Elevated IL-8, TNF-α, and MCP-1 in men with metastatic prostate cancer starting androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) are associated with shorter time to castration-resistance and overall survival

The Prostate ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 74 (8) ◽  
pp. 820-828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaya Sharma ◽  
Kathryn P. Gray ◽  
Lauren C. Harshman ◽  
Carolyn Evan ◽  
Mari Nakabayashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Castration Resistance ◽  
Tnf Α

Patterns of response to androgen deprivation therapy in younger patients with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 324-324
Author(s):  
Matthew Keating ◽  
Lisa Giscombe ◽  
Andre Desouza ◽  
Shiva Kumar Reddy Mukkamalla ◽  
Ritesh Rathore
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
National Cancer Database ◽  
Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Castrate Resistant

324 Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains a standard of care in the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer. But thanks to a few key trials (STAMPEDE, CHAARTED, and LATITUDE) reported within the past three years, docetaxel and abiraterone now have roles in extending overall survival in a patient population traditionally treated with ADT alone. These treatments when combined with ADT have been shown to extend overall survival in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients. The role of ADT in relation to other therapies continues to evolve rapidly. We intend to revisit ADT’s longstanding role in prostate cancer treatment using a national cancer database. Our aim is to look beyond traditional standards of care to identify patients more likely to have overall survival benefit from ADT. Are there any subgroups of patients with intermediate or high risk disease that have improved survival outcomes with androgen deprivation therapy, besides patients with localized disease that underwent radiation? Could there be other variables besides PSA and localization of the prostate cancer that should be considered when identifying ADT treatment candidates, or identifying survival trends in these groups? Methods: We are currently analyzing variables present in the National Cancer Database to retrospectively identify predictive factors for overall survival and progression to metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer in locally advanced prostate cancers treated with ADT. We will evaluate time-to-death from the initiation of ADT and from the diagnosis of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer. The following variables in localized, locally advanced, and metastatic prostate cancer will be analyzed with Statistical Analysis Software: age, locally advanced, site-specific metastasis (M1a, M1b, M1c), Gleason score, local treatment (radical prostatectomy or radiation), stage (T, N, and M), prostate lobe (one vs. both; T2a/b vs. T2c), chemotherapy (date, time from M1 stage), comorbidity score, ethnicity, facility type, insurance, and risk groups (low/intermediate/high as per NCCN guidelines).

scholarly journals Metastatic Prostate Cancer under Androgen Deprivation Therapy: Factors Influencing Castration Resistance

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (07) ◽  
pp. 225-232
Author(s):  
Modou Ndiaye ◽  
Ousmane Sow ◽  
Babacar Sine ◽  
Omar Gaye ◽  
Alioune Sarr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Castration Resistance ◽  
Factors Influencing

Correlation between time to prostate cancer metastasis and overall survival after androgen-deprivation therapy initiation.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 250-250
Author(s):  
Loana Bueno Valenca ◽  
Lillian Werner ◽  
Wanling Xie ◽  
Mari Nakabayashi ◽  
Philip W. Kantoff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Cancer Metastasis ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Rank Correlation ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Castration Resistance ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Prostate Cancer Metastasis

250 Background: Currently,overall survival (OS) is used to determine treatment efficacy in trials for advanced prostate cancer (PC). Reliable intermediate endpoints could hasten drug development efforts. We therefore sought to determine the association between an intermediate endpoint—time to metastasis (TTM)—and OS in PC patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for biochemical recurrence (BCR). Methods: The Dana-Farber PC database identified 415 patients who received ADT for non-metastatic BCR with median 6.4 years follow-up. Associations between TTM and OS were measured from (i) time of ADT initiation (n=398) and (ii) time of castration-resistance (n=247) using a non-parametric Kendall tau rank correlation for bivariate time to event outcomes. A Cox regression model was used to assess the association of development of metastasis and OS for landmark timepoints. Results: Among 398 subjects analyzed from start of ADT, 180 (45%) developed metastases with median TTM 6.25 years. A total of 152 (38%) died, with a median OS of 8.5 years. For men developing metastases within five years of ADT initiation, hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 7.42 (p<0.0001, 95% CI 4.18-13.17). Among 247 subjects assessed from time of castration resistant PC (CRPC), 172 (70%) developed metastases with a median TTM 2.6 years. In this subgroup, 140 (56%) patients died with median OS 5.25 years. For men developing metastases within three years of developing castration-resistance, HR for mortality was 5.25 (p<0.0001, 95% CI 3.20-8.61). Overall, correlation between TTM and OS from ADT initiation and OS was 0.25 (P<0.0001, 95% CI 0.20-0.29). Correlation between TTM and OS from CRPC was 0.32 (P<0.0001, 95% CI 0.25-0.37). Conclusions: TTM was significantly correlated with OS in PC patients treated with ADT for BCR. Prospective data in a large validation cohort will help determine whether TTM is suitably predictive of OS to serve as a primary endpoint in clinical trials.

Prediction of Response to Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Castration Resistance in Primary Metastatic Prostate Cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rauf Taner Divrik ◽  
Levent Türkeri ◽  
Ali F. Şahin ◽  
Bülent Akdoğan ◽  
Ferhat Ateş ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Castration Resistance ◽  
Prediction Of Response

Age-dependent overall survival benefit of androgen deprivation therapy for metastatic prostate cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 1927-1932 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J Keating ◽  
Lisa Giscombe ◽  
Toufic Tannous ◽  
Nishitha Reddy ◽  
Shiva Kumar R Mukkamalla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
National Cancer Database ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Overall Survival Benefit

Background Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains a standard of care in metastatic prostate cancer. Recent prospective trials have explored addition of chemotherapy to ADT. We retrospectively examined overall survival in metastatic prostate cancer patients treated with ADT, chemotherapy plus ADT (C + ADT), or observation from 2004 to 2010 using National Cancer Database data. Methods Using the National Cancer Database, 21,977 patients with metastatic prostate cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2010 were identified. Multivariate logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression modeling were implemented, with overall survival as the primary endpoint. Results Five-year overall survival was 13.6% in patients aged ≥ 75 years vs. 30.1% (age 65–74) and 34.5% (age 18–64). Subgroup analysis of age-based cohorts (<65 and ≥65 years) showed poor overall survival for C + ADT vs. ADT alone, both in younger (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.21–1.50; p < 0.0001) as well as older (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.08–1.34; p = 0.0006) populations. Younger patients had no significant difference in overall survival for observation vs. ADT (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92–1.08; p = 0.9121). Besides age, other factors impacting overall survival included race, rural/urban settings, comorbidity score, income, PSA and radiation. Discussion Younger patients had no significant difference in overall survival between observation or ADT. This implies a group of younger patients in whom ADT does not confer any overall survival benefit. Future clinical trials with genetic and biologic markers are needed to delineate which subgroups would not benefit from C + ADT or ADT alone. This is of utmost clinical importance given the negative impact of ADT on quality of life and comorbidities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document