Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Neal D. Shore is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Neal D. Shore.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2010

Sipuleucel-T Immunotherapy for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Philip W. Kantoff; Celestia S. Higano; Neal D. Shore; E. Roy Berger; Eric J. Small; David F. Penson; Charles H. Redfern; Anna C. Ferrari; Robert Dreicer; Robert B. Sims; Yi Xu; Mark W. Frohlich; Paul F. Schellhammer

BACKGROUND Sipuleucel-T, an autologous active cellular immunotherapy, has shown evidence of efficacy in reducing the risk of death among men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 512 patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive either sipuleucel-T (341 patients) or placebo (171 patients) administered intravenously every 2 weeks, for a total of three infusions. The primary end point was overall survival, analyzed by means of a stratified Cox regression model adjusted for baseline levels of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and lactate dehydrogenase. RESULTS In the sipuleucel-T group, there was a relative reduction of 22% in the risk of death as compared with the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.98; P=0.03). This reduction represented a 4.1-month improvement in median survival (25.8 months in the sipuleucel-T group vs. 21.7 months in the placebo group). The 36-month survival probability was 31.7% in the sipuleucel-T group versus 23.0% in the placebo group. The treatment effect was also observed with the use of an unadjusted Cox model and a log-rank test (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.97; P=0.02) and after adjustment for use of docetaxel after the study therapy (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98; P=0.03). The time to objective disease progression was similar in the two study groups. Immune responses to the immunizing antigen were observed in patients who received sipuleucel-T. Adverse events that were more frequently reported in the sipuleucel-T group than in the placebo group included chills, fever, and headache. CONCLUSIONS The use of sipuleucel-T prolonged overall survival among men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. No effect on the time to disease progression was observed. (Funded by Dendreon; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00065442.)


The Lancet | 2011

Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind study.

Karim Fizazi; Michael A. Carducci; Matthew R. Smith; Ronaldo Damião; Janet E. Brown; Lawrence Karsh; Piotr Milecki; Neal D. Shore; Michael Rader; Huei Wang; Qi Jiang; Sylvia Tadros; Roger Dansey; Carsten Goessl

BACKGROUND Bone metastases are a major burden in men with advanced prostate cancer. We compared denosumab, a human monoclonal antibody against RANKL, with zoledronic acid for prevention of skeletal-related events in men with bone metastases from castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS In this phase 3 study, men with castration-resistant prostate cancer and no previous exposure to intravenous bisphosphonate were enrolled from 342 centres in 39 countries. An interactive voice response system was used to assign patients (1:1 ratio), according to a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to receive 120 mg subcutaneous denosumab plus intravenous placebo, or 4 mg intravenous zoledronic acid plus subcutaneous placebo, every 4 weeks until the primary analysis cutoff date. Randomisation was stratified by previous skeletal-related event, prostate-specific antigen concentration, and chemotherapy for prostate cancer within 6 weeks before randomisation. Supplemental calcium and vitamin D were strongly recommended. Patients, study staff, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was time to first on-study skeletal-related event (pathological fracture, radiation therapy, surgery to bone, or spinal cord compression), and was assessed for non-inferiority. The same outcome was further assessed for superiority as a secondary endpoint. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00321620, and has been completed. FINDINGS 1904 patients were randomised, of whom 950 assigned to denosumab and 951 assigned to receive zoledronic acid were eligible for the efficacy analysis. Median duration on study at primary analysis cutoff date was 12·2 months (IQR 5·9-18·5) for patients on denosumab and 11·2 months (IQR 5·6-17·4) for those on zoledronic acid. Median time to first on-study skeletal-related event was 20·7 months (95% CI 18·8-24·9) with denosumab compared with 17·1 months (15·0-19·4) with zoledronic acid (hazard ratio 0·82, 95% CI 0·71-0·95; p = 0·0002 for non-inferiority; p = 0·008 for superiority). Adverse events were recorded in 916 patients (97%) on denosumab and 918 patients (97%) on zoledronic acid, and serious adverse events were recorded in 594 patients (63%) on denosumab and 568 patients (60%) on zoledronic acid. More events of hypocalcaemia occurred in the denosumab group (121 [13%]) than in the zoledronic acid group (55 [6%]; p<0·0001). Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred infrequently (22 [2%] vs 12 [1%]; p = 0·09). INTERPRETATION Denosumab was better than zoledronic acid for prevention of skeletal-related events, and potentially represents a novel treatment option in men with bone metastases from castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING Amgen.


The Lancet | 2012

Denosumab and bone-metastasis-free survival in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: results of a phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

Matthew R. Smith; Fred Saad; Robert E. Coleman; Neal D. Shore; Karim Fizazi; Bertrand Tombal; Kurt Miller; Paul Sieber; Lawrence Karsh; Ronaldo Damião; Teuvo L.J. Tammela; Blair Egerdie; Hendrik Van Poppel; Joseph L. Chin; Juan Morote; Francisco Gómez-Veiga; Tomasz Borkowski; Zhishen Ye; Amy Kupic; Roger Dansey; Carsten Goessl

BACKGROUND Bone metastases are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in men with prostate cancer. Preclinical studies suggest that osteoclast inhibition might prevent bone metastases. We assessed denosumab, a fully human anti-RANKL monoclonal antibody, for prevention of bone metastasis or death in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS In this phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study, men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer at high risk of bone metastasis (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥8·0 μg/L or PSA doubling time ≤10·0 months, or both) were enrolled at 319 centres from 30 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive subcutaneous denosumab 120 mg or subcutaneous placebo every 4 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PSA eligibility criteria and previous or ongoing chemotherapy for prostate cancer. Patients, investigators, and all people involved in study conduct were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was bone-metastasis-free survival, a composite endpoint determined by time to first occurrence of bone metastasis (symptomatic or asymptomatic) or death from any cause. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. The masked treatment phase of the trial has been completed. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00286091. FINDINGS 1432 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (716 denosumab, 716 placebo). Denosumab significantly increased bone-metastasis-free survival by a median of 4·2 months compared with placebo (median 29·5 [95% CI 25·4-33·3] vs 25·2 [22·2-29·5] months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·73-0·98, p=0·028). Denosumab also significantly delayed time to first bone metastasis (33·2 [95% CI 29·5-38·0] vs 29·5 [22·4-33·1] months; HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·71-0·98, p=0·032). Overall survival did not differ between groups (denosumab, 43·9 [95% CI 40·1-not estimable] months vs placebo, 44·8 [40·1-not estimable] months; HR 1·01, 95% CI 0·85-1·20, p=0·91). Rates of adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in both groups, except for osteonecrosis of the jaw and hypocalcaemia. 33 (5%) patients on denosumab developed osteonecrosis of the jaw versus none on placebo. Hypocalcaemia occurred in 12 (2%) patients on denosumab and two (<1%) on placebo. INTERPRETATION This large randomised study shows that targeting of the bone microenvironment can delay bone metastasis in men with prostate cancer. FUNDING Amgen Inc.


Lancet Oncology | 2015

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (COU-AA-302): final overall survival analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

Charles J. Ryan; Matthew R. Smith; Karim Fizazi; Fred Saad; Peter Mulders; Cora N. Sternberg; Kurt Miller; Christopher J. Logothetis; Neal D. Shore; Eric J. Small; Joan Carles; Thomas W. Flaig; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Celestia S. Higano; Paul de Souza; Johann S. de Bono; Thomas W. Griffin; Peter De Porre; Margaret K. Yu; Youn C. Park; Jinhui Li; Thian Kheoh; Vahid Naini; Arturo Molina; Dana E. Rathkopf

BACKGROUND Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival compared with placebo plus prednisone in men with chemotherapy-naive castration-resistant prostate cancer at the interim analyses of the COU-AA-302 trial. Here, we present the prespecified final analysis of the trial, assessing the effect of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone on overall survival, time to opiate use, and use of other subsequent therapies. METHODS In this placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised phase 3 study, 1088 asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with chemotherapy-naive prostate cancer stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology performance status (0 vs 1) were randomly assigned with a permuted block allocation scheme via a web response system in a 1:1 ratio to receive either abiraterone acetate (1000 mg once daily) plus prednisone (5 mg twice daily; abiraterone acetate group) or placebo plus prednisone (placebo group). Coprimary endpoints were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00887198. FINDINGS At a median follow-up of 49.2 months (IQR 47.0-51.8), 741 (96%) of the prespecified 773 death events for the final analysis had been observed: 354 (65%) of 546 patients in the abiraterone acetate group and 387 (71%) of 542 in the placebo group. 238 (44%) patients initially receiving prednisone alone subsequently received abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as crossover per protocol (93 patients) or as subsequent therapy (145 patients). Overall, 365 (67%) patients in the abiraterone acetate group and 435 (80%) in the placebo group received subsequent treatment with one or more approved agents. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the abiraterone acetate group than in the placebo group (34.7 months [95% CI 32.7-36.8] vs 30.3 months [28.7-33.3]; hazard ratio 0.81 [95% CI 0.70-0.93]; p=0.0033). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events of special interest were cardiac disorders (41 [8%] of 542 patients in the abiraterone acetate group vs 20 [4%] of 540 patients in the placebo group), increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [6%] vs four [<1%]), and hypertension (25 [5%] vs 17 [3%]). INTERPRETATION In this randomised phase 3 trial with a median follow-up of more than 4 years, treatment with abiraterone acetate prolonged overall survival compared with prednisone alone by a margin that was both clinically and statistically significant. These results further support the favourable safety profile of abiraterone acetate in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING Janssen Research & Development.


BJUI | 2008

The efficacy and safety of degarelix: a 12-month, comparative, randomized, open-label, parallel-group phase III study in patients with prostate cancer

Laurence Klotz; Laurent Boccon-Gibod; Neal D. Shore; Cal Andreou; Bo-Eric Persson; Per Cantor; Jens-Kristian Jensen; Tine Kold Olesen; Fritz H. Schröder

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of degarelix, a new gonadotrophin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist (blocker), vs leuprolide for achieving and maintaining testosterone suppression in a 1‐year phase III trial involving patients with prostate cancer.


Annals of Oncology | 2012

Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of osteonecrosis of the jaw: integrated analysis from three blinded active-controlled phase III trials in cancer patients with bone metastases

Fred Saad; Janet E. Brown; C Van Poznak; T. Ibrahim; S.M. Stemmer; Alison Stopeck; Ingo J. Diel; Shunji Takahashi; Neal D. Shore; David H. Henry; C.H. Barrios; T. Facon; F. Senecal; Karim Fizazi; L. Zhou; Alan H. Daniels; P. Carrière; R. Dansey

BACKGROUND Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been reported in patients receiving bisphosphonates for metastatic bone disease. ONJ incidence, risk factors, and outcomes were evaluated in a combined analysis of three phase III trials in patients with metastatic bone disease receiving antiresorptive therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumors or myeloma were randomly assigned to receive either s.c. denosumab (120 mg) or i.v. zoledronic acid (4 mg) every 4 weeks. On-study oral examinations were conducted by investigators at baseline and every 6 months. Oral adverse events were adjudicated by an independent blinded committee of dental experts. RESULTS Of 5723 patients enrolled, 89 (1.6%) patients were determined to have ONJ: 37 (1.3%) received zoledronic acid and 52 (1.8%) received denosumab (P = 0.13). Tooth extraction was reported for 61.8% of patients with ONJ. ONJ treatment was conservative in >95% of patients. As of October 2010, ONJ resolved in 36.0% of patients (29.7% for zoledronic acid and 40.4% for denosumab). CONCLUSIONS In this combined analysis of three prospective trials, ONJ was infrequent, management was mostly conservative, and healing occurred in over one-third of the patients. Educating physicians about oral health before and during bone-targeted therapy may help reduce ONJ incidence and improve outcomes.BACKGROUND Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been reported in patients receiving bisphosphonates for metastatic bone disease. ONJ incidence, risk factors, and outcomes were evaluated in a combined analysis of three phase III trials in patients with metastatic bone disease receiving antiresorptive therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumors or myeloma were randomly assigned to receive either s.c. denosumab (120 mg) or i.v. zoledronic acid (4 mg) every 4 weeks. On-study oral examinations were conducted by investigators at baseline and every 6 months. Oral adverse events were adjudicated by an independent blinded committee of dental experts. RESULTS Of 5723 patients enrolled, 89 (1.6%) patients were determined to have ONJ: 37 (1.3%) received zoledronic acid and 52 (1.8%) received denosumab (P = 0.13). Tooth extraction was reported for 61.8% of patients with ONJ. ONJ treatment was conservative in >95% of patients. As of October 2010, ONJ resolved in 36.0% of patients (29.7% for zoledronic acid and 40.4% for denosumab). CONCLUSIONS In this combined analysis of three prospective trials, ONJ was infrequent, management was mostly conservative, and healing occurred in over one-third of the patients. Educating physicians about oral health before and during bone-targeted therapy may help reduce ONJ incidence and improve outcomes.


Annals of Oncology | 2015

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer: recommendations of the St Gallen Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2015

Silke Gillessen; Aurelius Omlin; Gerhardt Attard; J. S. De Bono; Karim Fizazi; Susan Halabi; Peter S. Nelson; Oliver Sartor; Matthew R. Smith; Howard R. Soule; H Akaza; Tomasz M. Beer; Himisha Beltran; Arul M. Chinnaiyan; Gedske Daugaard; Ian D. Davis; M. De Santis; Charles G. Drake; Rosalind Eeles; Stefano Fanti; Martin Gleave; Axel Heidenreich; Maha Hussain; Nicholas D. James; Frédéric Lecouvet; Christopher J. Logothetis; Ken Mastris; Sten Nilsson; William Oh; David Olmos

The first St Gallen Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) Expert Panel identified and reviewed available evidence for the ten most important areas of controversy in advanced prostate cancer management. Recommendations based on expert opinion are presented. Detailed decisions on treatment will involve clinical consideration of disease extent and location, prior treatments, host factors, patient preferences and logistical and economic constraints.


European Urology | 2015

A multi-institutional prospective trial in the USA confirms that the 4Kscore accurately identifies men with high-grade prostate cancer.

Dipen J. Parekh; Sanoj Punnen; Daniel D. Sjoberg; Scott Asroff; James Bailen; James S. Cochran; Raoul S. Concepcion; Richard D. David; Kenneth Deck; Igor Dumbadze; Michael Gambla; Michael S. Grable; Ralph Jonathan Henderson; Lawrence Karsh; Evan B. Krisch; Timothy Dean Langford; Daniel W. Lin; Shawn M. McGee; John J. Munoz; Christopher Michael Pieczonka; Kimberley Rieger-Christ; Daniel Saltzstein; John W. Scott; Neal D. Shore; Paul Sieber; Todd M. Waldmann; Fredrick Wolk; Stephen Zappala

BACKGROUND The 4Kscore combines measurement of four kallikreins in blood with clinical information as a measure of the probability of significant (Gleason ≥7) prostate cancer (PCa) before prostate biopsy. OBJECTIVE To perform the first prospective evaluation of the 4Kscore in predicting Gleason ≥7 PCa in the USA. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective enrollment of 1012 men scheduled for prostate biopsy, regardless of prostate-specific antigen level or clinical findings, was conducted at 26 US urology centers between October 2013 and April 2014. INTERVENTION The 4Kscore. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary outcome was Gleason ≥7 PCa on prostate biopsy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, risk calibration, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were determined, along with comparisons of probability cutoffs for reducing the number of biopsies and their impact on delaying diagnosis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Gleason ≥7 PCa was found in 231 (23%) of the 1012 patients. The 4Kscore showed excellent calibration and demonstrated higher discrimination (AUC 0.82) and net benefit compared to a modified Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0 model and standard of care (biopsy for all men) according to DCA. A possible reduction of 30-58% in the number biopsies was identified with delayed diagnosis in only 1.3-4.7% of Gleason ≥7 PCa cases, depending on the threshold used for biopsy. Pathological assessment was performed according to the standard of care at each site without centralized review. CONCLUSION The 4Kscore showed excellent diagnostic performance in detecting significant PCa. It is a useful tool in selecting men who have significant disease and are most likely to benefit from a prostate biopsy from men with no cancer or indolent cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY The 4Kscore provides each patient with an accurate and personalized measure of the risk of Gleason ≥7 cancer to aid in decision-making regarding the need for prostate biopsy.


European Urology | 2010

Additional Analysis of the Secondary End Point of Biochemical Recurrence Rate in a Phase 3 Trial (CS21) Comparing Degarelix 80 mg Versus Leuprolide in Prostate Cancer Patients Segmented by Baseline Characteristics

Bertrand Tombal; Kurt Miller; Laurent Boccon-Gibod; Fritz H. Schröder; Neal D. Shore; David Crawford; Judd J. Moul; J.K. Jensen; Tine Kold Olesen; Bo-Eric Persson

BACKGROUND Recent data suggest prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression may predict overall survival in prostate cancer patients. OBJECTIVE To compare the activity of degarelix and leuprolide regarding PSA recurrence-free survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Phase 3, 1-yr, multicentre, randomised, open-label trial comparing the efficacy and safety of degarelix at 240 mg for 1 mo, and then 80 mg monthly (240/80 mg); degarelix at 240 mg for 1 mo, and then 160 mg monthly; and leuprolide at 7.5 mg/mo. Overall, 610 patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer (all stages), for whom androgen deprivation therapy was indicated, were included. The primary end point of this trial has been reported previously; the protocolled and exploratory subgroup analyses reported in this paper focus on degarelix at 240/80 mg (dose approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicine Evaluation Association for the treatment of patients with hormone-naive advanced prostate cancer). MEASUREMENTS PSA progression-free survival (two consecutive increases in PSA of 50% compared with nadir and ≥ 5 ng/ml on two consecutive measurements at least 2 wk apart or death) and change in PSA were reviewed. Effects of baseline disease stage (localised, locally advanced, and metastatic) and PSA level (<10, 10-20, >20-50, and >50 ng/ml) were analysed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Patients receiving degarelix showed a significantly lower risk of PSA progression or death compared with leuprolide (p=0.05). PSA recurrences occurred mainly in patients with advanced disease and exclusively in those with baseline PSA >20 ng/ml. Patients with PSA >20 ng/ml had a significantly longer time to PSA recurrence with degarelix (p=0.04). The relatively low number of patients in each subgroup is a limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS These results generate the hypothesis that degarelix at 240/80 mg offers improved PSA control compared with leuprolide. PSA recurrences occurred almost exclusively in patients with metastatic prostate cancer or high baseline PSA during this 1-yr study. Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings.


The Journal of Urology | 2011

A phase III extension trial with a 1-arm crossover from leuprolide to degarelix : comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and antagonist effect on prostate cancer.

E. David Crawford; Bertrand Tombal; Kurt Miller; Laurent Boccon-Gibod; Fritz H. Schröder; Neal D. Shore; Judd W. Moul; Jens-Kristian Jensen; Tine Kold Olesen; Bo-Eric Persson

PURPOSE We investigated the efficacy and safety of degarelix treatment and the effects of switching from leuprolide to degarelix in an ongoing extension study with a median 27.5-month followup of a pivotal 1-year prostate cancer trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients who completed a 1-year pivotal phase III trial continued on the same monthly degarelix maintenance dose (160 or 80 mg in 125 each), or were re-randomized from leuprolide 7.5 mg to degarelix 240/80 mg (69) or 240/160 mg (65). Data are shown on the approved degarelix 240/80 mg dose. The primary end point was safety/tolerability and the secondary end points were testosterone, prostate specific antigen, luteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone responses, and prostate specific antigen failure and progression-free survival. RESULTS During followup testosterone and prostate specific antigen suppression were similar to those in the 1-year trial in patients who continued on degarelix or switched from leuprolide. The prostate specific antigen progression-free survival hazard rate was decreased significantly after the switch in the leuprolide/degarelix group while the rate in those who continued on degarelix was consistent with the rate in treatment year 1. The same hazard rate change pattern occurred in the group with baseline prostate specific antigen greater than 20 ng/ml. Adverse event frequency was similar between the groups and decreased with time. CONCLUSIONS Data support the statistically significant prostate specific antigen progression-free survival benefit for degarelix over leuprolide seen during year 1 and the use of degarelix as first line androgen deprivation therapy as an alternative to a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist.

Collaboration


Dive into the Neal D. Shore's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Karim Fizazi

University of Paris-Sud

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Fred Saad

Université de Montréal

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lawrence Karsh

Brigham and Women's Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dana E. Rathkopf

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Celestia S. Higano

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Howard I. Scher

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge