-
BMJ Open Mar 2024Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is commonly used to treat men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. Men receiving ADT experience numerous side effects...
Prostate Cancer Survivorship Essentials for men with prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a tele-based nurse-led survivorship care intervention (PCEssentials Hormone Therapy Study).
INTRODUCTION
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is commonly used to treat men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. Men receiving ADT experience numerous side effects and frequently report unmet supportive care needs. An essential part of quality cancer care is survivorship care. To date, an optimal effective approach to survivorship care for men with prostate cancer on ADT has not been described. This protocol describes a randomised trial of tele-based nurse-led survivorship that addresses this knowledge gap: (1) determine the effectiveness of a nurse-led survivorship care intervention (PCEssentials), relative to usual care, for improving health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) in men with prostate cancer undergoing ADT and (2) evaluate PCEssentials implementation strategies and outcomes, including cost-effectiveness, compared with usual care.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
This is an effectiveness-implementation hybrid (type 1) trial with participants randomised to one of two arms: (1) minimally enhanced usual care and (2) nurse-led prostate cancer survivorship essentials (PCEssentials) delivered over four tele-based sessions, with a booster session 5 months after session 1. Eligible participants are Australian men with prostate cancer commencing ADT and expected to be on ADT for a minimum of 12 months. Participants are followed up at 3, 6 and 12 months postrecruitment. Primary outcomes are HR-QoL and self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes are psychological distress, insomnia, fatigue and physical activity. A concurrent process evaluation with participants and study stakeholders will be undertaken to determine effectiveness of delivery of PCEssentials.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION
Ethics approval was obtained from the Metro South Health HREC (HREC/2021/QMS/79429). All participants are required to provide written informed consent. Outcomes of this trial will be published in peer-reviewed journals. The findings will be presented at conferences and meetings, local hospital departments, participating organisations/clinical services, and university seminars, and communicated at community and consumer-led forums.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
ACTRN12622000025730.
Topics: Male; Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Prostate; Survivorship; Cancer Survivors; Nurse's Role; Australia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38521521
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084412 -
Medicine Mar 2024Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. In China, traditional Chinese medicine is used to treat prostate cancer. However, there is a lack of evidence for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. In China, traditional Chinese medicine is used to treat prostate cancer. However, there is a lack of evidence for differences in the effectiveness and safety of different Chinese patent medicines. Therefore, we conducted this Network Meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of different Chinese patent medicines in the treatment of prostate cancer.
METHODS
We systematically search PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane library, CNKI database, VIP database, wanfang database, and SinoMed Randomized controlled trials of Chinese patent medicines for the treatment of prostate cancer sores included in the database were retrieved until June 1, 2023. The included studies were assessed for risk of bias using Cochrane randomized controlled trial Bias risk Assessment tool. The main outcome indicators were Efficacy, Prostate Specific Antigen, and adverse reaction. Since different courses of treatment were used in the included studies, we used Bayesian mesh meta-regression to investigate the effects of treatment courses on efficacy and safety.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven articles were included, involving 1885 patients. Including 9 kinds of Chinese patent medicine. The results of Network Meta-analysis show that: ① efficacy: compared with androgen antagonists, Bruceolic oil emulsion (relative risk = 1.70, 95% credibility interval [CI] (1.30, 2.29)), Compound Kushen injection (relative risk = 1.39, 95%CI (1.19, 1.70)) had significant advantages. There was no significant difference among all Chinese patent medicines (P > .05). The top 3 Chinese patent medicines were Bruceolic oil emulsion, Zhibodihuang pill, Compound Kushen injection. ② Prostate specific antigen: compared with androgen antagonists, Bruceolic oil emulsion (mean difference [MD] = -10.4, 95%CI [-17.6, -3.21]), Compound Kushen injection (MD = -4.46, 95%CI [-8.80, -1.70]), Shenfu injection (MD = -14.7, 95%CI [-23.4, -6.01]) had significant advantages. The top 3 Chinese patent medicines were Shenfu injection, Bruceolic oil emulsion, Compound Kushen injection. adverse reaction: compared with androgen antagonists, there was no significant difference among all PCM (P > .05).
CONCLUSION
Compared with androgen antagonists, Chinese patent medicine has significant difference in effectiveness. The effect of Chinese patent medicine is little affected by the course of treatment and dose. From comprehensive analysis, Bruceolic oil emulsion combined with androgen antagonist is the best intervention measures.
Topics: Humans; Male; Androgen Antagonists; Antineoplastic Agents; Bayes Theorem; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Emulsions; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Network Meta-Analysis; Nonprescription Drugs; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 38517994
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037180 -
Clinical and Translational Medicine Mar 2024Our preclinical studies showed that lycopene enhanced the anti-prostate cancer efficacy of docetaxel in animal models. A phase I trial (NCT0149519) was conducted to...
PURPOSE
Our preclinical studies showed that lycopene enhanced the anti-prostate cancer efficacy of docetaxel in animal models. A phase I trial (NCT0149519) was conducted to identify an optimum dose of synthetic lycopene in combination with docetaxel (and androgen blockade [androgen deprivation therapy, ADT]), and to evaluate its effect on the safety and pharmacokinetics of docetaxel in men with metastatic prostate cancer.
METHODS
Subjects were treated with 21-day cycles of 75 mg/m docetaxel (and ADT), plus lycopene at 30, 90 or 150 mg/day. A Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method was used to guide dose escalation. Pharmacokinetics of docetaxel and multiple correlative studies were carried out.
RESULTS
Twenty-four participants were enrolled, 18 in a dose escalation cohort to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and six in a pharmacokinetic cohort. Docetaxel/ADT plus 150 mg/day synthetic lycopene resulted in dose-limiting toxicity (pulmonary embolus) in one out of 12 participants with an estimated probability of .106 and thus was chosen as the MTD. Lycopene increased the AUC and C of plasma docetaxel by 9.5% and 15.1%, respectively. Correlative studies showed dose-related changes in circulating endothelial cells and vascular endothelial growth factor A, and reduction in insulin-like growth factor 1R phosphorylation, associated with lycopene therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
The combination of docetaxel/ADT and synthetic lycopene has low toxicity and favourable pharmacokinetics. The effects of lycopene on biomarkers provide additional support for the toxicity-dependent MTD definition.
HIGHLIGHTS
The maximum tolerated dose was identified as 150 mg/day of lycopene in combination with docetaxel/ADT for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer patients. Small increases in plasma exposure to docetaxel were observed with lycopene co-administration. Mechanistically significant effects were seen on angiogenesis and insulin-like growth factor 1 signalling by lycopene co-administration with docetaxel/ADT.
Topics: Male; Humans; Docetaxel; Prostatic Neoplasms; Lycopene; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Bayes Theorem; Endothelial Cells
PubMed: 38515274
DOI: 10.1002/ctm2.1627 -
Clinical Cancer Research : An Official... Jun 2024Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors radically changed the treatment paradigm for breast cancer. Similar to estrogen receptor in breast cancer, androgen...
PURPOSE
Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors radically changed the treatment paradigm for breast cancer. Similar to estrogen receptor in breast cancer, androgen receptor signaling activates cyclin D-CDK4/6, driving proliferation and resistance to hormonal manipulation in prostate cancer. This study was designed to detect signals of clinical activity for abemaciclib in treatment-refractory metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Eligible patients had progressive mCRPC, measurable disease, and previously received ≥1 novel hormonal agent(s) and 2 lines of taxane chemotherapy. Abemaciclib 200 mg twice daily was administered on a continuous dosing schedule. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) without concurrent bone progression. This study was designed to detect a minimum ORR of 12.5%.
RESULTS
At trial entry, 40 (90.9%) of 44 patients had objective radiographic disease progression, 4 (9.1%) had prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-only progression, and 20 (46.5%) had visceral metastases (of these, 60% had liver metastases). Efficacy analyses are as follows: ORR without concurrent bone progression: 6.8%; disease control rate: 45.5%; median time to PSA progression: 6.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.2-NA]; median radiographic PFS; 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.9-3.7); and median OS, 8.4 months (95% CI, 5.6-12.7). Most frequent grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) were neutropenia (25.0%), anemia, and fatigue (11.4% each). No grade 4 or 5 AEs were related to abemaciclib.
CONCLUSIONS
Abemaciclib monotherapy was well tolerated and showed clinical activity in this heavily pretreated population, nearly half with visceral metastases. This study is considered preliminary proof-of-concept and designates CDK4/6 as a valid therapeutic target in prostate cancer.
Topics: Humans; Male; Benzimidazoles; Aged; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Aminopyridines; Middle Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Neoplasm Metastasis; Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4; Treatment Outcome; Protein Kinase Inhibitors
PubMed: 38512117
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3436 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2024The adrenal androgen-metabolizing 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-1 enzyme, encoded by the HSD3B1 gene, catalyzes the rate-limiting step necessary for synthesizing...
IMPORTANCE
The adrenal androgen-metabolizing 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-1 enzyme, encoded by the HSD3B1 gene, catalyzes the rate-limiting step necessary for synthesizing nontesticular testosterone and dihydrotestosterone production. The common adrenal-permissive HSD3B1(1245C) allele is responsible for encoding the 3β-HSD1 protein with decreased susceptibility to degradation resulting in higher extragonadal androgen synthesis. Retrospective studies have suggested an association of the HSD3B1 adrenal-permissive homozygous genotype with androgen deprivation therapy resistance in prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate differences in mortality outcomes by HSD3B1 genetic status among men with prostate cancer.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This cohort study of patients with prostate cancer who were enrolled in the Million Veteran Program within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system between 2011 and 2023 collected genotyping and phenotyping information.
EXPOSURE
HSD3B1 genotype status was categorized as AA (homozygous adrenal-restrictive), AC (heterozygous adrenal-restrictive), or CC (homozygous adrenal-permissive).
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome of this study was prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), defined as the time from diagnosis to death from prostate cancer, censored at the date of last VHA follow-up. Secondary outcomes included incidence of metastases and PCSM in predefined subgroups.
RESULTS
Of the 5287 participants (median [IQR] age, 69 [64-74] years), 402 (7.6%) had the CC genotype, 1970 (37.3%) had the AC genotype, and 2915 (55.1%) had the AA genotype. Overall, the primary cause of death for 91 patients (1.7%) was prostate cancer. Cumulative incidence of PCSM at 5 years after prostate cancer diagnosis was higher among men with the CC genotype (4.0%; 95% CI, 1.7%-6.2%) compared with the AC genotype (2.1%; 95% CI, 1.3%-2.8%) and AA genotype (1.9%; 95% CI, 1.3%-2.4%) (P = .02). In the 619 patients who developed metastatic disease at any time, the cumulative incidence of PCSM at 5 years was higher among patients with the CC genotype (36.0%; 95% CI, 16.7%-50.8%) compared with the AC genotype (17.9%; 95% CI, 10.5%-24.7%) and AA genotype (18.5%; 95% CI, 12.0%-24.6%) (P = .01).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this cohort study of US veterans undergoing treatment for prostate cancer at the VHA, the HSD3B1 CC genotype was associated with inferior outcomes. The HSD3B1 biomarker may help identify patients who may benefit from therapeutic targeting of 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-1 and the androgen-signaling axis.
Topics: Male; Humans; Aged; Alleles; Prostatic Neoplasms; Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Cohort Studies; Retrospective Studies; Multienzyme Complexes; Germ Cells
PubMed: 38506808
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2976 -
BMC Cancer Mar 2024The androgen/androgen receptor (AR)-signaling axis plays a central role in prostate cancer (PCa). Upon androgen-binding the AR dimerizes with another AR, and...
NanoLuc Binary Technology as a methodological approach: an important new tool for studying the localization of androgen receptor and androgen receptor splice variant V7 homo and heterodimers.
BACKGROUND
The androgen/androgen receptor (AR)-signaling axis plays a central role in prostate cancer (PCa). Upon androgen-binding the AR dimerizes with another AR, and translocates into the nucleus where the AR-dimer activates/inactivates androgen-dependent genes. Consequently, treatments for PCa are commonly based on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The clinical benefits of ADT are only transitory and most tumors develop mechanisms allowing the AR to bypass its need for physiological levels of circulating androgens. Clinical failure of ADT is often characterized by the synthesis of a constitutively active AR splice variant, termed AR-V7. AR-V7 mRNA expression is considered as a resistance mechanism following ADT. AR-V7 no longer needs androgenic stimuli for nuclear entry and/or dimerization.
METHODS
Our goal was to mechanistically decipher the interaction between full-length AR (AR-FL) and AR-V7 in AR-null HEK-293 cells using the NanoLuc Binary Technology under androgen stimulation and deprivation conditions.
RESULTS
Our data point toward a hypothesis that AR-FL/AR-FL homodimers form in the cytoplasm, whereas AR-V7/AR-V7 homodimers localize in the nucleus. However, after androgen stimulation, all the AR-FL/AR-FL, AR-FL/AR-V7 and AR-V7/AR-V7 dimers were localized in the nucleus.
CONCLUSIONS
We showed that AR-FL and AR-V7 form heterodimers that localize to the nucleus, whereas AR-V7/AR-V7 dimers were found to localize in the absence of androgens in the nucleus.
Topics: Male; Humans; Receptors, Androgen; Androgens; Prostatic Neoplasms; Androgen Antagonists; HEK293 Cells; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Protein Isoforms; Luciferases
PubMed: 38500100
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12110-2 -
Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism Mar 2024Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is widely used for the treatment of prostate cancer. ADT is associated with reduced bone density leading to an increased risk of...
INTRODUCTION
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is widely used for the treatment of prostate cancer. ADT is associated with reduced bone density leading to an increased risk of osteoporotic fracture. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to quantify fracture risk in men treated with ADT for prostate cancer in real-world practice in Japan.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Data were extracted from the Japanese Medical Data Vision (MDV) database. Men initiating ADT for treatment of prostate cancer between April 2010 and March 2021 were identified and matched to a cohort of prostate cancer patients not taking ADT using a propensity score. Fracture rates were estimated by a cumulative incidence function and compared between cohorts using a Cox cause-specific hazard model. Information was extracted on demographics, comorbidities and bone densitometry.
RESULTS
30,561 men with PC starting ADT were matched to 30,561 men with prostate cancer not treated with ADT. Following ADT initiation, <5% of men underwent bone densitometry. Prescription of ADT was associated with an increased fracture risk compared to not taking ADT (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.63 [95% CI 1.52-1.75]).
CONCLUSION
ADT is associated with a 1.6-fold increase in the risk of osteoporotic fracture in men with prostate cancer. Densitometry in this population is infrequent and monitoring urgently needs to be improved in order to implement effective fracture prevention.
Topics: Male; Humans; Osteoporotic Fractures; Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Japan; Retrospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms; Insurance
PubMed: 38493435
DOI: 10.1007/s00774-024-01497-4 -
Briefings in Bioinformatics Jan 2024The evolution of drug resistance leads to treatment failure and tumor progression. Intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (IADT) helps responsive cancer cells compete...
The evolution of drug resistance leads to treatment failure and tumor progression. Intermittent androgen deprivation therapy (IADT) helps responsive cancer cells compete with resistant cancer cells in intratumoral competition. However, conventional IADT is population-based, ignoring the heterogeneity of patients and cancer. Additionally, existing IADT relies on pre-determined thresholds of prostate-specific antigen to pause and resume treatment, which is not optimized for individual patients. To address these challenges, we framed a data-driven method in two steps. First, we developed a time-varied, mixed-effect and generative Lotka-Volterra (tM-GLV) model to account for the heterogeneity of the evolution mechanism and the pharmacokinetics of two ADT drugs Cyproterone acetate and Leuprolide acetate for individual patients. Then, we proposed a reinforcement-learning-enabled individualized IADT framework, namely, I$^{2}$ADT, to learn the patient-specific tumor dynamics and derive the optimal drug administration policy. Experiments with clinical trial data demonstrated that the proposed I$^{2}$ADT can significantly prolong the time to progression of prostate cancer patients with reduced cumulative drug dosage. We further validated the efficacy of the proposed methods with a recent pilot clinical trial data. Moreover, the adaptability of I$^{2}$ADT makes it a promising tool for other cancers with the availability of clinical data, where treatment regimens might need to be individualized based on patient characteristics and disease dynamics. Our research elucidates the application of deep reinforcement learning to identify personalized adaptive cancer therapy.
Topics: Male; Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms; Androgen Antagonists; Androgens
PubMed: 38493345
DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbae071 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2024The association between the use of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) and the outcomes among patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) treated with... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
The association between the use of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) and the outcomes among patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) treated with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the association between BMA use and the outcomes of patients with mCSPC receiving AAP.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
In this cohort study, a post hoc analysis of individual participant data from the LATITUDE trial was performed. The LATITUDE trial, a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, aimed to assess the efficacy of AAP and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) vs dual-placebo and ADT in patients with high-risk mCSPC (data cutoff, August 15, 2018). Eligible patients had newly diagnosed prostate cancer with metastases and at least 2 of 3 high-risk factors (Gleason score ≥8, presence of ≥3 lesions on bone scan, or presence of measurable visceral metastasis). The trial was conducted at 235 sites in 34 countries. Data for the present study were evaluated from July 18 to September 23, 2023.
EXPOSURES
Use of BMAs was defined as the administration of bisphosphonates and denosumab within 90 days before and after randomization.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcomes were time to skeletal-related events (SREs) and overall survival (OS). An SRE was defined as a clinical or pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, palliative radiation to bone, or surgery involving bone. Differences in these outcomes were examined using the restricted mean survival time from inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves, estimated until the last event was observed (longest time observed, 63.9 months). Treatment × covariate interactions were analyzed using weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models for the total cohort.
RESULTS
In the total cohort of 1199 patients (956 [79.7%] younger than 75 years), 597 (49.8%) received AAP and ADT, including 474 (79.4%) younger than 75 years and 384 (64.3%) with more than 10 bone metastases (AAP cohort); 602 (50.2%) were treated with dual placebo and ADT, including 482 (80.1%) younger than 75 years and 377 (62.6%) with more than 10 bone metastases (ADT cohort). In the AAP cohort, 132 patients (22.1%) received BMAs, while in the ADT cohort, 131 (21.8%) did. Zoledronic acid was the most frequently administered BMA in both the AAP (93 [70.5%]) and the ADT (88 [67.2%]) cohorts. During the median follow-up of 51.8 (IQR, 47.2-57.0) months in the AAP cohort, BMA use was associated with a longer time to SRE (difference, 7.8 [95% CI, 4.2-11.3] months) but not with OS (difference, 1.6 [95% CI, -2.5 to 5.8] months). In the ADT cohort, BMA use was associated with both time to SRE (difference, 9.3 [95% CI, 5.2-13.3] months) and OS (difference, 5.5 [95% CI, 3.2-9.8] months). No evidence was found that the outcomes of BMA varied by AAP or ADT (hazard ratio for time to SRE, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.48-2.08]; P = .99 for interaction; hazard ratio for OS, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.88-1.96]; P = .18 for interaction).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this cohort study suggest that use of BMAs was associated with a longer time to SRE in patients with high-risk mCSPC treated with ADT, with or without AAP, suggesting that BMA use might provide benefits to this population.
Topics: Male; Humans; Abiraterone Acetate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Androgen Antagonists; Cohort Studies; Prednisone; Castration
PubMed: 38488793
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2467 -
World Journal of Urology Mar 2024Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay approach for prostate cancer (PCa) management. However, the most commonly used ADT modality, gonadotropin-releasing... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay approach for prostate cancer (PCa) management. However, the most commonly used ADT modality, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD).
METHODS
The PCa Cardiovascular (PCCV) Expert Network, consisting of multinational urologists, cardiologists and oncologists with expertise in managing PCa, convened to discuss challenges to routine cardiovascular risk assessment in PCa management, as well as how to mitigate such risks in the current treatment landscape.
RESULTS
The experts identified several barriers, including lack of awareness, time constraints, challenges in implementing risk assessment tools and difficulties in establishing multidisciplinary teams that include cardiologists. The experts subsequently provided practical recommendations to improve cardio-oncology care for patients with PCa receiving ADT, such as simplifying cardiovascular risk assessment, individualising treatment based on CVD risk categories, establishing multidisciplinary teams and referral networks and fostering active patient engagement. A streamlined cardiovascular risk-stratification tool and a referral/management guide were developed for seamless integration into urologists' practices and presented herein. The PCCV Expert Network agreed that currently available evidence indicates that GnRH antagonists are associated with a lower risk of CVD than that of GnRH agonists and that GnRH antagonists are preferred for patients with PCa and a high CVD risk.
CONCLUSION
In summary, this article provides insights and guidance to improve management for patients with PCa undergoing ADT.
Topics: Male; Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms; Androgen Antagonists; Cardiovascular Diseases; Risk Assessment; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone
PubMed: 38483562
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04852-2