Jim Barber

Combined androgen deprivation therapy and radiation therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial

Summary Background Whether the addition of radiation therapy (RT) improves overall survival in men with locally advanced prostate cancer managed with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is unclear. Our aim was to compare outcomes in such patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Methods Patients with: locally advanced (T3 or T4) prostate cancer (n=1057); or organ-confined disease (T2) with either a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration more than 40 ng/mL (n=119) or PSA concentration more than 20 ng/mL and a Gleason score of 8 or higher (n=25), were randomly assigned (done centrally with stratification and dynamic minimisation, not masked) to receive lifelong ADT and RT (65–69 Gy to the prostate and seminal vesicles, 45 Gy to the pelvic nodes). The primary endpoint was overall survival. The results presented here are of an interim analysis planned for when two-thirds of the events for the final analysis were recorded. All efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat and were based on data from all patients. This trial is registered at controlledtrials.com as ISRCTN24991896 and Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00002633. Results Between 1995 and 2005, 1205 patients were randomly assigned (602 in the ADT only group and 603 in the ADT and RT group); median follow-up was 6·0 years (IQR 4·4–8·0). At the time of analysis, a total of 320 patients had died, 175 in the ADT only group and 145 in the ADT and RT group. The addition of RT to ADT improved overall survival at 7 years (74%, 95% CI 70–78 vs 66%, 60–70; hazard ratio [HR] 0·77, 95% CI 0·61–0·98, p=0·033). Both toxicity and health-related quality-of-life results showed a small effect of RT on late gastrointestinal toxicity (rectal bleeding grade >3, three patients (0·5%) in the ADT only group, two (0·3%) in the ADT and RT group; diarrhoea grade >3, four patients (0·7%) vs eight (1·3%); urinary toxicity grade >3, 14 patients (2·3%) in both groups). Interpretation The benefits of combined modality treatment—ADT and RT—should be discussed with all patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Funding Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, US National Cancer Institute, and UK Medical Research Council.

Final Report of the Intergroup Randomized Study of Combined Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Plus Radiotherapy Versus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Alone in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

Purpose We have previously reported that radiotherapy (RT) added to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improves survival in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. Here, we report the prespecified final analysis of this randomized trial. Patients and Methods NCIC Clinical Trials Group PR.3/Medical Research Council PR07/Intergroup T94-0110 was a randomized controlled trial of patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Patients with T3-4, N0/Nx, M0 prostate cancer or T1-2 disease with either prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of more than 40 μg/L or PSA of 20 to 40 μg/L plus Gleason score of 8 to 10 were randomly assigned to lifelong ADT alone or to ADT+RT. The RT dose was 64 to 69 Gy in 35 to 39 fractions to the prostate and pelvis or prostate alone. Overall survival was compared using a log-rank test stratified for prespecified variables. Results One thousand two hundred five patients were randomly assigned between 1995 and 2005, 602 to ADT alone and 603 to ADT+RT. At a median follow-up time of 8 years, 465 patients had died, including 199 patients from prostate cancer. Overall survival was significantly improved in the patients allocated to ADT+RT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.85; P < .001). Deaths from prostate cancer were significantly reduced by the addition of RT to ADT (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.61; P < .001). Patients on ADT+RT reported a higher frequency of adverse events related to bowel toxicity, but only two of 589 patients had grade 3 or greater diarrhea at 24 months after RT. Conclusion This analysis demonstrates that the previously reported benefit in survival is maintained at a median follow-up of 8 years and firmly establishes the role of RT in the treatment of men with locally advanced prostate cancer.

Phase II trial of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5FU chemotherapy in locally advanced and metastatic penis cancer (CRUK/09/001).

Background:Penis cancer is rare and clinical trial evidence on which to base treatment decisions is limited. Case reports suggest that the combination of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-flurouracil (TPF) is highly active in this disease.Methods:Twenty-nine patients with locally advanced or metastatic squamous carcinoma of the penis were recruited into a single-arm phase II trial from nine UK centres. Up to three cycles of chemotherapy were received (docetaxel 75 mg m−2 day 1, cisplatin 60 mg m−2 day 1, 5-flurouracil 750 mg m−2 per day days 1–5, repeated every 3 weeks). Primary outcome was objective response (assessed by RECIST). Fourteen or more responses in 26 evaluable patients were required to confirm a response rate of 60% or higher (Fleming-A’Hern design), warranting further evaluation. Secondary endpoints included toxicity and survival.Results:10/26 evaluable patients (38.5%, 95% CI: 20.2–59.4) achieved an objective response. Two patients with locally advanced disease achieved radiological complete remission. 65.5% of patients experienced at least one grade 3/4 adverse event.Conclusion:Docetaxel, cisplatin and 5FU did not reach the pre-determined threshold for further research and caused significant toxicity. Our results do not support the routine use of TPF. The observed complete responses support further investigation of combination chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting.

SUCCINCT: An open-label, single-arm, non-randomised, phase 2 trial of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin chemotherapy in combination with Sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy (GC regimen) represents a standard treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma. We performed an open-label, single-arm, non-randomised, phase 2 trial evaluating the addition of sunitinib to standard GC chemotherapy (SGC regimen). Overall, 63 treatment-naïve participants were recruited and received up to six 21-d cycles of cisplatin 70 mg/m2 (intravenously [IV], day 1) and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (IV, days 1 and 8) combined with sunitinib 37.5 mg (orally, days 2–15). Following review of toxicity after the first six patients, the sunitinib dose was reduced to 25 mg for all patients. Overall response rate was 64%, with response noted in 37 of 58 patients. At 6 mo, 30 of 58 assessable patients (52%; 90% confidence interval [CI], 40–63%) were progression free. Median overall survival was 12 mo (95% CI, 9–15) and was heavily influenced by Bajorin prognostic group. Grade 3–4 toxicities were predominantly haematologic and limited the deliverability of the triple SGC regimen. The trial did not meet its prespecified primary end point of >60% patients progression free at 6 mo. Cumulative myelosuppression led to treatment delays of gemcitabine and cisplatin and dose reduction and/or withdrawal of sunitinib in the majority of cases. The triple-drug combination was not well tolerated. Phase 3 evaluation of the triple SGC regimen in advanced transitional cell carcinoma is not recommended. Patient summary The addition of sunitinib to standard cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy was poorly tolerated and did not improve outcomes in advanced urothelial carcinoma. Treatment delivery was limited by myelotoxicity.

Population-based analysis of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in younger men (<55 years) in Australia.

To analyse the trends in opportunistic PSA screening in Australia, focusing on younger men (<55 years of age), to examine the effects of this screening on transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)‐guided biopsy rates and to determine the nature of prostate cancers (PCas) being detected.

Adding Celecoxib With or Without Zoledronic Acid for Hormone-Naïve Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Results From an Adaptive, Multiarm, Multistage, Platform, Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose Systemic Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy is a randomized controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage, platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer who were initiating long-term hormone therapy. We report survival data for two celecoxib (Cel)-containing comparisons, which stopped accrual early at interim analysis on the basis of failure-free survival. Patients and Methods Standard of care (SOC) was hormone therapy continuously (metastatic) or for ≥ 2 years (nonmetastatic); prostate (± pelvic node) radiotherapy was encouraged for men without metastases. Cel 400 mg was administered twice a day for 1 year. Zoledronic acid (ZA) 4 mg was administered for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly for 2 years. Stratified random assignment allocated patients 2:1:1 to SOC (control), SOC + Cel, or SOC + ZA + Cel. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality. Results were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models adjusted for stratification factors. Results A total of 1,245 men were randomly assigned (Oct 2005 to April 2011). Groups were balanced: median age, 65 years; 61% metastatic, 14% N+/X M0, 25% N0M0; 94% newly diagnosed; median prostate-specific antigen, 66 ng/mL. Median follow-up was 69 months. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were seen in 36% SOC-only, 33% SOC + Cel, and 32% SOC + ZA + Cel patients. There were 303 control arm deaths (83% prostate cancer), and median survival was 66 months. Compared with SOC, the adjusted hazard ratio was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.80 to 1.20; P = .847; median survival, 70 months) for SOC + Cel and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.05; P =.130; median survival, 76 months) for SOC + ZA + Cel. Preplanned subgroup analyses in men with metastatic disease showed a hazard ratio of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98; P = .033) for SOC + ZA + Cel. Conclusion These data show no overall evidence of improved survival with Cel. Preplanned subgroup analyses provide hypotheses for future studies.

Clinical oncologists favour radical radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a questionnaire survey.

Objective  To explore the treatment preferences of clinical oncologists for managing early prostate cancer and to compare the results with the preferences of urologists.

High Risk of Neutropenia for Hormone-naive Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving STAMPEDE-style Upfront Docetaxel Chemotherapy in Usual Clinical Practice

treatment. Our observed rates of grade 3 and 4 neutropeniawere 14/ 39 (36%) and rates of grade 3 and 4 neutropenic sepsis were 8/39 (20%). Both of these are significantly higher than that observed in the STAMPEDE trial: 12% for both. It has previously been observed that clearance of docetaxel increases by about 100% in castrate patients compared with those who are hormone naive (with a two-fold reduction in the area under the curve) [2]. This may explain the higher toxicity observed in our cohort when compared with those receiving docetaxel in the castrateresistant setting, but not the difference when compared with those published in the STAMPEDE trial (the median time from initiation of hormones to starting docetaxel in our cohort was 9 weeks versus 8.6 weeks in the STAMPEDE trial). We draw a number of conclusions from these findings. First, early docetaxel is not a risk-free strategy, despite the impressive survival benefits observed in the published data. This is of particular relevance when discussing treatment options with the non-metastatic high risk locally advanced patient where there is no proven overall survival advantage. Second, consideration might be given to the role of growth factor prophylaxis during treatment, especially if the true rate of haematological toxicity is similar to that observed in our study. Third, clinical trial results do not always directly translate into real life clinical practice. We recommend that other centres prospectively audit their rates of neutropenia in the initial stages of implementation of the STAMPEDE results.

Adjuvant bevacizumab as treatment for melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence: Preplanned interim results for the AVAST-M trial.

LBA9000 Background: Bevacizumab (Bev) is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) shown to improve survival in several advanced solid tumors. Multiple adjuvant trials are underway, but trials that have reported in colon and triple-negative breast cancer did not meet their primary end points. Since VEGF is a relevant target in melanoma, AVAST-M aimed to evaluate the role of Bev in patients (pts) with resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence. METHODS AVAST-M is a randomized phase III trial evaluating single agent Bev (7.5mg/kg IV 3 weekly for 1 year) as adjuvant therapy following resection of AJCC stage IIB, IIC, and III cutaneous melanoma compared to standard observation (Obs). 1,320 pts were required to detect 8% differences in 5-year overall survival (OS) rate from 40% to 48%; 85% power, 5% alpha level. Primary endpoint is OS; secondary endpoints are disease free interval (DFI), distant-metastasis free interval (DMFI), safety, and quality of life (QoL). An associated translational study is ongoing. Results of the first pre-planned interim analysis (agreed by the IDSMC) are reported here. RESULTS Between July 2007 and March 2012, 1,343 pts were recruited. 56% were male; median age 56 years (range 18-88 years), 16% were stage IIB, 11% IIC, 15% IIIA, 36% IIIB, 20% IIIC, and 2% unknown stage. Ulceration status of the primary melanoma was: 38% present, 45% absent, 17% unknown. At the time of the interim analysis, 286 (21%) patients had died. Median follow-up for survival was 25 months. Median duration of Bev treatment in 671 treated pts was 51 weeks (dose intensity 86%). Main outcomes are shown in the table. Grade 3/4 adverse events were experienced in 101 (15%) Bev pts and 36 (5%) Obs pts. CONCLUSIONS Interim analysis of this large, multicenter trial of melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence has shown that adjuvant Bev monotherapy is well tolerated and improved DFI. Longer follow-up is required to determine an impact on the primary endpoint of 5-year OS. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION 81261306. [Table: see text].

A Phase II Trial of Continuous 5-Fluorouracil in Recurrent or Metastatic Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Urinary Tract

AIMS To assess the activity of a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil in patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eight centres within the UK entered 50 patients into the study. Twenty-four weeks of continuously infused 5-fluorouracil, 300mg/m(2)/day through a mini-pump, were planned. The primary outcome was tumour response at 8 weeks after the start of treatment. RESULTS The median age of the patients was 68 years and 37 (80.4%) had a World Health Organization performance status of 0 or 1. The overall response rate at 8 weeks, according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) criteria in 46 evaluable patients, was 15% (95% confidence interval 5-26%) and 20% (95% confidence interval 8-31%) when assessments at all time points were included. The median progression-free survival was 1.9 months (95% confidence interval 1.8-2.7 months) and the median overall survival was 6.5 months (95% confidence interval 4.1-8.5 months). The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were mucositis and diarrhoea (each in 6.5% of patients) and nausea/vomiting and hand-foot syndrome (each in 4.3% of patients). CONCLUSIONS Continuous infusional 5-fluorouracil has activity in transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract. Prolonged fluoropyrimidine administration may be a useful component of future combination regimens for this disease, particularly in patients with poor renal function.