Celecoxib plus hormone therapy versus hormone therapy alone for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: first results from the STAMPEDE multiarm, multistage, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND:
Long-term hormone therapy alone is standard care for metastatic or high-risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer. STAMPEDE--an international, open-label, randomised controlled trial--uses a novel multiarm, multistage design to assess whether the early additional use of one or two drugs (docetaxel, zoledronic acid, celecoxib, zoledronic acid and docetaxel, or zoledronic acid and celecoxib) improves survival in men starting first-line, long-term hormone therapy. Here, we report the preplanned, second intermediate analysis comparing hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D) with hormone therapy alone (control arm A).
METHODS:
Eligible patients were men with newly diagnosed or rapidly relapsing prostate cancer who were starting long-term hormone therapy for the first time. Hormone therapy was given as standard care in all trial arms, with local radiotherapy encouraged for newly diagnosed patients without distant metastasis. Randomisation was done using minimisation with a random element across seven stratification factors. Patients randomly allocated to arm D received celecoxib 400 mg twice daily, given orally, until 1 year or disease progression (including prostate-specific antigen [PSA] failure). The intermediate outcome was failure-free survival (FFS) in three activity stages; the primary outcome was overall survival in a subsequent efficacy stage. Research arms were compared pairwise against the control arm on an intention-to-treat basis. Accrual of further patients was discontinued in any research arm showing safety concerns or insufficient evidence of activity (lack of benefit) compared with the control arm. The minimum targeted activity at the second intermediate activity stage was a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·92. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476, and with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN78818544.
FINDINGS:
2043 patients were enrolled in the trial from Oct 17, 2005, to Jan 31, 2011, of whom 584 were randomly allocated to receive hormone therapy alone (control group; arm A) and 291 to receive hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D). At the preplanned analysis of the second intermediate activity stage, with 305 FFS events (209 in arm A, 96 in arm D), there was no evidence of an advantage for hormone therapy plus celecoxib over hormone therapy alone: HR 0·94 (95% CI 0·74-1·20). [corrected]. 2-year FFS was 51% (95% CI 46-56) in arm A and 51% (95% CI 43-58) in arm D. There was no evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse events between groups (events of grade 3 or higher were noted at any time in 123 [23%, 95% CI 20-27] patients in arm A and 64 [25%, 19-30] in arm D). The most common grade 3-5 events adverse effects in both groups were endocrine disorders (55 [11%] of patients in arm A vs 19 [7%] in arm D) and musculoskeletal disorders (30 [6%] of patients in arm A vs 15 [6%] in arm D). The independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping accrual to both celecoxib-containing arms on grounds of lack of benefit and discontinuing celecoxib for patients currently on treatment, which was endorsed by the trial steering committee.
INTERPRETATION:
Celecoxib 400 mg twice daily for up to 1 year is insufficiently active in patients starting hormone therapy for high-risk prostate cancer, and we do not recommend its use in this setting. Accrual continues seamlessly to the other research arms and follow-up of all arms will continue to assess effects on overall survival.

Neoadjuvant hormone therapy for radical prostate radiotherapy:bicalutamide monotherapy vs. luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist monotherapy: a single-institution matched-pair analysis

The purpose of this study was to compare the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response to either neoadjuvant bicalutamide (BC) monotherapy or neoadjuvant luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRHa) monotherapy and the subsequent effect on biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS) in men receiving radical radiotherapy (RT) for localized prostate cancer.

Hormone therapy and intraocular pressure in nonglaucomatous eyes

Objective: The influence of sex hormones on intraocular pressure (IOP) has been the focus of recent debate. Previous studies investigating the effects of hormone therapy (HT) on IOP in postmenopausal women have produced conflicting results but have been limited by small numbers of participants. The aim of our study was to compare IOP in women without glaucoma taking HT with those not taking HT. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study of postmenopausal women visiting a single ophthalmic medical practitioner was conducted. All women with a history of intraocular disease, a family history of glaucoma, or refractive error exceeding ±5 diopters were excluded. Applanation tonometry was used to measure IOP, and participants were then asked if they were current HT users. Results: A total of 263 participants were recruited, of whom 91 reported current use of HT; 172 had never used HT. Within the HT group, 33 were taking an estrogen-therapy and 58 were taking a estrogen-progesterone therapy. Mean IOP in the HT group was significantly lower than that in the non-HT group; the mean difference was 1.41 mm Hg (P <0.001). This difference remained statistically significant after statistical correction for age, use of systemic ß-blockers, and time of IOP measurement. There was no significant difference in mean IOP between women taking combined versus those taking estrogen-only preparations. Conclusions: Our study showed that IOP was significantly lower in women taking HT than in those who had never taken HT, even after removing other possible influences on IOP. The IOP-lowering effect of HT deserves further investigation to explore whether it may represent a possible new therapeutic modality for glaucoma. © 2010 by The North American Menopause Society.

Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone.

METHODS: Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544).

FINDINGS: 2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc.

INTERPRETATION: Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy.

FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

Risk factors (excluding hormone therapy) for endometrial hyperplasia: a systematic review.

Objective: To conduct a systematic review of risk factors associated with the development of Endometrial Hyperplasia (EH).

Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 30 June 2015.

Study eligibility: Fifteen observational studies that reported on EH risk in relation to lifestyle factors (n=14), medical history (n=11), reproductive and menstrual history (n=9) and measures of socio-economic status (n=2) were identified. Pooled relative risk estimates and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were able to be derived for EH and Body Mass Index (BMI), smoking, diabetes and hypertension, using random effects models comparing high versus low categories.

Results: The pooled relative risk for EH when comparing women with the highest versus lowest BMI was 1.82 (95% CI 1.22–2.71; n=7 studies, I2=90.4%). No significant associations were observed for EH risk for smokers compared with non-smokers (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66-1.17; n=3, I2=0.0%), hypertensive versus normotensive women (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.72–3.15; n=5 studies, I2=79.1%), or diabetic versus non-diabetic women (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.79–3.96; n=5 studies, I2=31.8%) respectively although the number of included studies was limited. There were mixed reports on the relationship between age and risk of EH. Too few studies reported on other factors to reach any conclusions in relation to EH risk.

Conclusions: A high BMI was associated with an increased risk of EH, providing additional rationale for women to maintain a normal body weight. No significant associations were detected for other factors and EH risk, however relatively few studies have been conducted and few of the available studies adequately adjusted for relevant confounders. Therefore, further aetiological studies of endometrial hyperplasia are warranted.

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.

Growth hormone (GH) responsiveness to GHRH in normal adults is not affected by short-term gonadal blockade

The effects of changes in circulating gonadal steroids on GH secretion elicited by GHRH challenge (1µg/kg) in normal adults volunteers (aged 18-24 years), were evaluated in 10 women and 10 men before and after gonadal blockade was achieved by a GnRH agonist (1500 µg/day by nasal spray for 40 days). To see if the effect of testosterone on GH secretion was dependent on its aromatization to estradiol (E), GHRH tests were performed in 7 normal men prior to administration of testosterone enanthate (250 mg im), 8 days after this treatment had began, and again after E receptor blockade with tamoxifen (30 mg for 2 days plus 10 mg on the third day 2 h before the GHRH test, po) administered 8 days after testosterone enanthate. The study of the functional status of the somatotropes at the time of GHRH testing was made according to our previous postulate. Short-term gonadal blockade did not affect the parameters of GH response to GHRH in neither women nor men. Thus, the functional blockade of the gonads may be advisable as an adjunct therapy in the treatment of hypothalamic GH deficiency during the prepubertal stage. In the other group of men, administration of testosterone enanthate significantly increased GHRH-elicited GH release, but this was reverted after E receptor blockade. Since the hypothalamic-somatotrope rhythm was altered by both these farmacological manipulations, it appears that testosterone acts on GH release mainly at the suprapituitary level, and that this action is secondary to its aromatization to E.

ELIMED:A new hadron therapy concept based on laser driven ion beams

Laser accelerated proton beams have been proposed to be used in different research fields. A great interest has risen for the potential replacement of conventional accelerating machines with laser-based accelerators, and in particular for the development of new concepts of more compact and cheaper hadrontherapy centers. In this context the ELIMED (ELI MEDical applications) research project has been launched by INFN-LNS and ASCR-FZU researchers within the pan-European ELI-Beamlines facility framework. The ELIMED project aims to demonstrate the potential clinical applicability of optically accelerated proton beams and to realize a laser-accelerated ion transport beamline for multi-disciplinary user applications. In this framework the eye melanoma, as for instance the uveal melanoma normally treated with 62 MeV proton beams produced by standard accelerators, will be considered as a model system to demonstrate the potential clinical use of laser-driven protons in hadrontherapy, especially because of the limited constraints in terms of proton energy and irradiation geometry for this particular tumour treatment. Several challenges, starting from laser-target interaction and beam transport development up to dosimetry and radiobiology, need to be overcome in order to reach the ELIMED final goals. A crucial role will be played by the final design and realization of a transport beamline capable to provide ion beams with proper characteristics in terms of energy spectrum and angular distribution which will allow performing dosimetric tests and biological cell irradiation. A first prototype of the transport beamline has been already designed and other transport elements are under construction in order to perform a first experimental test with the TARANIS laser system by the end of 2013. A wide international collaboration among specialists of different disciplines like Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Medicine and medical doctors coming from Europe, Japan, and the US is growing up around the ELIMED project with the aim to work on the conceptual design, technical and experimental realization of this core beamline of the ELI Beamlines facility. © 2013 SPIE.

Pathogenesis of prostate cancer and hormone refractory prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy in males and the leading cause of cancer death. Prostate cancer is initially androgen dependent and relies upon the androgen receptor (AR) to mediate the effects of androgens. The AR is also the target for therapy using antiandrogens and LHRH analogues. However, all cancers eventually become androgen independent, often referred to as hormone refractory prostate cancer. The processes involved in this transformation are yet to be fully understood but research in this area has discovered numerous potential mechanisms including AR amplification, over-expression or mutation and alterations in the AR signaling pathway. This review of the recent literature examines the current knowledge and developments in the understanding of the molecular biology of prostate cancer and hormone refractory prostate cancer, summarizing the well characterized pathways involved as well as introducing new concepts that may offer future solutions to this difficult problem.

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.