E-1899: An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study Comparing Ketoconazole Plus Hydrocortisone with Docetaxel Plus Estramustine for Asymptomatic, Androgen-Independent, Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Patients with Rising PSA Levels

Many prostate cancer patients with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels following radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy receive "early" hormonal therapy, despite its uncertain benefit. When these patients ultimately progress to androgen independence, their management remains controversial, with many receiving second-line hormonal therapy. Chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer has a defined palliative benefit; studies to establish its potential impact on survival are ongoing. E-1899 is an intergroup phase III trial comparing second-line hormonal therapy with ketoconazole plus hydrocortisone with docetaxel plus estramustine in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer with rising PSA levels who have no evidence of metastases.     

Immediate Treatment with Bicalutamide, 150 mg/d, Following Radiotherapy in Localized or Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

Previous studies and meta-analyses have made it clear that some subgroups of prostate cancer patients who have received radiotherapy should benefit from immediate adjuvant hormonal therapy. A cohort totaling 1370 patients who received radiotherapy for early nonmetastatic prostate cancer is currently enrolled in three ongoing, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials investigating the role of bicalutamide ('Casodex') 150 mg/d as adjuvant to standard care (the bicalutamide Early Prostate Cancer program). At preliminary analysis, conducted after a median follow-up of 3 years, adjuvant therapy with bicalutamide 150 mg/d significantly reduced the risk of objective progression by 37% compared with radiotherapy alone (HR 0.63, 95% CI, 0.46-0.85, P = .0024). Initial results demonstrate that bicalutamide 150 mg/d given as immediate adjuvant therapy following radiotherapy in men with early nonmetastatic prostate cancer has benefits over radiotherapy alone.     

Prostate cancer radiation therapy: A physician’s perspective

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men and a major cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Ionizing radiation has played a substantial role in the curative treatment of this disease. The historical evolution of radiotherapy techniques through 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) has allowed more accurate and precise treatments toward significant improvements in the therapeutic ratio. The addition of androgen deprivation therapy has significantly improved overall survival becoming the standard therapy for intermediate- and high-risk disease. Many randomized controlled trials have shown improved local control with dose escalation, and hypofractionated RT has been consolidated with proven efficacy and safe clinical results. However, several questions remain open in the radiotherapeutic management of prostate cancer patients and hopefully ongoing studies will shed light on these uncertainties. More individualized approaches are essential through better prognostic and novel predictive biomarkers of prostate radiotherapy response. Clinicians should critically interpret the evolving technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy with important optimism but balancing the costs and the actual magnitude of clinical benefit. This article provides an overview of the basic aspects of radiotherapy treatment in localized prostate cancer from a physician’s perspective.     

Improving outcomes in high-risk prostate cancer with radiotherapy

There have been significant improvements in the radiotherapeutic management of patients with high risk prostate cancer. Randomized trials have clearly demonstrated improved outcomes with the combination of radiotherapy in conjunction with androgen deprivation. While these trials have utilized low doses of radiotherapy in the range of 70 Gy, recent studies have suggested that significant benefits of combined androgen deprivation therapy with dose escalated radiotherapy are also observed. The use of high radiation dose levels in the setting of high risk prostate cancer is important, and strategies which combine external beam radiotherapy with a brachytherapy boost may provide an opportunity for even greater intensification of the radiation dose to the prostate target. Systemic therapies, second generation anti-androgen therapy and novel targeted agents integrated with radiotherapy will open up new vistas and challenges for further improved outcomes in patients with high-risk disease.     

Total neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer

Locally advanced rectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary management, traditionally based on neo-adjuvant (chemo) radiotherapy, conservative surgery with total mesorectal excision and adjuvant chemotherapy. Despite effective in term of local control, this strategy is linked to a high risk of distant metastasis (up to 30%). In this context, recent published randomized phase III clinical trials have tested the potential benefits with a different sequencing and/or intensification of the standard components of the trimodal therapy.Here, we briefly assess the efficacy and discuss the clinical relevance of total neoadjuvant treatment with a focus on indications and results in the short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy use for this setting of patients. Long term results and additional prospective studies are necessary to more accurately estimate the clinical benefit and further establish the role of total neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer disease.     

Endocrine treatment of prostate cancer

Although androgen deprivation as a treatment for patients with prostate cancer was described more than 60 years ago its optimal use remains controversial. The widespread use of prostate-specific (PSA) assay has lead to earlier diagnosis and earlier detection of recurrent disease. This means that the systemic side effects of androgen deprivation and quality of life have become more important. Debates continue regarding the proper use and timing of endocrine therapy with orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists, gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, GnRH antagonists, and androgen antagonists. A critical review of the literature was performed. Data support that androgen deprivation is an effective treatment for patients with advanced prostate cancer. However, although it improves survival, it is not curative, and creates a spectrum of unwanted effects that influence quality of life. Castration remains the frontline treatment for metastatic prostate cancer, where orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists and GnRH agonists produce equivalent clinical responses. Maximum androgen blockade (MAB) is not significantly more effective than single agent GnRH agonist or orchiectomy. Nonsteroidal antiandrogen monotherapy is as effective as castration in treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer offering quality of life benefits. Adjuvant endocrine treatment is able to delay disease progression at any stage. There is, however, controversy of the possible survival benefit of such treatment, including patients having PSA relapse after definitive local treatment for prostate cancer. Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment has its place mainly in the external beam radiotherapy setting. Intermittent androgen blockade is still considered experimental. The decision regarding the type of androgen deprivation should be made individually after informing the patient of all available treatment options, including watchful waiting, and on the basis of potential benefits and adverse effects. Several large studies are under way to investigate the role of adjuvant endocrine treatment in the field of early prostate cancer, intermittent androgen deprivation and endocrine therapy alone compared with endocrine therapy with radiotherapy. The real challenge, however, is to develop better means to avert hormone-refractory prostate cancer and better treatments for patients with hormone-refractory disease when it occurs.     

Breast cancer local recurrence under the form of inflammatory carcinoma,treated with concurrent radiation and chemotherapy,a case report

The authors present a case report of a patient with breast cancer diagnosed in 2005, treated with conservative surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, followed by hormonal therapy until 2010, who relapsed under the form of inflammatory breast cancer in 2011. After tumor progression detected during primary systemic therapy, a concurrent radiation and radiosensitizing chemotherapy were proposed. There was a significant clinical response to this treatment, enabling curative chance with total mastectomy. The histological examination of the breast and regional lymph nodes revealed a complete response, since there was no evidence of residual tumor.There are few reports concerning concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer, but it could be a suitable “loco regional rescue therapy” to further reduce tumor progression and allow curative surgery. Study of this treatment strategy in randomized clinical trials is warranted.     

Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant treatment: which one is better for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma?

ABSTRACT: Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer worldwide, and especially in some areas of China is the fourth most common cause of death and is of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) histology in >90% of cases. Surgery alone was the mainstay of therapeutic intervention in the past, but high rates of local and systemic failure have prompted investigation into multidisciplinary management. In this review, we discuss the key issues raised by the recent availability of esophageal SCC treatment with the addition of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy to the surgical management of resectable disease and discuss how clinical trials and meta-analysis inform current clinical practice. None of the randomized trials that compared neoadjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy with surgery alone in esophageal SCC has demonstrated an increase in overall survival in those patients treated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has been accepted recently for esophageal cancer because such a regimen offers great opportunity for margin negative resection, improved loco-regional control and increased survival. The majority of the available evidence currently reveals that only selected locally advanced esophageal SCC are more likely to benefit from the adjuvant therapy. The focus of future trials should be on identification of the optimum regimen and should aim to minimize treatment toxicities and effect on quality of life, as well as attempt to identify and select those patients most likely to benefit from specific treatment options.     

The treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer: docetaxel and beyond

Two randomized clinical trials demonstrated a survival benefit of 20% to 24% with docetaxel-based therapy when compared with survival with mitoxantrone and prednisone after failure of androgen ablation therapy. These studies supported the approval of docetaxel-based therapy for the treatment of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer by the US Food and Drug Administration in May 2005. Clinical trials in hormone-refractory prostate cancer are now focused on building on the survival improvement seen with docetaxel-based therapy. This article presents a summary of some of the more promising treatments and regimens for advanced prostate cancer.     

Results of combined radiotherapy and hormonal treatment of prostate cancer patients with initial PSA value >40 ng/ml

AimTo evaluate the outcome of prostate cancer patients with initial PSA value >40 ng/ml.BackgroundThe outcome of prostate cancer patients with very high initial PSA value is not known and patients are frequently treated with palliative intent. We analyzed the outcome of radical combined hormonal treatment and radiotherapy in prostate cancer patients with initial PSA value >40 ng/ml.MethodsBetween January 2003 and December 2007 we treated, with curative intent, 56 patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer and initial PSA value >40 ng/ml. The treatment consisted of two months of neoadjuvant hormonal treatment (LHRH analog), radical radiotherapy (68–78 Gy, conformal technique) and an optional two-year adjuvant hormonal treatment.ResultsThe median time of follow up was 61 months. 5-Year overall survival was 90%. 5-Year biochemical disease free survival was 62%. T stage, Gleason score, PSA value, and radiotherapy dose did not significantly influence the outcome. Late genitourinal and gastrointestinal toxicity was acceptable.ConclusionRadical treatment in combination with hormonal treatment and radiotherapy can be recommended for this subgroup of prostate cancer patients with good performance status and life expectancy.     

Salvage cryosurgery-how I do it

Prostate cryosurgery has advanced over the last decade, and is now recognized as a treatment option for patients who have failed radiotherapy. Appropriate patient selection is imperative for successful salvage. Because the treatment is a local therapy, the recurrent cancer must be confined to the prostate and its immediate area, and up to half of patients who undergo salvage cryotherapy may eventually fail treatment because of occult synchronous metastases. Yet some patients with poor prognosticators may still benefit from salvage treatment.     

Erratum to: “Pancreatic cancer and SBRT: A new potential option?” [Rep. Pract. Oncol. Radiother. 20 (2015) 377–384]

Local control remains a major issue for patients with unresectable, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). The role of radiation therapy in the management of LAPC represents an area of some controversy. Stereotactic body radiotherapy is an emerging treatment option for LAPC as it can provide a therapeutic benefit with significant advantages for patients’ quality of life over standard conventional chemoradiation. The objective of this review is to present the rationale for stereotactic body radiotherapy in LAPC, as well as to discuss the potential limitations and caveats of the currently available studies.     

Cardiac toxicity of lung cancer radiotherapy

Radical radiotherapy of lung cancer with dose escalation has been associated with increased tumor control. However, these attempts to continually improve local control through dose escalation, have met mixed results culminating in the findings of the RTOG trial 0617, where the heart dose was associated with a worse overall survival, indicating a significant contribution to radiation-induced cardiac morbidity. It is, therefore, very likely that poorly understood cardiac toxicity may have offset any potential improvement in overall survival derived from dose escalation and may be an obstacle that limits disease control and survival of patients. The manifestations of cardiac toxicity are relatively common after high dose radiotherapy of advanced lung cancers and are independently associated with both heart dose and baseline cardiac risk. Toxicity following the treatment may occur earlier than previously thought and, therefore, heart doses should be minimized. In patients with lung cancer, who not only receive substantial heart dose, but are also older with more comorbidities, all cardiac events have the potential to be clinically significant and life-threatening.Sophisticated radiation treatment planning techniques, charged particle therapy, and modern imaging methods in radiotherapy planning, may lead to reduction of the heart dose, which could potentially improve the clinical outcomes in patients with lung cancer. Efforts should be made to minimize heart radiation exposure whenever possible even at doses lower than those generally recommended. Heart doses should be limited as much as possible.A heart dosimetry as a whole is important for patient outcomes, rather than emphasizing just one parameter.     

Androgen deprivation therapy in combination with radiotherapy for high-risk clinically localized prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has remained the main therapeutic option for patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) for about 70 years. Several reports and our findings revealed that aggressive PCa can occur under a low dihydrotestosterone (DHT) level environment where the PCa of a low malignancy with high DHT dependency cannot easily occur. Low DHT levels in the prostate with aggressive PCa are probably sufficient to propagate the growth of the tumor, and the prostate with aggressive PCa can produce androgens from the adrenal precursors more autonomously than that with non-aggressive PCa does under the low testosterone environment with testicular suppression. In patients treated with ADT the pituitary-adrenal axis mediated by adrenocorticotropic hormone has a central role in the regulation of androgen synthesis. Several experimental studies have confirmed the potential benefits from the combination of ADT with radiotherapy (RT). A combination of external RT with short-term ADT is recommended based on the results of phase III randomized trials. In contrast, the combination of RT plus 6 months of ADT provides inferior survival as compared with RT plus 3 years of ADT in the treatment of locally advanced PCa. Notably, randomized trials included patients with diverse risk groups treated with older RT modalities, a variety of ADT scheduling and duration and, importantly, suboptimal RT doses. The use of ADT with higher doses of RT or newer RT modalities has to be properly assessed.     

Smoking during radiotherapy for head and neck cancer and acute mucosal reaction

AimWe compared the incidence of RTOG/EORTC grade III and higher acute mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer who continued to smoke during radiotherapy with those who quit smoking.BackgroundThere are conflicting data on the relationship between smoking during radiotherapy and the severity of acute mucosal reaction. More studies dealing with this issue are needed.Materials and methodsAmong 136 patients receiving curative radio(chemo)therapy, 37 (27%) declared that they had not quit smoking during radiotherapy. The intensity of mucositis was scored daily by a nurse and weekly by a physician using the RTOG/EORTC scale. The main end-point of the study was the highest observed RTOG/EORTC grade of mucositis.ResultsPatients who smoked during radiotherapy (smokers) were younger than their counterparts who quit smoking (non-smokers), p = 0.06. There were no other differences in the baseline characteristics between smokers and non-smokers. Grade III/IV acute mucositis was observed in 43.5% of all patients. The percentage of patients with grade III/IV acute mucositis was similar in smokers and non-smokers (46% vs. 42%, p = 0.71). Nine patients (smokers [13.5%]; non-smokers [4%], p = 0.05) required prolonged hospitalization to heal mucositis.ConclusionsIn the whole group, smoking during radiotherapy was not related to acute mucosal toxicity evaluated as the rate of the highest observed grade of mucositis.     

Success and failure of single-modality treatment for early prostate cancer

Many men who undergo radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy for early prostate cancer have an excellent outcome; however, a significant proportion subsequently experience disease recurrence and/or cancer-related death. Adjuvant hormonal therapy after treatment of curative intent is given with the aim of eradicating undetected cancer cells outside the surgical margins or radiation field and/or micrometastatic disease. In the analogous setting of early breast cancer, adjuvant hormonal therapy is already established as standard care. Efficacy and tolerability data from the ongoing bicalutamide ('Casodex') Early Prostate Cancer program are expected to determine the role of adjuvant hormonal therapy with antiandrogens in early prostate cancer.     

Current status of androgen suppression and radiotherapy for patients with prostate cancer

Analogous to the impact of anti-estrogen therapy in breast cancer, anti-androgen therapy may have a greater impact on the castrate male with non-metastatic disease. The use of castration or a LHRH drug alone, does not appear to adequately suppress intra-prostatic DHT (Dihydrotestosterone) levels. Normal prostate elements appear to be more efficient than metastatic elements at converting DHT precursors to active DHT. Thus, blocking this step may be more critical for clinically localized disease. Laverdiere et al. reported a 2 year positive (+) biopsy rate of 65% with XRT alone compared to 28% when 3 months of NHT preceded radiotherapy, but 5% if NHT was continued for a total of 10.5 months of combined androgen blockade (CAB). Bolla et al. incorporated one month of NHT prior to XRT followed by 3 years of an LHRH drug. An improvement in local control, disease free survival and overall survival of nearly 20% was noted at 5 years. Thus far, these important studies demonstrate that a survival benefit may require long term adjuvant hormonal therapy. There is a need for further studies to define the optimal timing and duration of CAB and the role of XRT. Long term data recently provided by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) may provide insights into criteria for defining which patients are likely to benefit the most from long term CAB.     

Clinical experience with gene therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer

Localized prostate cancer can be treated effectively with radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. The treatment options for metastatic prostate cancer are limited to hormonal therapy; hormone-refractory cancer is treated with taxane-based chemotherapy, which provides only a modest survival benefit. New treatments are needed. The gene for the initiation of prostate cancer has not been identified; however, gene therapy can involve tumor injection of a gene to kill cells, systemic gene delivery to target and kill metastases, or local gene expression intended to generate a systemic response. This review will provide an overview of the various strategies of cancer gene therapy, focusing on those that have gone to clinical trial, detailing clinical experience in prostate cancer patients.     

Hormonal therapy for prostate cancer

Updates on hormonal therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer are presented. The most common therapy is to reduce testosterone to castrate levels. A dosage of 1 mg diethylstilbestrol daily prolonged survival in patients with advanced prostate cancer. The leuteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists have essentially replaced surgical orchiectomy in the vast majority of clinical settings; however, a major problem with the leuteinizing hormone- releasing hormone agonists has been the surge and flare of testosterone levels. If hormonal therapy is initiated early, the risk of major complications is significantly decreased. Combined androgen blockade is better than monotherapy, although there is only a small clinical benefit. When androgen deprivation is used for a short time and the normal androgen milieu is re-established, the side effects and toxicity of androgen deprivation are decreased. The major complications of androgen deprivation include hot flushes, reduction of bone mineral density, osteoporosis, and anemia. Intermittent androgen blockade might have the same benefits of total androgen suppression with fewer side effects, increased duration of androgen dependence, and less cost. The 10 steps to take when advising patients about initiation of androgen deprivation therapy are reviewed.     

Low-dose Taxol radiosensitization in locally advanced head and neck cancers

INTRODUCTION: Combined modality treatment with chemotherapy and radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck cancers is an effective and often the only treatment with a chance of cure. An alternative is to use chemotherapeutic agents at low doses as radiosensitizers. In this study we examined the radiosensitizing effect of low dose Taxol in locally advanced head and neck cancer. Patients and methods: 26 patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity and the oropharynx were treated with external beam radiotherapy up to doses of 66-70 Gy and received concomitantly 2 mg/m(2) Taxol intravenously three times a week. Response rates according to WHO criteria, side effects according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, overall and progression-free survival were evaluated. RESULTS: All patients completed the therapy. Median radiation dose was 66 Gy, Taxol dose 40 mg/m(2) and treatment duration 54 days. 8 weeks after completion of therapy complete response was 30.8%, partial response 34.6%, stable disease 11.5% and progressive disease 23.1%. The median follow-up time was 25 months (9-36). At the cloes- out date 12 (46,1%) of the patients were alive, 9 without evidence of disease. The estimated median overall survival was 22 months (CI 14.2-34.6), the median progression-free survival 12 months (CI 5.2-18.8). We observed four grade 4, fourteen grade 3 and numerous grade 1-2 side effects. There was no treatment related death. DISCUSSION: Our regimen resulted in a worse response rate than the aggressive chemoradiation protocols treating the same disease. However, the two-year survival was comparable with the results of other studies. The advantages of our schedule are that it is well tolerated, easy to perform on an outpatient basis, resource effective and does not deteriorate the general condition of the patients, therefore successive therapy can be carried out immediately if necessary. We intend to evaluate the effectivity of this treatment in a study comparing radiotherapy with Taxol sensitization versus radiotherapy alone.