Is screening for prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen an appropriate public health measure?

Screening and treatment for prostate cancer is controversial. In the absence of randomized trials, several prominent medical organizations in the United States and Europe have formulated policies that range from enthusiastic support to significant skepticism concerning the efficacy of screening and subsequent treatment for prostate cancer. Sharp rises in the incidence of prostate cancer have occurred whenever PSA testing has been introduced on a wide scale. Unfortunately, it is unclear whether declines in prostate cancer mortality can be attributed to PSA testing. Other explanations include the early use of anti-androgen therapy or changes in environmental factors such as diet. Repeated testing for serum PSA has produced significant shifts in the types of cases being identified and has raised the possibility of significant over-diagnosis of this disease. The European screening trial and the PLCO trial in the US will hopefully provide some insights into the value of population-based testing.     

Is there a role for chemotherapy in prostate cancer?

There is evidence from randomised-controlled trials that patients with symptomatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer may experience palliative benefit from chemotherapy with mitoxantrone and prednisone. This treatment is well tolerated, even by elderly patients, although the cumulative dose of mitoxantrone is limited by cardiotoxicity. Treatment with docetaxel or paclitaxel, with or without estramustine, appears to convey higher rates of prostate-specific antigen response in phase II trials, but is more toxic. Large phase III trials comparing docetaxel with mitoxantrone have completed accrual. There is no role for chemotherapy in earlier stages of disease except in the context of a well-designed clinical trial.     

Is the AJCC TNM staging system still appropriate for gastric cancer patients survival after 5 years?

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the eighth AJCC TNM staging classification for patients with gastric cancer who had already survived for 5 years.Patients and methodsPatients who underwent radical gastrectomy at a large eastern center were considered. The prognostic value of staging systems were assessed and compared. Additional external validation was performed using a dataset from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) database.ResultsThe 5-year overall survival (OS) rate for patients in the training set was 59.4%. With the prolongation of the survival time after surgery, the 5-year OS improved significantly (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in survival curves among patients who have survived 5 years after surgery. The AUC and χ2 of the eighth AJCC classification for predicting of 5-year OS decreased gradually after surgery and appeared stable after 5 years. For patients who survived 5 years after surgery, we constructed a new TNM staging system (nTNM) according to the survival curves of T stage and N stage. A 2-step multivariate analysis showed that nTNM, age and sex were independent prognostic factors. The nTNM demonstrated superior prognostic stratification, with higher c-statistic and likelihood ratio chi-square scores and lower AIC values than those of the AJCC classification. Similar results were observed in the external validation set.ConclusionThe nTNM predicted an additional survival more accurately than did the AJCC classification for patients who have survived 5 years after surgery; this may guide decisions regarding surveillance.     

Is there still a place for docetaxel rechallenge in prostate cancer?

Three-weekly docetaxel plus prednisone is the standard first-line cytotoxic treatment for patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Today, several new treatment options are available for patients with tumor progression after first-line docetaxel: Abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel, sipuleucel-T immunotherapy, and the radionuclide radium-223. However, despite the evolving scenario in CRPC treatment, the optimal sequencing of the innovative therapies remains unclear. The reintroduction of docetaxel at the occurrence of disease progression after a drug holiday (docetaxel rechallenge) was often proposed, and this chemotherapeutic agent showed to maintain antitumor activity in mCRPC patients. Docetaxel rechallenge may still constitute a valid treatment option mainly for patients with favorable response to first-line docetaxel, at least > 3 mo progression-free interval, age less than 75 years, good performance status, and acceptable docetaxel toxicity. The risk of cumulative toxicity must be evaluated, since sensory neuropathy, nail disorders and fatigue might occur on docetaxel rechallenge.     

Is there a role for platinum chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with hormone‐refractory prostate cancer?

Docetaxel chemotherapy is the current standard of care for metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). Platinum chemotherapy drugs, such as cisplatin and carboplatin, have moderate single-agent activity in HRPC. Next-generation platinum drugs, including satraplatin and oxaliplatin, may have additional activity in the management of HRPC. Furthermore, neuroendocrine differentiation may play a role in disease progression, providing a rationale for platinum-based chemotherapy in the management of HRPC. The authors reviewed the MEDLINE database for reports related to platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer and evaluated studies that reviewed the role of neuroendocrine differentiation in the progression of HRPC. Older studies from the 1970s and 1980s suggested a lack of activity of cisplatin and carboplatin; however, those studies were flawed at least in part by their methods of response assessment. More recent Phase II studies of carboplatin suggested a moderate level of clinical and palliative activity when it was used as a single agent. However, when carboplatin was combined with a taxane and estramustine, high response rates were observed in several recent clinical trials. In addition, a randomized trial suggested that satraplatin plus prednisone improved progression-free survival compared with prednisone alone. For patients who progressed after docetaxel, no standard options existed in the literature that was reviewed. Several preliminary reports suggested that carboplatin and oxaliplatin may have activity as second-line chemotherapy. Platinum chemotherapy drugs historically have been considered inactive in HRPC, although a review of the data suggested otherwise. Carboplatin, in particular, induced very high response rates when it was combined with estramustine and a taxane, but it also appeared to have activity in patients who progressed after docetaxel. Satraplatin plus prednisone is being investigated in a large Phase III trial as second-line chemotherapy for HRPC. Targeting neuroendocrine cells may provide a new therapeutic approach to HRPC.     

Is there a role for short-term hormone use in the treatment of nonmetastatic prostate cancer?

We reviewed our institution's experience treating patients with prostate cancer with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and short-term adjuvant hormonal therapy to determine biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED) and clinical outcome compared with patients treated with 3DCRT alone. Between 4/1/89 and 11/30/94, 558 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer received treatment at Fox Chase Cancer Center (Philadelphia, Pa.); 484 patients were treated with 3DCRT alone (Group I); 74 patients were treated with 3DCRT and hormones (Group II). Five-year actuarial rates of bNED control, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), cause-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were calculated for pretreatment PSA, Gleason score, T stage, use of hormones, treatment field size, age, and dose. A matched case/control analysis was performed to further evaluate the effect of hormones on treatment with 3DCRT. Median follow-up was 47 months (range: 2-97 months). The 5-year actuarial rates of bNED control, DMFS, CSS, and OS were 66%, 93%, 98%, and 86%, respectively, for Group I patients and 68%, 93%, 98%, and 89%, respectively, for Group II patients. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that hormone use was an independent predictor of bNED control only. A significant difference in bNED control was observed between Group I and II (43% vs. 71%) using the matched case/control analysis (P = 0.02). A trend towards significance was observed for different rates of DMFS between Group I and II (79% vs. 94%, P = 0.09). Patients with clinically localized prostate cancer with poor prognostic features (pretreatment PSA > or = 10 ng/ml, Gleason score > or = 7, and/or T2c or greater palpation stage) show improved rates of bNED control and a trend towards improved DMFS when treated with 3DCRT and short-term adjuvant hormones compared with 3DCRT alone. Long-term observation will be necessary to see if improvements in bNED control will translate into improvements in overall survival.     

Is it reasonable to consider second-line chemotherapy in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer?

At present, no consensus exists regarding the use of second-line chemotherapy in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). A total of 23 patients with evidence of disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy (epirubicin, etoposide, and dexamethasone) were included in this study. Two second-line treatments were administered throughout the study period (2000-2004) with 15/23 patients receiving carboplatin AUC 3 on day 1 and vinblastine 5 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle and 8/23 patients treated with docetaxel 50 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The latter regimen has been used since 2003. The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level decreased by > or =50% in 3 of 23 patients, corresponding to an overall PSA response rate of 13% (95% confidence interval, 3-34%). The median time to biochemical progression was 9, 24 and 33 weeks, respectively. The median overall survival was 39 weeks (range, 15-73 weeks) with no difference between the two chemotherapy groups (p=0.08). A significant reduction of analgesic use was observed in 2 of 10 patients (20%) who required analgesics for cancer pain upon study entry. The major toxicity was grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 2 of 23 patients (9%). Both second-line treatments, a combination of carboplatin and vinblastine and a monotherapy with docetaxel, showed modest activity at subtoxic doses in patients with HRPC.     

Do preserved foods increase prostate cancer risk?

Preserved foods have been found in some studies to be associated with increased cancer risks. The possible relationship between preserved foods and prostate cancer was investigated in a case-control study in southeast China during 2001-2002 covering 130 histologically confirmed cases and 274 inpatient controls without malignant disease. The total amount of preserved food consumed was positively associated with cancer risk, the adjusted odds ratio being 7.05 (95% CI: 3.12-15.90) for the highest relative to the lowest quartile of intake. In particular, the consumption of pickled vegetables, fermented soy products, salted fish and preserved meats was associated with a significant increase in prostate cancer risk, all with a significant dose-response relationship.