Prostate cancer vaccines in clinical trials

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 857-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M Lubaroff
2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 743-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi A Madan ◽  
Jeanny B Aragon-Ching ◽  
James L Gulley ◽  
William L Dahut

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (15) ◽  
pp. 1558-1565
Author(s):  
Matteo Santoni ◽  
Francesco Massari ◽  
Liang Cheng ◽  
Alessia Cimadamore ◽  
Marina Scarpelli ◽  
...  

The carcinogenesis of prostate cancer (PCa) results from a complex series of events. Chronic inflammation and infections are crucial in this context. Infiltrating M2 type macrophages, as well as neutrophils and T lymphocytes, contribute to PCa development, progression and response to therapy. The preliminary findings on the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with PCa were not encouraging. However, a series of studies investigating anti-PD-L1 agents such as Atezolizumab, Avelumab and Durvalumab used alone or in combination with other immunotherapies, chemotherapy or locoregional approaches are in course in this tumor. In this review, we illustrate the role of immune cells and PD-L1 expression during PCa carcinogenesis and progression, with a focus on ongoing clinical trials on anti-PD-L1 agents in this context.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Armstrong ◽  
Ruben GW Quek ◽  
Steve Ryder ◽  
Janine Ross ◽  
Titas Buksnys ◽  
...  

Background: Ongoing clinical trials are investigating poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors to target the DNA damage repair (DDR) pathway in prostate cancer. DDR mutation screening will guide treatment strategy and assess eligibility for clinical trials. Materials & methods: This systematic review estimated the rate of DDR mutation testing or genetic counseling among men with or at risk of prostate cancer. Results: From 6856 records, one study fulfilled the inclusion criteria and described men undiagnosed with prostate cancer with a family history of BRCA1/2 mutation who received DDR mutation testing. Conclusion: With only one study included in this first systematic review of DDR mutation testing or genetic counseling in men with or at risk of prostate cancer, more research is warranted.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dexin Shen ◽  
Lingao Ju ◽  
Fenfang Zhou ◽  
Mengxue Yu ◽  
Haoli Ma ◽  
...  

AbstractProstate cancer (PCa) is one of the most commonly diagnosed human cancers in males. Nearly 191,930 new cases and 33,330 new deaths of PCa are estimated in 2020. Androgen and androgen receptor pathways played essential roles in the pathogenesis of PCa. Androgen depletion therapy is the most used therapies for primary PCa patients. However, due to the high relapse and mortality of PCa, developing novel noninvasive therapies have become the focus of research. Melatonin is an indole-like neurohormone mainly produced in the human pineal gland with a prominent anti-oxidant property. The anti-tumor ability of melatonin has been substantially confirmed and several related articles have also reported the inhibitory effect of melatonin on PCa, while reviews of this inhibitory effect of melatonin on PCa in recent 10 years are absent. Therefore, we systematically discuss the relationship between melatonin disruption and the risk of PCa, the mechanism of how melatonin inhibited PCa, and the synergistic benefits of melatonin and other drugs to summarize current understandings about the function of melatonin in suppressing human prostate cancer. We also raise several unsolved issues that need to be resolved to translate currently non-clinical trials of melatonin for clinic use. We hope this literature review could provide a solid theoretical basis for the future utilization of melatonin in preventing, diagnosing and treating human prostate cancer.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18501-e18501
Author(s):  
Ryan Huu-Tuan Nguyen ◽  
Yomaira Silva ◽  
Vijayakrishna K. Gadi

e18501 Background: Cancer clinical trials based in the United States (US) have lacked adequate representation of racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and women. Pivotal clinical trials leading to United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval are often multi-national trials and may also lack generalizability to underrepresented populations in the United States. We determined the racial, ethnic, age, and sex enrollment in pivotal trials relative to the US cancer population. Methods: We reviewed the FDA’s Drug Approvals and Databases for novel and new use drug approvals for breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer indications from 2008 through 2020. Drugs@FDA was searched for drug approval summaries and FDA labels to identify clinical trials used to justify clinical efficacy that led to FDA approval. For eligible trials, enrollment data were obtained from FDA approval summaries, FDA labels, ClinicalTrials.gov, and corresponding journal manuscripts. Enrollment Fraction (EF) was calculated as enrollment in identified clinical trials divided by 2017 SEER cancer prevalence. All data sources were publicly available. Results: From 2008 through 2020, 60 drugs received novel or new use drug approval for breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer indications based on 66 clinical trials with a total enrollment of 36,830. North America accounted for 9,259 (31%) enrollees of the 73% of trials reporting location of enrollment. Racial demographics were reported in 78% of manuscripts, 66% of ClinicalTrials.gov pages, and 98% of FDA labels or approval summaries. Compared with a 0.4% enrollment fraction among White patients, lower enrollment fractions were noted in Hispanic (0.2%, odds ratio [OR] vs White, 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.49, P< 0.001) and Black (0.1%, OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.31, P< 0.001) patients. Elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years) were less likely than younger patients to be enrollees (EF 0.3% vs 0.9%, OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.27, P< 0.001) despite accounting for 61.3% of cancer prevalence. For colorectal and lung cancer trials, females were less likely than males (EF 0.7% vs 1.1%, OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.68, P< 0.001) to be enrolled. Conclusions: Black, Hispanic, elderly, and female patients were less likely to enroll in cancer clinical trials leading to FDA approvals from 2008 to 2020. Race and geographic enrollment data were inconsistently reported in journal manuscripts and ClinicalTrials.gov. The lack of appropriate representation of specific patient populations in these key clinical trials limits their generalizability. Future efforts must be made to ensure equitable access, representation, and reporting of enrollees that adequately represent the US population of patients with cancer.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document