Optimizing outcomes in men with prostate cancer: the cardiovascular event lowering (CaELo) pathways.

INTRODUCTION: Risk of cardiovascular disease is higher among men with prostate cancer than men without, and prostate cancer treatments (especially those that are hormonally based) are associated with increased cardiovascular risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An 11-member panel of urologic, medical, and radiation oncologists (along with a men's health specialist and an endocrinologist/preventive cardiologist) met to discuss current practices and challenges in the management of cardiovascular risk in prostate cancer patients who are taking androgen deprivation therapies (ADT) including LHRH analogues, alone and in combination with androgen-targeted therapies (ATTs). RESULTS: The panel developed an assessment algorithm to categorize patients by risk and deploy a risk-adapted management strategy, in collaboration with other healthcare providers (the patient's healthcare "village"), with the goal of preventing as well as reducing cardiovascular events. The panel also developed a patient questionnaire for cardiovascular risk as well as a checklist to ensure that all aspects of cardiovascular disease risk reduction are completed and monitored. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer patients receiving ADT with or without ATT need to be more zealously assessed for prevention and aggressively managed to reduce cardiovascular events. This can and should include participation from the entire multidisciplinary healthcare team.

Genetic variation in the HSD17B1 gene and risk of prostate cancer.

Steroid hormones are believed to play an important role in prostate carcinogenesis, but epidemiological evidence linking prostate cancer and steroid hormone genes has been inconclusive, in part due to small sample sizes or incomplete characterization of genetic variation at the locus of interest. Here we report on the results of a comprehensive study of the association between HSD17B1 and prostate cancer by the Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium, a large collaborative study. HSD17B1 encodes 17beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1, an enzyme that converts dihydroepiandrosterone to the testosterone precursor Delta5-androsterone-3beta,17beta-diol and converts estrone to estradiol. The Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium researchers systematically characterized variation in HSD17B1 by targeted resequencing and dense genotyping; selected haplotype-tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (htSNPs) that efficiently predict common variants in U.S. and European whites, Latinos, Japanese Americans, and Native Hawaiians; and genotyped these htSNPs in 8,290 prostate cancer cases and 9,367 study-, age-, and ethnicity-matched controls. We found no evidence that HSD17B1 htSNPs (including the nonsynonymous coding SNP S312G) or htSNP haplotypes were associated with risk of prostate cancer or tumor stage in the pooled multiethnic sample or in U.S. and European whites. Analyses stratified by age, body mass index, and family history of disease found no subgroup-specific associations between these HSD17B1 htSNPs and prostate cancer. We found significant evidence of heterogeneity in associations between HSD17B1 haplotypes and prostate cancer across ethnicity: one haplotype had a significant (p < 0.002) inverse association with risk of prostate cancer in Latinos and Japanese Americans but showed no evidence of association in African Americans, Native Hawaiians, or whites. However, the smaller numbers of Latinos and Japanese Americans in this study makes these subgroup analyses less reliable. These results suggest that the germline variants in HSD17B1 characterized by these htSNPs do not substantially influence the risk of prostate cancer in U.S. and European whites.

Role of Genetic Testing for Inherited Prostate Cancer Risk: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2017.

Purpose Guidelines are limited for genetic testing for prostate cancer (PCA). The goal of this conference was to develop an expert consensus-driven working framework for comprehensive genetic evaluation of inherited PCA in the multigene testing era addressing genetic counseling, testing, and genetically informed management. Methods An expert consensus conference was convened including key stakeholders to address genetic counseling and testing, PCA screening, and management informed by evidence review. Results Consensus was strong that patients should engage in shared decision making for genetic testing. There was strong consensus to test HOXB13 for suspected hereditary PCA, BRCA1/2 for suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and DNA mismatch repair genes for suspected Lynch syndrome. There was strong consensus to factor BRCA2 mutations into PCA screening discussions. BRCA2 achieved moderate consensus for factoring into early-stage management discussion, with stronger consensus in high-risk/advanced and metastatic setting. Agreement was moderate to test all men with metastatic castration-resistant PCA, regardless of family history, with stronger agreement to test BRCA1/2 and moderate agreement to test ATM to inform prognosis and targeted therapy. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive, multidisciplinary consensus statement to address a genetic evaluation framework for inherited PCA in the multigene testing era. Future research should focus on developing a working definition of familial PCA for clinical genetic testing, expanding understanding of genetic contribution to aggressive PCA, exploring clinical use of genetic testing for PCA management, genetic testing of African American males, and addressing the value framework of genetic evaluation and testing men at risk for PCA-a clinically heterogeneous disease.

A phase ii study of gemcitabine and capecitabine in patients with advanced renal cell cancer: Southwest Oncology Group Study S0312.

OBJECTIVES: Gemcitabine plus capecitabine has moderate efficacy in patients with advanced renal cell cancer (RCC) but has considerable toxicity. We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of a modified dose-schedule of this doublet in patients with metastatic RCC. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients were treated with gemcitabine at 900 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 and with capecitabine at 625 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1 through 21, and every 28 days thereafter. The primary end point was response rate (RR). No further evaluation of this regimen would be pursued if the RR was ≤ 5%. In an exploratory analysis, we also evaluated potential markers of prognosis and treatment response, including thymidylate synthase, PTEN, pAKT, pmTOR, XRCC1, and ERCC1. RESULTS: Of 43 patients, 1 was ineligible and 2 were not analyzable. There was 1 complete response and 3 partial responses, for an overall RR of 10% (95% CI = 3, 24). Nineteen patients (48%) had stable disease. The 6-month freedom-from-treatment-failure and overall survival rates were 20% (95% CI = 8, 32) and 75% (95% CI = 62, 88), respectively. Median survival time was 23 months (95% CI = 10, 37). One patient each experienced grade 4 neutropenia, fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and hemolysis with renal failure. The most common grade 3 toxicities were neutropenia (12 patients), fatigue (5), and leucopenia (4). Patients with a best response of stable disease or better were more likely to have decreased expression of PTEN and increased expression of pmTOR. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine plus capecitabine at this reduced dose-schedule benefits a small percentage of patients with RCC with an acceptable toxicity profile.

An individual patient data meta-analysis of the long-term outcome of randomised studies comparing intravesical mitomycin C versus bacillus Calmette-Guérin for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with an intermediate or high risk need adjuvant intravesical therapy after surgery. Based largely on meta-analyses of previously published results, guidelines recommend using either bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) or mitomycin C (MMC) in these patients. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses, however, are the gold standard. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of BCG and MMC based on an IPD meta-analysis of randomised trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Trials were searched through Medline and review articles. The relevant trial investigators were contacted to provide IPD. MEASUREMENTS: The drugs were compared with respect to time to recurrence, progression, and overall and cancer-specific death. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Nine trials that included 2820 patients were identified, and IPD were obtained from all of them. Patient characteristics were 71% primary, 54% Ta, 43% T1, 25% G1, 58% G2, and 16% G3, and 7% had prior intravesical chemotherapy. Based on a median follow-up of 4.4 yr, 43% recurred. Overall, there was no difference in the time to first recurrence (p=0.09) between BCG and MMC. In the trials with BCG maintenance, a 32% reduction in risk of recurrence on BCG compared to MMC was found (p<0.0001), while there was a 28% risk increase (p=0.006) for BCG in the trials without maintenance. BCG with maintenance was more effective than MMC in both patients previously treated and those not previously treated with chemotherapy. In the subset of 1880 patients for whom data on progression, survival, and cause of death were available, 12% progressed and 24% died, and, of those, 30% of the deaths were due to bladder cancer. No statistically significant differences were found for these long-term end points. CONCLUSIONS: For prophylaxis of recurrence, maintenance BCG is required to demonstrate superiority to MMC. Prior intravesical chemotherapy was not a confounder. There were no statistically significant differences regarding progression, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival between the two treatments.