxifen alone, resulted in a lesser but statistically significant decline in bone mineral density (mean change, -1.4%; P =.02; and -1.5%; P <.001). One year after cessation of treatment, the goserelin group alone showed a partial recovery from bone loss (mean change, 1.5%; P =.02).

CONCLUSION

Two years of ovarian ablation from goserelin treatment caused a significant reduction in bone mineral density but there was a partial recovery from the bone loss 1 year after cessation of treatment. The addition of tamoxifen seems to partially counteract the demineralizing effects of goserelin.

A controlled trial of bicalutamide versus flutamide, each in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy, in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Casodex Combination Study Group

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of bicalutamide and flutamide, each used in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing analogue (LHRH-A) therapy, in patients with untreated metastatic (Stage D2) prostate cancer.

METHODS

Randomized, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy), multicenter study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Eight hundred thirteen patients were allocated 1:1 to bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) and flutamide (250 mg three times daily) and 2:1 to goserelin acetate (3.6 mg every 28 days) and leuprolide acetate (7.5 mg every 28 days).

RESULTS

With a median duration of follow-up of 49 weeks, time to treatment failure, the primary endpoint, was significantly (P = 0.005) better for the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group than for the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. Patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group were 34% more likely to fail treatment over the given time period, as indicated by the hazard ratio of 0.749 (95% confidence interval, 0.61 to 0.92) for bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A. Results for secondary endpoints (survival, quality of life, and subjective response) were similar between groups. Diarrhea occurred in 24% of patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group, compared with 10% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with metastatic prostate cancer, bicalutamide plus LHRH-A is well tolerated and provides superior efficacy to flutamide plus LHRH-A with respect to time to treatment failure. Assessment of the effects of these regimens on longer term survival requires additional time for follow-up.

Quality of life compared during pharmacological treatments and clinical monitoring for non-localized prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effects of different management strategies for non-localized prostate cancer on men's quality of life and cognitive functioning.

PATIENTS, SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Men with prostate cancer were randomly assigned to one of four treatment arms: leuprorelin, goserelin, cyproterone acetate (CPA), or close clinical monitoring. In a repeated-measures design, men were assessed before treatment (baseline) and after 6 and 12 months of treatment. A community comparison group of men of the same age with no prostate cancer participated for the same length of time. The men were recruited from public and private urology departments from university teaching hospitals. All those with prostate cancer who were eligible for hormonal therapy had no symptoms requiring immediate therapy. In all, 82 patients were randomized and 62 completed the 1-year study, and of the 20 community participants, 15 completed the study. The main outcome measures were obtained from questionnaires on emotional distress, existential satisfaction, physical function and symptoms, social and role function, subjective cognitive function, and sexual function, combined with standard neuropsychological tests of memory, attention, and executive functions.

RESULTS

Sexual dysfunction increased for patients on androgen-suppressing therapies, and emotional distress increased in those assigned to CPA or close clinical monitoring. Compared with before treatment there was evidence of an adverse effect of leuprorelin, goserelin, and CPA on cognitive function.

CONCLUSIONS

In deciding the timing of androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer, consideration should be given to potential adverse effects on quality of life and cognitive function.

Side effects of adjuvant endocrine treatment in premenopausal breast cancer patients: a prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapies with and without chemotherapy on physical symptoms, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in premenopausal women with breast cancer in a randomized clinical trial (the Zoladex in Premenopausal Patients trial).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The patients were randomly assigned to goserelin, goserelin plus tamoxifen, tamoxifen alone, or no endocrine therapy. The duration of the endocrine treatment was 2 years. The groups were observed for 3 years after primary treatment (ie, during 2 years of active treatment as well as 1 year after cessation of the adjuvant endocrine therapy). All patients with node-positive disease received adjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF), which was given concurrently with the endocrine treatment.

RESULTS

Patients treated with CMF typically reported higher levels of physical symptoms than did patients who did not receive CMF. It was only among patients who did not receive chemotherapy that the endocrine treatment had differential effects. Goserelin was most burdensome and resulted in similar symptom levels as those of CMF, whereas the side effects of tamoxifen alone were milder. After cessation of the endocrine treatment, the side effects diminished in patients who had not received CMF, whereas patients treated with CMF reported ongoing problems at the 3-year follow-up. In contrast, anxiety and depressive symptoms were not significantly affected by endocrine treatment or chemotherapy during the 3 years of assessment.

CONCLUSION

Goserelin and tamoxifen resulted in menopausal symptoms, but these symptoms were reversible. However, women treated with CMF experienced physical symptoms throughout the whole study period.

Disease control outcomes from analysis of pooled individual patient data from five comparative randomised clinical trials of degarelix versus luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, degarelix, with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists indicate differences in outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess differences in efficacy and safety outcomes in a pooled analysis of trials comparing degarelix with LHRH agonists.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Data were pooled from five prospective, phase 3 or 3b randomised trials (n=1925) of degarelix and leuprolide or goserelin in men requiring androgen deprivation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer. Patients received either 3 mo (n=467) or 12 mo (n=1458) of treatment.

INTERVENTION

Men were randomised to receive degarelix (n=1266), leuprolide (n=201), or goserelin (n=458).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analyses were supported by the Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for disease-related baseline factors, to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of efficacy and safety outcomes. The Fisher exact test compared crude incidences of adverse events.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (PFS) was improved in the degarelix group (HR: 0.71; p=0.017). For patients with baseline PSA levels >20 ng/ml, the HR for PSA PFS was 0.74 (p=0.052). Overall survival (OS) was higher in the degarelix group (HR: 0.47; p=0.023). OS was particularly improved with degarelix in patients with baseline testosterone levels >2 ng/ml (HR: 0.36; p=0.006). In terms of disease-related adverse events, there were, overall, fewer joint-related signs and symptoms, musculoskeletal events, and urinary tract events in the degarelix group.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate clinical benefits with degarelix, including a significant improvement in PSA PFS and OS, as well as reduced incidence of joint, musculoskeletal, and urinary tract adverse events, compared with LHRH agonists.

Does neoadjuvant hormone therapy for early prostate cancer affect cognition? Results from a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To examine, in a prospective study, the influence that temporary reversible medical castration for localized prostate cancer has on cognition, by assessing whether temporary 3-5 month treatment with a luteinizing-hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist before radical radiotherapy had a short- or long-term affect on cognitive function.

PATIENTS, SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Thirty-two patients with localized prostate cancer had cognitive assessments at baseline (T1) before the start of drug treatment, at 3 months (T2) or on completing drug treatment but before radiotherapy, and 9 months later (T3). Eighteen men with no prostate cancer (controls subjects) completed the cognitive tests at the same times. In addition, psychological functioning and quality of life were assessed at the same times, together with serum free and bound testosterone, beta-oestradiol and sex hormone-binding globulin levels.

RESULTS

There was a significant cognitive decline (on at least one cognitive task) at T2 in 15 (47%) patients vs three (17%) of controls (odds ratio 4.412, P = 0.033). Most patients (nine of 15) who had a change in performance declined on tasks of spatial memory and ability. At T3 there was significant cognitive decline in 11 (34%) patients and five (28%) control subjects (odds ratio 1.37, P = 0.631).

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggests that short-term LHRH therapy for early-stage prostate cancer has modest short-term consequences on men's cognitive functioning; a larger prospective study is warranted.

Prevalence and duration of hot flushes after surgical or medical castration in men with prostatic carcinoma

A total of 77 men with prostatic carcinoma treated with orchiectomy or a gonadotropin releasing hormone analogue before September 1987 underwent evaluation by a questionnaire regarding vasomotor symptoms. Answers were received from 84% of the patients. Of 63 patients 43 (68%) reported hot flushes during treatment, while 30 (48%) still had flushes 5 years after treatment. Of the latter 30 patients 28 (median 7.6 years after treatment) had vasomotor symptoms at the time of the study. Only 13 of 43 men with vasomotor symptoms after the start of treatment had relief 5 years later. At the time of the study 13 of 30 patients (more than 40%) still had flushes 8 years after castration. Most men reported that the flushes presently had the same frequency and duration as when they started therapy. Contrary to the general belief that the symptoms disappear with time, our study highlighted a long persistence of hot flushes after castration.

Tolerability of hormone therapies for breast cancer: how informative are documented symptom profiles in medical notes for 'well-tolerated' treatments?

Hormonal therapies for cancer are often viewed as a gentler option than many other cancer treatments, but is low toxicity an accurate perception of patients' experiences? Side effects tend to be described as minimal or well tolerated, yet published symptoms from hormonal therapy vary considerably in their descriptions and frequencies. Previous research has highlighted under-reporting of side effects by clinical staff so as part of a wider study examining tamoxifen and goserelin treatment as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, treatment-related symptoms documented in medical notes were compared with those that patients reported during a research interview. There was a significant difference in the frequency of many side effects reported by the two methods in this study. Sixty four out of 72 (89%) women who had received adjuvant tamoxifen or goserelin had side effects recorded in their medical notes, compared with 74/75 (99%) reporting side effects at interview. We compared the published frequencies of commonly reported symptoms with those found ourselves. The discrepancies between patient-reported and clinician-recorded (usually from clinical trial data) symptom profiles were similar to those found in our study. Without accurate comprehensive side effect profiles for hormone therapies, prospective patients cannot make informed judgements on proposed treatments.