Prostate cancer radiotherapy: potential applications of metal nanoparticles for imaging and therapy

Prostate cancer (CaP) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in males. There have been dramatic technical advances in radiotherapy delivery, enabling higher doses of radiotherapy to primary cancer, involved lymph nodes and oligometastases with acceptable normal tissue toxicity. Despite this, many patients relapse following primary radical therapy, and novel treatment approaches are required. Metal nanoparticles are agents that promise to improve diagnostic imaging and image-guided radiotherapy and to selectively enhance radiotherapy effectiveness in CaP. We summarize current radiotherapy treatment approaches for CaP and consider pre-clinical and clinical evidence for metal nanoparticles in this condition.

Prostate cancer (CaP) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in males and is responsible for more than 10,000 deaths each year in the UK.1 Technical advances in radiotherapy delivery, including image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT), have enabled the delivery of higher radiation dose to the prostate, which has led to improved biochemical control. Further improvements in cancer imaging during radiotherapy are being developed with the advent of MRI simulators and MRI linear accelerators.2–4

Nanotechnology promises to deliver significant advancements across numerous disciplines.5 The widest scope of applications are from the biomedical field including exogenous gene/drug delivery systems, advanced biosensors, targeted contrast agents for diagnostic applications and as direct therapeutic agents used in combination with existing treatment modalities.6–11 This diversity of application is especially evident within cancer research, with a myriad of experimental anticancer strategies currently under investigation.

This review will focus specifically on the potential of metal-based nanoparticles to augment the efficacy of radiotherapy in CaP, a disease where radiotherapy constitutes a major curative treatment modality.12 Furthermore, we will also address the clinical state of the art for CaP radiotherapy and consider how these treatments could be best combined with nanotherapeutics to improve cancer outcomes.

DNA vaccination for prostate cancer: key concepts and considerations

While locally confined prostate cancer is associated with a low five year mortality rate, advanced or metastatic disease remains a major challenge for healthcare professionals to treat and is usually terminal. As such, there is a need for the development of new, efficacious therapies for prostate cancer. Immunotherapy represents a promising approach where the host's immune system is harnessed to mount an anti-tumour effect, and the licensing of the first prostate cancer specific immunotherapy in 2010 has opened the door for other immunotherapies to gain regulatory approval. Among these strategies DNA vaccines are an attractive option in terms of their ability to elicit a highly specific, potent and wide-sweeping immune response. Several DNA vaccines have been tested for prostate cancer and while they have demonstrated a good safety profile they have faced problems with low efficacy and immunogenicity compared to other immunotherapeutic approaches. This review focuses on the positive aspects of DNA vaccines for prostate cancer that have been assessed in preclinical and clinical trials thus far and examines the key considerations that must be employed to improve the efficacy and immunogenicity of these vaccines.

Cabazitaxel for Hormone-Relapsed Metastatic Prostate Cancer Previously Treated With a Docetaxel-Containing Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the company that manufactures cabazitaxel (Jevtana(®), Sanofi, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cabazitaxel for treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer (mHRPC) previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology based upon the company's submission to NICE. Clinical evidence for cabazitaxel was derived from a multinational randomised open-label phase III trial (TROPIC) of cabazitaxel plus prednisone or prednisolone compared with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisolone, which was assumed to represent best supportive care. The NICE final scope identified a further three comparators: abiraterone in combination with prednisone or prednisolone; enzalutamide; and radium-223 dichloride for the subgroup of people with bone metastasis only (no visceral metastasis). The company did not consider radium-223 dichloride to be a relevant comparator. Neither abiraterone nor enzalutamide has been directly compared in a trial with cabazitaxel. Instead, clinical evidence was synthesised within a network meta-analysis (NMA). Results from TROPIC showed that cabazitaxel was associated with a statistically significant improvement in both overall survival and progression-free survival compared with mitoxantrone. Results from a random-effects NMA, as conducted by the company and updated by the ERG, indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the three active treatments for both overall survival and progression-free survival. Utility data were not collected as part of the TROPIC trial, and were instead taken from the company's UK early access programme. Evidence on resource use came from the TROPIC trial, supplemented by both expert clinical opinion and a UK clinical audit. List prices were used for mitoxantrone, abiraterone and enzalutamide as directed by NICE, although commercial in-confidence patient-access schemes (PASs) are in place for abiraterone and enzalutamide. The confidential PAS was used for cabazitaxel. Sequential use of the advanced hormonal therapies (abiraterone and enzalutamide) does not usually occur in clinical practice in the UK. Hence, cabazitaxel could be used within two pathways of care: either when an advanced hormonal therapy was used pre-docetaxel, or when one was used post-docetaxel. The company believed that the former pathway was more likely to represent standard National Health Service (NHS) practice, and so their main comparison was between cabazitaxel and mitoxantrone, with effectiveness data from the TROPIC trial. Results of the company's updated cost-effectiveness analysis estimated a probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £45,982 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, which the committee considered to be the most plausible value for this comparison. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be both cheaper and more effective than abiraterone. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be cheaper but less effective than enzalutamide, resulting in an ICER of £212,038 per QALY gained for enzalutamide compared with cabazitaxel. The ERG noted that radium-223 is a valid comparator (for the indicated sub-group), and that it may be used in either of the two care pathways. Hence, its exclusion leads to uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results. In addition, the company assumed that there would be no drug wastage when cabazitaxel was used, with cost-effectiveness results being sensitive to this assumption: modelling drug wastage increased the ICER comparing cabazitaxel with mitoxantrone to over £55,000 per QALY gained. The ERG updated the company's NMA and used a random effects model to perform a fully incremental analysis between cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and best supportive care using PASs for abiraterone and enzalutamide. Results showed that both cabazitaxel and abiraterone were extendedly dominated by the combination of best supportive care and enzalutamide. Preliminary guidance from the committee, which included wastage of cabazitaxel, did not recommend its use. In response, the company provided both a further discount to the confidential PAS for cabazitaxel and confirmation from NHS England that it is appropriate to supply and purchase cabazitaxel in pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags, which would remove the cost of drug wastage. As a result, the committee recommended use of cabazitaxel as a treatment option in people with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 whose disease had progressed during or after treatment with at least 225 mg/m(2) of docetaxel, as long as it was provided at the discount agreed in the PAS and purchased in either pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags or in vials at a reduced price to reflect the average per-patient drug wastage.

A phase 2 study of high-activity 186Re-HEDP with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant in progressive hormone-refractory prostate cancer metastatic to bone

Purpose: We investigated the potential for improvement in disease control by use of autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT) to permit administration of high activities of 186Re-hydroxyethylidene diphosphonate (HEDP) in patients with progressive hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC).

Methods: Eligible patients had progressive HRPC metastatic to bone, good performance status and minimal soft tissue disease. Patients received 5,000 MBq of 186Re-HEDP i.v., followed 14 days later by PBSCT. Response was assessed using PSA, survival, pain scores and quality of life.

Results: Thirty-eight patients with a median age of 67 years (range 50–77) and a median PSA of 57 ng/ml (range 4–3,628) received a median activity of 4,978 MBq 186Re-HEDP (range 4,770–5,100 MBq). The most serious toxicity was short-lived grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 8 (21%) patients. The median survival of the group is 21 months (95%CI 18–24 months) with Kaplan-Meier estimated 1- and 2-year survival rates of 83% and 40% respectively. Thirty-one patients (81%, 95% CI 66–90%) had stable or reduced PSA levels 3 months post therapy while 11 (29%, 95% CI 15–49%) had PSA reductions of >50% lasting >4 weeks. Quality of life measures were stable or improved in 27 (66%) at 3 months.

Conclusion: We have shown that it is feasible and safe to deliver high-activity radioisotope therapy with PBSCT to men with metastatic HRPC. Response rates and survival data are encouraging; however, further research is needed to define optimal role of this treatment approach.

Nonapical and Cytoplasmic Expression of Interleukin-8, CXCR1, and CXCR2 Correlates with Cell Proliferation and Microvessel Density in Prostate Cancer

Purpose: We characterized interleukin-8 (IL-8) and IL-8 receptor expression (CXCR1 and CXCR2) in prostate cancer to address their significance to this disease. Experimental Design: Immunohistochemistry was conducted on 40 cases of human prostate biopsy containing histologically normal and neoplastic tissue, excised from patients with locally confined or invasive androgen-dependent prostate cancer, and 10 cases of transurethral resection of the prostate material from patients with androgen-independent disease. Results: Weak to moderate IL-8 expression was strictly localized to the apical membrane of normal prostate epithelium. In contrast, membranous expression of IL-8, CXCR1, and CXCR2 was nonapical in cancer cells of Gleason pattern 3 and 4, whereas circumferential expression was present in Gleason pattern 5 and androgen-independent prostate cancer. Each of IL-8, CXCR1, and CXCR2 were also increasingly localized to the cytoplasm of cancer cells in correlation with advancing stage of disease. Cytoplasmic expression (but not apical membrane expression) of IL-8 in Gleason pattern 3 and 4 cancer correlated with Ki-67 expression (R = 0.79; P <0.001), cyclin D1 expression (R = 0.79; P <0.001), and microvessel density (R = 0.81; P <0.001). In vitro studies on androgen-independent PC3 cells confirmed the mitogenic activity of IL-8, increasing the rate of cell proliferation through activation of both CXCR1 and CXCR2 receptors. Conclusions: We propose that the concurrent increase in IL-8 and IL-8 receptor expression in human prostate cancer induces autocrine signaling that may be functionally significant in initiating and promoting the progression of prostate cancer by underpinning cell proliferation and angiogenesis.