Eric J. Small

Eligibility and Response Guidelines for Phase II Clinical Trials in Androgen-Independent Prostate Cancer: Recommendations From the Prostate-Specific Antigen Working Group

PURPOSE Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a glycoprotein that is found almost exclusively in normal and neoplastic prostate cells. For patients with metastatic disease, changes in PSA will often antedate changes in bone scan. Furthermore, many but not all investigators have observed an association between a decline in PSA levels of 50% or greater and survival. Since the majority of phase II clinical trials for patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer (AIPC) have used PSA as a marker, we believed it was important for investigators to agree on definitions and values for a minimum set of parameters for eligibility and PSA declines and to develop a common approach to outcome analysis and reporting. We held a consensus conference with 26 leading investigators in the field of AIPC to define these parameters. RESULT We defined four patient groups: (1) progressive measurable disease, (2) progressive bone metastasis, (3) stable metastases and a rising PSA, and (4) rising PSA and no other evidence of metastatic disease. The purpose of determining the number of patients whose PSA level drops in a phase II trial of AIPC is to guide the selection of agents for further testing and phase III trials. We propose that investigators report at a minimum a PSA decline of at least 50% and this must be confirmed by a second PSA value 4 or more weeks later. Patients may not demonstrate clinical or radiographic evidence of disease progression during this time period. Some investigators may want to report additional measures of PSA changes (ie, 75% decline, 90% decline). Response duration and the time to PSA progression may also be important clinical end point. CONCLUSION Through this consensus conference, we believe we have developed practical guidelines for using PSA as a measurement of outcome. Furthermore, the use of common standards is important as we determine which agents should progress to randomized trials which will use survival as an end point.

Prognostic Model for Predicting Survival in Men With Hormone-Refractory Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To develop and validate a model that can be used to predict the overall survival probability among metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients (HRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Data from six Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocols that enrolled 1,101 patients with metastatic hormone-refractory adenocarcinoma of the prostate during the study period from 1991 to 2001 were pooled. The proportional hazards model was used to develop a multivariable model on the basis of pretreatment factors and to construct a prognostic model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was calculated as a measure of predictive discrimination. Calibration of the model predictions was assessed by comparing the predicted probability with the actual survival probability. An independent data set was used to validate the fitted model. RESULTS The final model included the following factors: lactate dehydrogenase, prostate-specific antigen, alkaline phosphatase, Gleason sum, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, hemoglobin, and the presence of visceral disease. The area under the ROC curve was 0.68. Patients were classified into one of four risk groups. We observed a good agreement between the observed and predicted survival probabilities for the four risk groups. The observed median survival durations were 7.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2 to 10.9), 13.4 (95% CI, 9.7 to 26.3), 18.9 (95% CI, 16.2 to 26.3), and 27.2 (95% CI, 21.9 to 42.8) months for the first, second, third, and fourth risk groups, respectively. The corresponding median predicted survival times were 8.8, 13.4, 17.4, and 22.80 for the four risk groups. CONCLUSION This model could be used to predict individual survival probabilities and to stratify metastatic HRPC patients in randomized phase III trials.

Nomogram for Overall Survival of Patients With Progressive Metastatic Prostate Cancer After Castration

PURPOSE To develop a pretreatment prognostic model for survival of patients with progressive metastatic prostate cancer after castration using parameters that are measured during routine clinical management. PATIENTS AND METHODS Pretreatment clinical and biochemical determinants from 409 patients enrolled onto 19 consecutive therapeutic protocols from June 1989 through January 2000 were evaluated. The factors selected were age, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), hemoglobin (HGB), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), alkaline phosphatase (ALK), and albumin. These factors were combined in an accelerated failure time regression model to produce a nomogram to predict median, 1-year, and 2-year survival. The nomogram was validated internally and externally using data from a multicenter randomized trial of suramin plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone. RESULTS The median survival of the entire group was 15.8 months (range, 0.9 to 77.8 months); 87% have died. In multivariable analysis, KPS, HGB, ALK, albumin, and LDH were significantly associated with survival (P <.05), whereas age and PSA were not. All seven factors were included in the nomogram. When applied to the external validation data set, the nomogram achieved a concordance index of 0.67. Calibration plots suggested that the nomogram was well calibrated for all predictions. CONCLUSION A nomogram derived from pretreatment parameters that are measured on a routine basis was constructed. It can be used to predict the median, 1-year, and 2-year survival of patients with progressive castrate metastatic disease with reasonable accuracy. The information is useful to assess prognosis, guide treatment selection, and design clinical trials.

Multi-Institutional Randomized Phase II Trial of the Epothilone B Analog Ixabepilone (BMS-247550) With or Without Estramustine Phosphate in Patients With Progressive Castrate Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the antitumor activity and safety of the epothilone B analog, ixabepilone, with or without estramustine phosphate (EMP), in chemotherapy-naive patients with progressive castrate metastatic prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive ixabepilone (35 mg/m(2)) by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks with or without EMP 280 mg orally three times daily on days 1 to 5. RESULTS Between December 2001 and October 2003, 92 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment with ixabepilone alone (45 patients) or in combination with EMP (47 patients). Grades 3 and 4 toxicities experienced by more than 5% of patients included neutropenia (22%), fatigue (9%), and neuropathy (13%) on the ixabepilone arm, and neutropenia (29%), febrile neutropenia (9%), fatigue (9%), neuropathy (7%), and thrombosis (6%) on the ixabepilone + EMP arm. Post-treatment declines in prostate-specific antigen of > or = 50% were achieved in 21 of 44 patients (48%; 95% CI, 33% to 64%) on the ixabepilone arm, and 31 of 45 patients (69%; 95% CI, 55% to 82%) on the ixabepilone + EMP arm. In patients with measurable disease, partial responses were observed in eight of 25 patients (32%; 95% CI, 14% to 50%) on the ixabepilone arm, and 11 of 23 (48%; 95% CI, 27% to 68%) on the ixabepilone + EMP arm. Time to prostate-specific antigen progression was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 6.9 months) on the ixabepilone-alone arm and 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.5 to 6.8 months) on the combination arm. CONCLUSION Ixabepilone, with or without estramustine phosphate, is well tolerated and has antitumor activity in patients with castrate metastatic prostate cancer.

Paclitaxel, Estramustine Phosphate, and Carboplatin in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To determine the safety and activity of weekly paclitaxel in combination with estramustine and carboplatin (TEC) in patients with advanced prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS In a dose-escalation study, patients with advanced prostate cancer were administered paclitaxel (weekly 1-hour infusions of 60 to 100 mg/m(2)), oral estramustine (10 mg/kg), and carboplatin (area under the curve, 6 mg/mL-min every 4 weeks). Paclitaxel levels were determined 0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes and 18 hours after infusion, and a concentration-time curve was estimated. Once a safe dose was established, a multi-institutional phase II trial was conducted in patients with progressive androgen-independent disease. RESULTS Fifty-six patients with progressive androgen-independent disease were treated for a median of four cycles. The dose of paclitaxel was escalated from 60 to 100 mg/m(2) without the occurrence of DLT. Posttherapy decreases in serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 50%, 80%, and 90% were seen in 67%, 48%, and 39% (95% confidence interval, 55% to 79%, 35% to 61%, 26% to 52%) of the patients, respectively. Of the 33 patients with measurable disease, two (6%) had a complete response and 13 (39%) had a partial response. The overall median time to progression was 21 weeks, and the median survival time for all patients was 19.9 months. Major grade 3 or 4 adverse effects were thromboembolic disease (in 25% of patients), hyperglycemia (in 38%), and hypophosphatemia (in 42%). Significant leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and peripheral neuropathy were not observed. CONCLUSION TEC has significant antitumor activity and is well tolerated in patients with progressive androgen-independent prostate cancer.

Suramin Therapy for Patients With Symptomatic Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing Suramin Plus Hydrocortisone to Placebo Plus Hydrocortisone

PURPOSE Suramin is a novel agent that has demonstrated preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). A prospective randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate pain and opioid analgesic intake as surrogates for antitumor response in HRPC patients with significant, opioid analgesic-dependent pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized patients to receive a 78-day, outpatient regimen of either suramin plus hydrocortisone (HC, 40 mg/d) or placebo plus HC. Treatment assignment was unblinded when either disease progression or dose-limiting toxicity occurred; placebo patients were allowed to cross-over to open-label suramin plus HC. In addition to pain and opioid analgesic intake, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, time to disease progression, quality of life, performance status, and survival were compared. RESULTS Overall mean reductions in combined pain and opioid analgesic intake were greater for suramin plus HC (rank sum P =.0001). Pain response was achieved in a higher proportion of patients receiving suramin than placebo (43% v 28%; P =.001), and duration of response was longer for suramin responders (median, 240 v 69 days; P =.0027). Time to disease progression was longer (relative risk = 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 1.9) and the proportion of patients with a greater than 50% decline in PSA was higher (33% v 16%; P =.01) in patients who received suramin. Neither quality of life nor performance status was decreased by suramin treatment, and overall survival was similar. Most adverse events were of mild or moderate intensity and were easily managed medically. CONCLUSION Outpatient treatment with suramin plus HC is well tolerated and provides moderate palliative benefit and delay in disease progression for patients with symptomatic HRPC.

Activity of second-line chemotherapy in docetaxel-refractory hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients Presented in part at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Multidisciplinary Prostate Cancer Symposium, February 17–19, 2005, Orlando, Florida; and the American Society of Clinical Oncology Multidisciplinary Prostate Cancer Symposium, February 24–26, 2006.

This randomized, noncomparative, multicenter, clinical trial evaluated ixabepilone or mitoxantrone/prednisone (MP) as second‐line chemotherapy for taxane‐refractory, hormone‐refractory, prostate cancer (HRPC).

Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Phase II Trial of the Herbal Supplement, PC-SPES, and Diethylstilbestrol in Patients With Androgen-Independent Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the herbal combination, PC-SPES, and diethylstilbestrol (DES) in patients with androgen independent prostate cancer (AIPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS A randomized phase II study was conducted with cross-over design. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either three PC-SPES capsules orally three times a day or DES 3 mg orally once a day. Prophylactic warfarin was administered. At clinical or prostate-specific antigen progression, patients received the other therapy. The study closed prematurely after PC-SPES was withdrawn from the market. Chemical analyses were performed on multiple lots of PC-SPES. RESULTS Ninety patients were enrolled, of whom 85 were assessable for response. Prostate-specific antigen declines > or = 50% were noted in 40% (95% CI, 25% to 56%) with PC-SPES, and 24% (95% CI, 12% to 39%) with DES. Median response duration was not reached with PC-SPES, and was 3.8 months with DES. Median time to progression for randomly assigned patients was 5.5 months for PC-SPES and 2.9 months for DES. Common toxicities included mild fatigue, gynecomastia, and mastodynia. Five thromboembolic events occurred (one PC-SPES, four DES). Responses in the cross-over phase were inconclusive. Four lots of PC-SPES had measurable quantities of DES, ranging from 0.01% to 3.1% of the dose used in the DES arm. Ethinyl estradiol was also detected in PC-SPES lots. CONCLUSION PC-SPES and DES demonstrate activity in AIPC and are well tolerated. However, the synthetic estrogens, DES and ethinyl estradiol, were detected in various lots of PC-SPES, including those used in this trial. Clinical trials that utilize herbal therapies must account for issues of purity and consistency.

Successful Implementation of the Randomized Discontinuation Trial Design: An Application to the Study of the Putative Antiangiogenic Agent Carboxyaminoimidazole in Renal Cell Carcinoma—CALGB 69901

PURPOSE To assess the disease-stabilizing activity of carboxyaminoimidazole (CAI) in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC) using a randomized discontinuation trial (RDT) design. PATIENTS AND METHODS Recruited patients had a performance status of 0 to 2, minimal neuropathy or cerebellar dysfunction, measurable disease, and normal organ function. Treatment with 250 mg/d CAI was initiated in all patients and continued until disease progression in those with an objective response. Protocol treatment was discontinued for unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease; patients with stable disease at the 16-week evaluation point were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to continued CAI or placebo. The primary end point was the stable disease rate in the randomized groups. RESULTS A total of 368 patients were accrued and received therapy. Ninety percent had a performance status of 0 or 1, 80% underwent a prior nephrectomy, and 41% had received no prior systemic therapy. Serious or life-threatening toxicity was experienced by 34%, with asthenia (15%) and neuropsychiatric difficulties (7%) being most common. At the randomization point, 51% of patients had progressed, 30% withdrew, 1% experienced a partial response, and 17% had stable disease and were randomly assigned. A Bayesian futility analysis utilizing the first 49 randomly assigned patients suggested that the probability of demonstrating a higher stable disease rate in the experimental group was less than 9% even under the most optimistic a priori assumptions, and further trial accrual was halted. CONCLUSION CAI is inactive in RCC. The RDT design should be further explored for evaluating activity of putative disease stabilizing agents.

Focal therapy for prostate cancer 1996: Maximizing outcome

OBJECTIVES To summarize improvements in patient selection and the results of focal therapy for the management of localized prostate cancer. METHODS A contemporary series of patients managed with wide surgical excision, radiation therapy (three-dimensional conformal radiation, interstitial radiation, and charged-particle or proton therapy), and cryo-therapy were reviewed. RESULTS We used preoperative cancer grade, transrectal ultrasound, and serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in all patients, and cross-sectional imaging and bone scans in selected patients to allow for reasonably accurate cancer staging and selection of patients most likely to be cured by radical prostatectomy or radiation. In patients with extracapsular extension of prostate cancer, wide surgical excision and achievement of a clear surgical margin had therapeutic value. Newer radiation techniques resulted in a higher likelihood of prostate cancer control than previous techniques. Cryotherapy for patients with stages T1 through 3 prostate cancer was associated with a posttreatment undetectable PSA rate of 48% and a positive biopsy rate of 23%. CONCLUSIONS Patients with organ-confined and, therefore, curable prostate cancer can be identified. Well-performed radical prostatectomy, radiation, and cryotherapy are alternative treatments for the management of localized prostate cancer.