Is Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Necessary in Patients with a Serum PSA<10ng/ml Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer?

OBJECTIVE: Controversy persists concerning the role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in patients with preoperative PSA values <10ng/ml undergoing treatment for prostate cancer with a curative intent. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of lymph node metastasis in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: Patients with clinically localized prostate cancer and a serum PSA<10ng/ml, without neoadjuvant hormonal or radiotherapy, with negative staging examinations who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy with bilateral extended PLND and with >/=10 lymph nodes detected by the pathologist in the surgical specimen, were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients with a median serum PSA of 6.7ng/ml (range 0.4-9.98) and a median age of 62 years (range 44-76) were evaluated. A median of 20 (range 10-72) nodes were removed per patient. Positive nodes were found in 26 of 231 patients (11%), the majority of which (81%) had a Gleason score >/=7 in the surgical specimen. Of the patients with a Gleason score >/=7 in the prostatectomy specimen 25% had positive nodes, whereas only 3% with a Gleason score /=7 in the prostatectomy specimen was 25% after extended PLND. It seems that in this patient group extended PLND, including removal of nodes along the internal iliac vessels, is warranted.

Immediate or deferred androgen deprivation for patients with prostate cancer not suitable for local treatment with curative intent: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Trial 30891

PURPOSE: This study (EORTC 30891) attempted to demonstrate equivalent overall survival in patients with localized prostate cancer not suitable for local curative treatment treated with immediate or deferred androgen ablation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 985 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer T0-4 N0-2 M0 to receive androgen deprivation either immediately (n = 493) or on symptomatic disease progression or occurrence of serious complications (n = 492). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. Median age was 73 years (range, 52 to 81). At a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 541 of 985 patients had died, mostly of prostate cancer (n = 193) or cardiovascular disease (n = 185). The overall survival hazard ratio was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.48; noninferiority P > .1) favoring immediate treatment, seemingly due to fewer deaths of nonprostatic cancer causes (P = .06). The time from randomization to progression of hormone refractory disease did not differ significantly, nor did prostate-cancer specific survival. The median time to the start of deferred treatment after study entry was 7 years. In this group 126 patients (25.6%) died without ever needing treatment (44% of the deaths in this arm). CONCLUSION: Immediate androgen deprivation resulted in a modest but statistically significant increase in overall survival but no significant difference in prostate cancer mortality or symptom-free survival. This must be weighed on an individual basis against the adverse effects of life-long androgen deprivation, which may be avoided in a substantial number of patients with a deferred treatment policy.

Androgen deprivation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer: consider both benefits and risks

CONTEXT: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is increasingly used for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa), even in clinical settings in which there is no evidence-based proof of prolonged overall survival (OS). ADT, however, may be associated with numerous side effects, including an increased therapy-related cardiovascular mortality. OBJECTIVE: To discuss different clinical settings in which ADT is currently used and to critically weigh the benefits of ADT against its possible side effects. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A MEDLINE search was conducted to identify original articles and review articles addressing the efficacy and side effects of ADT for the treatment of PCa. Keywords consisted of prostate cancer, hormonal therapy, adverse effects, radical prostatectomy, and radiotherapy. The articles with the highest level of evidence for the various examined end points were identified with the consensus of all authors and were reviewed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Even short-term use of ADT may lead to numerous side effects, such as osteoporosis, obesity, sarcopenia, lipid alterations, insulin resistance, and increased risk for diabetes and cardiovascular morbidity. Despite these side effects, ADT is commonly used in various clinical settings in which a clear effect on improved OS has not been shown. CONCLUSIONS: ADT is associated with an increased risk of multiple side effects that may reduce quality of life and/or OS. Consequently, these issues should be discussed in detail with patients and their families before initiation of ADT. ADT should be used with knowledge of its potential long-term side effects and with possible lifestyle interventions, especially in settings with the highest risk-benefit ratio, to alleviate comorbidities.

Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer

CONTEXT: Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is considered the most reliable procedure for the detection of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer (PCa); however, the therapeutic benefit of PLND in PCa management is currently under debate. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the available literature concerning the role of PLND and its extent in PCa staging and outcome. All of the existing recommendations and staging tools determining the need for PLND were also assessed. Moreover, a systematic review was performed of the long-term outcome of node-positive patients stratified according to the extent of nodal invasion. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A Medline search was conducted to identify original and review articles as well as editorials addressing the significance of PLND in PCa. Keywords included prostate cancer, pelvic lymph node dissection, radical prostatectomy, imaging, and complications. Data from the selected studies focussing on the role of PLND in PCa staging and outcome were reviewed and discussed by all of the contributing authors. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Despite recent advances in imaging techniques, PLND remains the most accurate staging procedure for the detection of lymph node invasion (LNI) in PCa. The rate of LNI increases with the extent of PLND. Extended PLND (ePLND; ie, removal of obturator, external iliac, hypogastric with or without presacral and common iliac nodes) significantly improves the detection of lymph node metastases compared with limited PLND (lPLND; ie, removal of obturator with or without external iliac nodes), which is associated with poor staging accuracy. Because not all patients with PCa are at the same risk of harbouring nodal metastases, several nomograms and tables have been developed and validated to identify candidates for PLND. These tools, however, are based mostly on findings derived from lPLND dissections performed in older patient series. According to these prediction models, a staging PLND might be omitted in low-risk PCa patients because of the low rate of lymph node metastases found, even after extended dissections (<8%). The outcome for patients with positive nodes is not necessarily poor. Indeed, patients with low-volume nodal metastases experience excellent survival rates, regardless of adjuvant treatment. But despite few retrospective studies reporting an association between PLND and PCa progression and survival, the exact impact of PLND on patient outcomes has not yet been clearly proven because of the lack of prospective randomised trials. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of current data, we suggest that if a PLND is indicated, then it should be extended. Conversely, in view of the low rate of LNI among patients with low-risk PCa, a staging ePLND might be spared in this patient category. Whether this approach is also safe from oncologic perspectives is still unknown. Patients with low-volume nodal metastases have a good long-term prognosis; to what extent this prognosis is the result of a positive impact of PLND on PCa outcomes is still to be determined.

Local recurrence after retropubic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer does not exclusively occur at the anastomotic site

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Local recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) for clinically organ-confined prostate cancer is largely assumed to occur at the anastomotic site, as reflected in European and North American guidelines for adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after RP. However, the exact site of local recurrence often remains undetermined. The present study shows that roughly one out of five patients with local recurrence after RP has histologically confirmed tumour deposits at the resection site of the vas deferens, clearly above the anastomotic site. This should be considered when offering ‘blind’ radiotherapy to the anastomotic site in patients with biochemical recurrence alone. Objective To determine the anatomical pattern of local recurrence and the corresponding clinical and pathological variables of patients treated with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). Patients and Methods In all, 41 patients with biopsy confirmed local recurrence after extended pelvic lymph node dissection and RRP performed between January 1992 and December 2009 at a single tertiary referral academic centre were retrospectively studied. The site of local recurrence as assessed on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging was reviewed. Two sites were identified: the vesicourethral anastomotic site and the cranial resection margin of the surgical bed, where the vas deferens was transected and clipped. Age and serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at RRP, pathological tumour and nodal stage, Gleason score, tumour location, surgical margin status, age and serum PSA level at the time of local recurrence, and time to diagnosis of local recurrence were assessed for the two sites and compared with the chi-square or Wilcoxon rank sum tests as appropriate. Results Local recurrence occurred at the anastomotic site in 31/41 (76%) patients and at the resection site of the vas deferens in nine of 41 (22%) patients. One patient had distinct lesions at both sites. There was no significant difference in any of the clinical and pathological variables between patients with local recurrence in the former and latter site. Conclusion Most local recurrences after RRP occur exclusively at the anastomotic site. However, 22% of locally recurrent cases had tumour at the resection site of the vas deferens. This should be taken into account when considering adjuvant or salvage radiation therapy.

Differences in Time to Disease Progression Do Not Predict for Cancer-specific Survival in Patients Receiving Immediate or Deferred Androgen-deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Final Results of EORTC Randomized Trial 30891 with 12 Years of Follow-up

BACKGROUND Trials assessing the benefit of immediate androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for treating prostate cancer (PCa) have often done so based on differences in detectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) relapse or metastatic disease rates at a specific time after randomization. OBJECTIVE Based on the long-term results of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 30891, we questioned if differences in time to progression predict for survival differences. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS EORTC trial 30891 compared immediate ADT (n=492) with orchiectomy or luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog with deferred ADT (n=493) initiated upon symptomatic disease progression or life-threatening complications in randomly assigned T0-4 N0-2 M0 PCa patients. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Time to first objective progression (documented metastases, ureteric obstruction, not PSA rise) and time to objective castration-resistant progressive disease were compared as well as PCa mortality and overall survival. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS After a median of 12.8 yr, 769 of the 985 patients had died (78%), 269 of PCa (27%). For patients receiving deferred ADT, the overall treatment time was 31% of that for patients on immediate ADT. Deferred ADT was significantly worse than immediate ADT for time to first objective disease progression (p<0.0001; 10-yr progression rates 42% vs 30%). However, time to objective castration-resistant disease after deferred ADT did not differ significantly (p=0.42) from that after immediate ADT. In addition, PCa mortality did not differ significantly, except in patients with aggressive PCa resulting in death within 3-5 yr after diagnosis. Deferred ADT was inferior to immediate ADT in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio: 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.39; p [noninferiority]=0.72, p [difference] = 0.0085). CONCLUSIONS This study shows that if hormonal manipulation is used at different times during the disease course, differences in time to first disease progression cannot predict differences in disease-specific survival. A deferred ADT policy may substantially reduce the time on treatment, but it is not suitable for patients with rapidly progressing disease.

Current role of surgery for high risk prostate cancer

In this review, the role of surgery in patients with adverse tumor characteristics and a high risk of tumor progression are discussed. In the current PSA era the proportion of patients presenting with high risk prostate cancer (PCa) is estimated to be between 15% and 25% with a 10-year cancer specific survival in the range of 80-90% for those receiving active local treatment. The treatment of high risk prostate cancer is a contemporary challenge. Surgery in this group is gaining popularity since 10-year cancer specific survival data of over 90% has been described. Radical prostatectomy should be combined with extended lymphadenectomy. Adjuvant or salvage therapies may be needed in more than half of patients , guided by pathologic findings and postoperative PSA. Unfortunately there are no randomized controlled trials comparing radical prostatectomy to radiotherapy and no single treatment can be universally recommended. This group of high risk prostate cancer patients should be considered a multi-disciplinary challenge; however, for the properly selected patient, radical prostatectomy either as initial or as the only therapy can be considered an excellent treatment.

RANGE ADAPTIVE PROTON THERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER

Purpose: The rapid distal falloff of a proton beam allows for sparing of normal tissues distal to the target. However proton beams that aim directly towards critical structures are avoided due to concerns of range uncertainties, such as CT number conversion and anatomy variations. We propose to eliminate range uncertainty and enable prostate treatment with a single anterior beam by detecting the proton’s range at the prostate-rectal interface and adaptively adjusting the range in vivo and in real-time. Materials and Methods: A prototype device, consisting of an endorectal liquid scintillation detector and dual-inverted Lucite wedges for range compensation, was designed to test the feasibility and accuracy of the technique. Liquid scintillation filled volume was fitted with optical fiber and placed inside the rectum of an anthropomorphic pelvic phantom. Photodiode-generated current signal was generated as a function of proton beam distal depth, and the spatial resolution of this technique was calculated by relating the variance in detecting proton spills to its maximum penetration depth. The relative water-equivalent thickness of the wedges was measured in a water phantom and prospectively tested to determine the accuracy of range corrections. Treatment simulation studies were performed to test the potential dosimetric benefit in sparing the rectum. Results: The spatial resolution of the detector in phantom measurement was 0.5 mm. The precision of the range correction was 0.04 mm. The residual margin to ensure CTV coverage was 1.1 mm. The composite distal margin for 95% treatment confidence was 2.4 mm. Planning studies based on a previously estimated 2mm margin (90% treatment confidence) for 27 patients showed a rectal sparing up to 51% at 70 Gy and 57% at 40 Gy relative to IMRT and bilateral proton treatment. Conclusion: We demonstrated the feasibility of our design. Use of this technique allows for proton treatment using a single anterior beam, significantly reducing the rectal dose.

Risk of Second Malignant Neoplasms Following Proton Arc Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Prostate Cancer

The risk of second malignant neoplasms (SMNs) following prostate radiotherapy is a concern due to the large population of survivors and decreasing age at diagnosis. It is known that parallel-opposed beam proton therapy carries a lower risk than photon IMRT. However, a comparison of SMN risk following proton and photon arc therapies has not previously been reported. The purpose of this study was to predict the ratio of excess relative risk (RRR) of SMN incidence following proton arc therapy to that after volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Additionally, we investigated the impact of margin size and the effect of risk-minimized proton beam weighting on predicted RRR. Physician-approved treatment plans were created for both modalities for three patients. Therapeutic dose was obtained with differential dose-volume histograms from the treatment planning system, and stray dose was estimated from the literature or calculated with Monte Carlo simulations. Then, various risk models were applied to the total dose. Additional treatment plans were also investigated with varying margin size and risk-minimized proton beam weighting. The mean RRR ranged from 0.74 to 0.99, depending on risk model. The additional treatment plans revealed that the RRR remained approximately constant with varying margin size, and that the predicted RRR was reduced by 12% using a risk-minimized proton arc therapy planning technique. In conclusion, proton arc therapy was found to provide an advantage over VMAT in regard to predicted risk of SMN following prostate radiotherapy. This advantage was independent of margin size and was amplified with risk-optimized proton beam weighting.

Is a 3-mm intrafractional margin sufficient for daily image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy of prostate cancer?

PURPOSE: To determine whether a 3-mm isotropic target margin adequately covers the prostate and seminal vesicles (SVs) during administration of an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment fraction, assuming that daily image-guided setup is performed just before each fraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In-room computed tomographic (CT) scans were acquired immediately before and after a daily treatment fraction in 46 patients with prostate cancer. An eight-field IMRT plan was designed using the pre-fraction CT with a 3-mm margin and subsequently recalculated on the post-fraction CT. For convenience of comparison, dose plans were scaled to full course of treatment (75.6 Gy). Dose coverage was assessed on the post-treatment CT image set. RESULTS: During one treatment fraction (21.4+/-5.5 min), there were reductions in the volumes of the prostate and SVs receiving the prescribed dose (median reduction 0.1% and 1.0%, respectively, p<0.001) and in the minimum dose to 0.1 cm(3) of their volumes (median reduction 0.5 and 1.5 Gy, p<0.001). Of the 46 patients, three patients' prostates and eight patients' SVs did not maintain dose coverage above 70 Gy. Rectal filling correlated with decreased percentage-volume of SV receiving 75.6, 70, and 60 Gy (p<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The 3-mm intrafractional margin was adequate for prostate dose coverage. However, a significant subset of patients lost SV dose coverage. The rectal volume change significantly affected SV dose coverage. For advanced-stage prostate cancers, we recommend to use larger margins or improve organ immobilization (such as with a rectal balloon) to ensure SV coverage.

Incidence of second malignancies for prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION There is a need to assess risk of second primary cancers in prostate cancer (PCa) patients, especially since PCa treatment may be associated with increased risk of second primary tumours. METHODS We calculated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for second primary tumours comparing men diagnosed with PCa between 1980 and 2010 in the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (n = 20,559), and the general male population in the Canton. RESULTS A total of 1,718 men developed a second primary tumour after PCa diagnosis, with lung and colon cancer being the most common (15 and 13% respectively). The SIR for overall second primary cancer was 1.11 (95%CI: 1.06-1.17). Site-specific SIRs varied from 1.19 (1.05-1.34) to 2.89 (2.62-4.77) for lung and thyroid cancer, respectively. When stratified by treatment, the highest SIR was observed for thyroid cancer (3.57 (1.30-7.76)) when undergoing surgery, whereas liver cancer was common when treated with radiotherapy (3.21 (1.54-5.90)) and kidney bladder was most prevalent for those on hormonal treatment (3.15 (1.93-4.87)). Stratification by time since PCa diagnosis showed a lower risk of cancer for men with PCa compared to the general population for the first four years, but then a steep increase in risk was observed. CONCLUSION In the Canton of Zurich, there was an increased risk of second primary cancers among men with PCa compared to the general population. Increased diagnostic activity after PCa diagnosis may partly explain increased risks within the first years of diagnosis, but time-stratified analyses indicated that increased risks remained and even increased over time.

Tumour genomic and microenvironmental heterogeneity for integrated prediction of 5-year biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND Clinical prognostic groupings for localised prostate cancers are imprecise, with 30-50% of patients recurring after image-guided radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy. We aimed to test combined genomic and microenvironmental indices in prostate cancer to improve risk stratification and complement clinical prognostic factors. METHODS We used DNA-based indices alone or in combination with intra-prostatic hypoxia measurements to develop four prognostic indices in 126 low-risk to intermediate-risk patients (Toronto cohort) who will receive image-guided radiotherapy. We validated these indices in two independent cohorts of 154 (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center cohort [MSKCC] cohort) and 117 (Cambridge cohort) radical prostatectomy specimens from low-risk to high-risk patients. We applied unsupervised and supervised machine learning techniques to the copy-number profiles of 126 pre-image-guided radiotherapy diagnostic biopsies to develop prognostic signatures. Our primary endpoint was the development of a set of prognostic measures capable of stratifying patients for risk of biochemical relapse 5 years after primary treatment. FINDINGS Biochemical relapse was associated with indices of tumour hypoxia, genomic instability, and genomic subtypes based on multivariate analyses. We identified four genomic subtypes for prostate cancer, which had different 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival. Genomic instability is prognostic for relapse in both image-guided radiotherapy (multivariate analysis hazard ratio [HR] 4·5 [95% CI 2·1-9·8]; p=0·00013; area under the receiver operator curve [AUC] 0·70 [95% CI 0·65-0·76]) and radical prostatectomy (4·0 [1·6-9·7]; p=0·0024; AUC 0·57 [0·52-0·61]) patients with prostate cancer, and its effect is magnified by intratumoral hypoxia (3·8 [1·2-12]; p=0·019; AUC 0·67 [0·61-0·73]). A novel 100-loci DNA signature accurately classified treatment outcome in the MSKCC low-risk to intermediate-risk cohort (multivariate analysis HR 6·1 [95% CI 2·0-19]; p=0·0015; AUC 0·74 [95% CI 0·65-0·83]). In the independent MSKCC and Cambridge cohorts, this signature identified low-risk to high-risk patients who were most likely to fail treatment within 18 months (combined cohorts multivariate analysis HR 2·9 [95% CI 1·4-6·0]; p=0·0039; AUC 0·68 [95% CI 0·63-0·73]), and was better at predicting biochemical relapse than 23 previously published RNA signatures. INTERPRETATION This is the first study of cancer outcome to integrate DNA-based and microenvironment-based failure indices to predict patient outcome. Patients exhibiting these aggressive features after biopsy should be entered into treatment intensification trials. FUNDING Movember Foundation, Prostate Cancer Canada, Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Canadian Institute for Health Research, NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, The University of Cambridge, Cancer Research UK, Cambridge Cancer Charity, Prostate Cancer UK, Hutchison Whampoa Limited, Terry Fox Research Institute, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre Foundation, PMH-Radiation Medicine Program Academic Enrichment Fund, Motorcycle Ride for Dad (Durham), Canadian Cancer Society.

Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of prostate cancer with a gastrin releasing peptide receptor antagonist - from mice to men

UNLABELLED Ex vivo studies have shown that the gastrin releasing peptide receptor (GRPr) is overexpressed on almost all primary prostate cancers, making it a promising target for prostate cancer imaging and targeted radiotherapy. METHODS Biodistribution, dosimetry and tumor uptake of the GRPr antagonist ⁶⁴Cu-CB-TE2A-AR06 [(⁶⁴Cu-4,11-bis(carboxymethyl)-1,4,8,11-tetraazabicyclo(6.6.2)hexadecane)-PEG₄-D-Phe-Gln-Trp-Ala-Val-Gly-His-Sta-LeuNH₂] were studied by PET/CT in four patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer (T1c-T2b, Gleason 6-7). RESULTS No adverse events were observed after injection of ⁶⁴Cu-CB-TE2A-AR06. Three of four tumors were visualized with high contrast [tumor-to-prostate ratio > 4 at 4 hours (h) post injection (p.i.)], one small tumor (T1c, < 5% tumor on biopsy specimens) showed moderate contrast (tumor-to-prostate ratio at 4 h: 1.9). Radioactivity was cleared by the kidneys and only the pancreas demonstrated significant accumulation of radioactivity, which rapidly decreased over time. CONCLUSION ⁶⁴Cu-CB-TE2A-AR06 shows very favorable characteristics for imaging prostate cancer. Future studies evaluating ⁶⁴Cu-CB-TE2A-AR06 PET/CT for prostate cancer detection, staging, active surveillance, and radiation treatment planning are necessary.

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.

Acceptability of short term neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer

Purpose: To determine the acceptability of short term neo-adjuvant maximal androgen deprivation (MAD) to patients treated with external beam radiation for locally advanced prostate cancer. Methods: Between 1996 and 2000, 818 patients with locally advanced, but non-metastatic, prostate cancer were entered into a randomised clinical trial (TROG 96.01), which compared radiation treatment alone with the same radiation treatment and 3 or 6 months neo-adjuvant MAD with goserelin and flutamide. Relevant symptoms, and how troublesome they were to the patient, were scored using a self-assessment questionnaire. This was completed by the patient at registration, and at specified times during and after treatment. Patients taking flutamide had liver function tests checked at regular intervals. Results: All patients have completed at least 12 months follow-up after treatment. Nearly all patients completed planned treatment with goserelin, but 27% of patients in the 6-month MAD treatment arm, and 20% in the 3-month arm, had to stop flutamide early. This was mainly due to altered liver function (up to 17% patients) and bowel side effects (up to 8% patients). However, although flutamide resulted in more bowel symptoms for patients on MAD, there was significant reduction in some urinary symptoms on this treatment. Acute bowel and urinary side effects at the end of radiation treatment were similar in all treatment arms. Side effect severity was unrelated to radiation target volume size, which was reduced by MAD, but symptomatology prior to any treatment was a powerful predictor. Of the 36% of patients who were sexually active before any treatment, the majority became inactive whilst on MAD. However, sexual activity at 12 months after radiation treatment was similar in all treatment arms, indicating that the effects of short term MAD on sexual function are reversible. Conclusion: Despite temporary effects on sexual activity, and compliance difficulties with flutamide, short-term neo-adjuvant MAD was not perceived by patients to be a major inconvenience. If neo-adjuvant MAD in the way tested can be demonstrated to lead to improved biochemical control and/or survival, then patients would view these therapeutic gains as worthwhile. Compliance with short-term goserelin was excellent, confirming that LH-RH analogues have a potential role in more long-term adjuvant treatment. However, for more protracted androgen deprivation, survival advantages and deleterious effects need to be assessed in parallel, in order to determine the optimal duration of treatment. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All fights reserved.