Combination of androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer in the contemporary era.

Currently, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has a well-defined role when administered together with radiotherapy (RT): neo-adjuvant and concurrent combination for intermediate risk-disease and adjuvant therapy for high risk disease. Evidence of this association was generated by randomized trials designed and led approximately 30 years ago; thus the question which arises is how relevant and portable are these data in our current clinical practice? In the present review, we examine the pitfalls of these published randomized controlled trials, their relevance to present daily clinics, where high-dose external beam RT or brachytherapy is applied, as well as the adoption of ADT in patients with concomitant cardiovascular disorders.

Contemporary role of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) represents one of the most effective systemic palliative treatments known for solid tumors. Although clinical trials have assessed the role of ADT in patients with metastatic and advanced locoregional disease, the risk-benefit ratio, especially in earlier stages, remains poorly defined. Given the mounting evidence for potentially life-threatening adverse effects with short- and long-term ADT, it is important to redefine the role of ADT for this disease.

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.

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.

Combining Enzalutamide with Abiraterone, Prednisone, and Androgen Deprivation Therapy in the STAMPEDE Trial.

There are compelling reasons to study the addition of both enzalutamide and abiraterone, in combination, to standard-of-care for hormone-naïve prostate cancer. Through a protocol amendment, this will be assessed in the STAMPEDE trial, with overall survival as primary outcome measure.

Multimodal treatment for high-risk prostate cancer with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy preceded or not by radical prostatectomy, concurrent intensified-dose docetaxel and long-term androgen deprivation therapy: results of a prospective phase II trial.

BACKGROUND The optimal management of high-risk prostate cancer remains uncertain. In this study we assessed the safety and efficacy of a novel multimodal treatment paradigm for high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS This was a prospective phase II trial including 35 patients with newly diagnosed high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer treated with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy preceded or not by radical prostatectomy, concurrent intensified-dose docetaxel-based chemotherapy and long-term androgen deprivation therapy. Primary endpoint was acute and late toxicity evaluated with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0. Secondary endpoint was biochemical and clinical recurrence-free survival explored with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Acute gastro-intestinal and genito-urinary toxicity was grade 2 in 23% and 20% of patients, and grade 3 in 9% and 3% of patients, respectively. Acute blood/bone marrow toxicity was grade 2 in 20% of patients. No acute grade ≥ 4 toxicity was observed. Late gastro-intestinal and genito-urinary toxicity was grade 2 in 9% of patients each. No late grade ≥ 3 toxicity was observed. Median follow-up was 63 months (interquartile range 31-79). Actuarial 5-year biochemical and clinical recurrence-free survival rate was 55% (95% confidence interval, 35-75%) and 70% (95% confidence interval, 52-88%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS In our phase II trial testing a novel multimodal treatment paradigm for high-risk prostate cancer, toxicity was acceptably low and mid-term oncological outcome was good. This treatment paradigm, thus, may warrant further evaluation in phase III randomized trials.

Synergistic action of image-guided radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy.

The combined use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) can improve overall survival in aggressive, localized prostate cancer. However, owing to the adverse effects of prolonged ADT, it is imperative to identify the patients who would benefit from this combined-modality therapy relative to the use of IGRT alone. Opportunities exist for more personalized approaches in treating aggressive, locally advanced prostate cancer. Biomarkers--such as disseminated tumour cells, circulating tumour cells, genomic signatures and molecular imaging techniques--could identify the patients who are at greatest risk for systemic metastases and who would benefit from the addition of systemic ADT. By contrast, when biomarkers of systemic disease are not present, treatment could proceed using local IGRT alone. The choice of drug, treatment duration and timing of ADT relative to IGRT could be predicated on these personalized approaches to prostate cancer medicine. These novel treatment intensification and reduction strategies could result in improved prostate-cancer-specific survival and overall survival, without incurring the added expense of metabolic syndrome and other adverse effects of ADT in all patients.

Comparison of Objectively and Subjectively Measured Sedentary Behavior in Men with Prostate Cancer and a History of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Use

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-08

Outcome predictors of radical prostatectomy followed by adjuvant androgen deprivation in patients with clinical high risk prostate cancer and pT3 surgical margin positive disease

Patients with high risk prostate cancer with pT3 tumor and positive surgical margins have a high risk of biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Predictors of cancer related death in this patient group are necessary.

Using PSA to guide timing of androgen deprivation in patients with T0-4 N0-2 M0 prostate cancer not suitable for local curative treatment (EORTC 30891)

OBJECTIVE: EORTC trial 30891 compared immediate versus deferred androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in T0-4 N0-2 M0 prostate cancer (PCa). Many patients randomly assigned to deferred ADT did not require ADT because they died before becoming symptomatic. The question arises whether serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels may be used to decide when to initiate ADT in PCa not suitable for local curative treatment. METHODS: PSA data at baseline, PSA doubling time (PSADT) in patients receiving no ADT, and time to PSA relapse (>2 ng/ml) in patients whose PSA declined to <2 ng/ml within the first year after immediate ADT were analyzed in 939 eligible patients randomly assigned to immediate (n=468) or deferred ADT (n=471). RESULTS: In both arms, patients with a baseline PSA>50 ng/ml were at a>3.5-fold higher risk to die of PCa than patients with a baseline PSA12 mo. Time to PSA relapse after response to immediate ADT correlated significantly with baseline PSA, suggesting that baseline PSA may also reflect disease aggressiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a baseline PSA>50 ng/ml and/or a PSADT<12 mo were at increased risk to die from PCa and might have benefited from immediate ADT, whereas patients with a baseline PSA<50 ng/ml and a slow PSADT (>12 mo) were likely to die of causes unrelated to PCa, and thus could be spared the burden of immediate ADT.