Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has shown significant reductions in prostate cancer mortality after 9 years and 11 years of follow-up, but screening is controversial because of adverse events such as overdiagnosis. We provide updated results of mortality from prostate cancer with follow-up to 2010, with analyses truncated at 9, 11, and 13 years. METHODS: ERSPC is a multicentre, randomised trial with a predefined centralised database, analysis plan, and core age group (55-69 years), which assesses prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in eight European countries. Eligible men aged 50-74 years were identified from population registries and randomly assigned by computer generated random numbers to screening or no intervention (control). Investigators were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was prostate cancer mortality in the core age group. Analysis was by intention to treat. We did a secondary analysis that corrected for selection bias due to non-participation. Only incidence and no mortality data at 9 years' follow-up are reported for the French centres. This study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN49127736. FINDINGS: With data truncated at 13 years of follow-up, 7408 prostate cancer cases were diagnosed in the intervention group and 6107 cases in the control group. The rate ratio of prostate cancer incidence between the intervention and control groups was 1·91 (95% CI 1·83-1·99) after 9 years (1·64 [1·58-1·69] including France), 1·66 (1·60-1·73) after 11 years, and 1·57 (1·51-1·62) after 13 years. The rate ratio of prostate cancer mortality was 0·85 (0·70-1·03) after 9 years, 0·78 (0·66-0·91) after 11 years, and 0·79 (0·69-0·91) at 13 years. The absolute risk reduction of death from prostate cancer at 13 years was 0·11 per 1000 person-years or 1·28 per 1000 men randomised, which is equivalent to one prostate cancer death averted per 781 (95% CI 490-1929) men invited for screening or one per 27 (17-66) additional prostate cancer detected. After adjustment for non-participation, the rate ratio of prostate cancer mortality in men screened was 0·73 (95% CI 0·61-0·88). INTERPRETATION: In this update the ERSPC confirms a substantial reduction in prostate cancer mortality attributable to testing of PSA, with a substantially increased absolute effect at 13 years compared with findings after 9 and 11 years. Despite our findings, further quantification of harms and their reduction are still considered a prerequisite for the introduction of populated-based screening. FUNDING: Each centre had its own funding responsibility.

Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Several trials evaluating the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing on prostate-cancer mortality have shown conflicting results. We updated prostate-cancer mortality in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer with 2 additional years of follow-up. METHODS: The study involved 182,160 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years at entry, with a predefined core age group of 162,388 men 55 to 69 years of age. The trial was conducted in eight European countries. Men who were randomly assigned to the screening group were offered PSA-based screening, whereas those in the control group were not offered such screening. The primary outcome was mortality from prostate cancer. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 11 years in the core age group, the relative reduction in the risk of death from prostate cancer in the screening group was 21% (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 0.91; P=0.001), and 29% after adjustment for noncompliance. The absolute reduction in mortality in the screening group was 0.10 deaths per 1000 person-years or 1.07 deaths per 1000 men who underwent randomization. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer during follow-up years 10 and 11 was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85; P=0.003). To prevent one death from prostate cancer at 11 years of follow-up, 1055 men would need to be invited for screening and 37 cancers would need to be detected. There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses after 2 additional years of follow-up consolidated our previous finding that PSA-based screening significantly reduced mortality from prostate cancer but did not affect all-cause mortality. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.).

Relationship Between Baseline Prostate-specific Antigen on Cancer Detection and Prostate Cancer Death: Long-term Follow-up from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Association of Urology guidelines recommend a risk-based strategy for prostate cancer screening based on the first prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and age. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of the first PSA level on prostate cancer (PCa) detection and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) in a population-based screening trial (repeat screening every 2-4 yr). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We evaluated 25589 men aged 55-59 yr, 16898 men aged 60-64 yr, and 12936 men aged 65-69 yr who attended at least one screening visit in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial (screening arm: repeat PSA testing every 2-4 yr and biopsy in cases with elevated PSA; control arm: no active screening offered) during 16-yr follow-up (FU). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed the actuarial probability for any PCa and for clinically significant (cs)PCa (Gleason ≥7). Cox proportional-hazards regression was performed to assess whether the association between baseline PSA and PCSM was comparable for all age groups. A Lorenz curve was computed to assess the association between baseline PSA and PCSM for men aged 60-61 yr. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The overall actuarial probability at 16 yr ranged from 12% to 16% for any PCa and from 3.7% to 5.7% for csPCa across the age groups. The actuarial probability of csPCa at 16 yr ranged from 1.2-1.5% for men with PSA <1.0 ng/ml to 13.3-13.8% for men with PSA ≥3.0 ng/ml. The association between baseline PSA and PCSM differed marginally among the three age groups. A Lorenz curve for men aged 60-61 yr showed that 92% of lethal PCa cases occurred among those with PSA above the median (1.21 ng/ml). In addition, for men initially screened at age 60-61 yr with baseline PSA <2 ng/ml, further continuation of screening is unlikely to be beneficial after the age of 68-70 yr if PSA is still <2 ng/ml. No case of PCSM emerged in the subsequent 8 yr (up to age 76-78 yr). A limitation is that these results may not be generalizable to an opportunistic screening setting or to contemporary clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: In all age groups, baseline PSA can guide decisions on the repeat screening interval. Baseline PSA of <1.0 ng/ml for men aged 55-69 yr is a strong indicator to delay or stop further screening. PATIENT SUMMARY: In prostate cancer screening, the patient's baseline PSA (prostate-specific antigen) level can be used to guide decisions on when to repeat screening. The PSA test when used according to current knowledge is valuable in helping to reduce the burden of prostate cancer.

Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer was initiated in the early 1990s to evaluate the effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing on death rates from prostate cancer. METHODS: We identified 182,000 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years through registries in seven European countries for inclusion in our study. The men were randomly assigned to a group that was offered PSA screening at an average of once every 4 years or to a control group that did not receive such screening. The predefined core age group for this study included 162,243 men between the ages of 55 and 69 years. The primary outcome was the rate of death from prostate cancer. Mortality follow-up was identical for the two study groups and ended on December 31, 2006. RESULTS: In the screening group, 82% of men accepted at least one offer of screening. During a median follow-up of 9 years, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer was 8.2% in the screening group and 4.8% in the control group. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer in the screening group, as compared with the control group, was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.98; adjusted P=0.04). The absolute risk difference was 0.71 death per 1000 men. This means that 1410 men would need to be screened and 48 additional cases of prostate cancer would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer. The analysis of men who were actually screened during the first round (excluding subjects with noncompliance) provided a rate ratio for death from prostate cancer of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: PSA-based screening reduced the rate of death from prostate cancer by 20% but was associated with a high risk of overdiagnosis. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.)

Phase I study of oral irinotecan as a single-agent and given sequentially with capecitabine.

PURPOSE: To assess the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) of orally administered irinotecan in the semi-solid matrix (SSM) formulation, both as a single agent and in sequential combination with capecitabine, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-three patients were treated with irinotecan given as a single oral daily dose on days 1-5 every three weeks. An additional forty patients were treated with sequential oral irinotecan given daily on days 1-5 followed by capecitabine given orally as a divided dose twice daily on days 6-14 of each three week cycle. RESULTS: The MTD of single-agent oral irinotecan was estimated to be 60 mg/m(2)/day, and DLT included diarrhea, nausea, and neutropenia. In an initial group of patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 to 2, the MTD of sequential oral irinotecan/capecitabine was estimated to be 40/1600 mg/m(2)/day with DLT of delayed diarrhea. In a subsequent group of patients with ECOG PS of 0 or 1, the MTD for the sequential combination was 50/2000 mg/m(2)/day. The most common adverse events were fatigue, diarrhea, nausea/vomiting and dehydration. Pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation showed that oral irinotecan was rapidly absorbed and effectively converted to the active metabolite, SN-38, achieving approximately 50% of the SN-38 systemic exposure resulting from an equivalent IV dose. CONCLUSIONS: Oral irinotecan can be safely administered as a single agent or in sequential combination with capecitabine. The efficacy of oral irinotecan should be explored further as a potentially convenient alternative to IV chemotherapy.

Prostate cancer from the horizon of the patient.

The democratization of civil society and the development of modern medicine changed the sacrosanct doctor-patient relationship to a doctor-partner dialogue. Values and respect were lost in the process where common courtesy and empathy in trust were replaced by patient rights. LAUNCH OF EUROPA UOMO: Europa Uomo, the European prostate cancer coalition, represents 22 national, autonomous patient support groups. Its aim includes increasing the awareness of prostate diseases, support individualized treatment as a balance between optimal medical treatment and personalized care delivered by a multiprofessional team. We expect our information/education from dedicated professional societies while in return we share care for properly informed members as well as a fast, unbiased and cheap distribution of information/innovation across the European continent. THE ROLE OF A PATIENT GROUP: Our advocacy role is focused on quality of life, tailored treatment, knowledge of risk factors, support for research and last but not least active partnerships. We believe that we can play a modest but basic role in common actions to overcome inequalities in treatment and care in Europe. Our responsibilities range from defining patient obligations to facilitating translational research and saving scarce health resources. THE HORIZON OF THE PATIENT: Our hope is to plead for a treatment policy on the man first and then on his cancer and to improve treatment outcomes by multiprofessional collaboration and the development of expert Prostate Units. FUTURE EXPECTATIONS: A transparent, open communication line between the multiprofessional team and the patient is mandatory. The existing uncertainties should be discussed with common sense but always leave a factor of hope in survival or quality of life.

ASN004, A 5T4-targeting scFv-Fc Antibody-Drug Conjugate with High Drug-to-Antibody Ratio, Induces Complete and Durable Tumor Regressions in Preclinical Models.

The 5T4 oncofetal antigen (trophoblast glycoprotein) is expressed in a wide range of malignant tumors but shows very limited expression in normal adult tissues. ASN004 is a 5T4-targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) that incorporates a novel single-chain Fv-Fc antibody and Dolaflexin drug-linker technology, with an Auristatin F hydroxypropylamide payload drug-to-antibody ratio of approximately 10-12. The pharmacology, toxicology, and pharmacokinetic properties of ASN004 and its components were investigated in vitro and in vivo ASN004 showed high affinity for the 5T4 antigen and was selectively bound to and internalized into 5T4-expressing tumor cells, and potent cytotoxicity was demonstrated for a diverse panel of solid tumor cell lines. ASN004 induced complete and durable tumor regression in multiple tumor xenograft models, derived from human lung, breast, cervical, and gastric tumor cell lines having a wide range of 5T4 expression levels. A single dose of ASN004, as low as 1 mg/kg i.v., achieved complete tumor regression leading to tumor-free survivors in the A431 cervical cancer model. In head-to-head studies, superior activity of ASN004 was demonstrated against trastuzumab-DM1, in a low-5T4/high-HER2 expressing gastric tumor model, and 10-fold greater potency was found for ASN004 against the 5T4-targeted ADC PF-06263507 in a lung tumor model. In marmoset monkeys, ASN004 was well tolerated at doses up to 1.5 mg/kg Q3W i.v., and showed dose-dependent exposure, linear pharmacokinetics, and markedly low exposure of free payload drug. Taken together, these findings identify ASN004 as a promising new ADC therapeutic for clinical evaluation in a broad range of solid tumor types.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of XRP6258 (RPR 116258A), a novel taxane, administered as a 1-hour infusion every 3 weeks in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of administering XRP6258, a new taxane with a low affinity for the multidrug resistance 1 protein, as a 1-hour i.v. infusion every 3 weeks. The study also sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose and the recommended dose, to describe the pharmacokinetic (PK) behavior of the compound, and to seek preliminary evidence of anticancer activity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Twenty-five patients with advanced solid malignancies were treated with 102 courses of XRP6258 at four dose levels ranging from 10 to 25 mg/m(2). Dose escalation was based on the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) at each dose level, provided that PK variables were favorable. The maximum tolerated dose was defined as the dose at which at least two patients developed a DLT at the first course. RESULTS: Neutropenia was the principal DLT, with one patient experiencing febrile neutropenia and two others showing prolonged grade 4 neutropenia at the 25 mg/m(2) dose level. Nonhematologic toxicities, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, neurotoxicity, and fatigue, were generally mild to moderate in severity. XRP6258 exhibited dose-proportional PK, a triphasic elimination profile, a long terminal half-life (77.3 hours), a high clearance (mean CL, 53.5 L/h), and a large volume of distribution (mean V(ss), 2,034 L/m(2)). Objective antitumor activity included partial responses in two patients with metastatic prostate carcinoma, one unconfirmed partial response, and two minor responses. CONCLUSION: The recommended phase II dose of XRP6258 on this schedule is 20 mg/m(2). The general tolerability and encouraging antitumor activity in taxane-refractory patients warrant further evaluations of XRP6258.

A 16-yr Follow-up of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has previously demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening decreases prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PSA screening decreases PCa mortality for up to 16yr and to assess results following adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicentre population-based randomised screening trial was conducted in eight European countries. Report includes 182160 men, followed up until 2014 (maximum of 16yr), with a predefined core age group of 162389 men (55-69yr), selected from population registry. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The outcome was PCa mortality, also assessed with adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The rate ratio of PCa mortality was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.89, p<0.001) at 16yr. The difference in absolute PCa mortality increased from 0.14% at 13yr to 0.18% at 16yr. The number of men needed to be invited for screening to prevent one PCa death was 570 at 16yr compared with 742 at 13yr. The number needed to diagnose was reduced to 18 from 26 at 13yr. Men with PCa detected during the first round had a higher prevalence of PSA >20ng/ml (9.9% compared with 4.1% in the second round, p<0.001) and higher PCa mortality (hazard ratio=1.86, p<0.001) than those detected subsequently. CONCLUSIONS: Findings corroborate earlier results that PSA screening significantly reduces PCa mortality, showing larger absolute benefit with longer follow-up and a reduction in excess incidence. Repeated screening may be important to reduce PCa mortality on a population level. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes from prostate cancer in a large European population. We found that repeated screening reduces the risk of dying from prostate cancer.

Europa Uomo: the European Prostate Cancer Coalition.

Europa Uomo is a patient-led, non-governmental association (NGO), launched formally in Milan in 2004 with a legal base in Antwerp. As a coalition of prostate cancer patient groups with representation in 18 European countries, the NGO focusses on awareness, early detection, optimal treatment, multi-professional care and, above all, quality of life and patient advocacy. In the majority of European countries prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer affecting men beyond middle age. The incidence and substantial mortality rises with age, peaking in the seventh decade. Standards of diagnosis and treatment vary across Europe and attitudes differ. Information about the early detection and awareness of prostate cancer available to the public leaves much to be desired. Since 2002, involved individuals, patient support groups, patients, family members, physicians, urologists, oncologists and nurses joined in the formation of an independent, international, non-profit association of patient-led prostate cancer support groups from European countries known as Europa Uomo, the European Prostate Cancer Coalition. This Coalition was legally established as an NGO in June 2004 in Milan with the headquarters and secretariat in Antwerp, Belgium. Its membership represents 18 countries by the national or regional groups listed in Table 16.1 with their respective contact persons. The coalition is led by a steering committee under the control of the annual general assembly. The steering committee members and their co-ordinates are listed in Table 16.2. Scientific advice is given by a scientific committee chaired by Prof. H. Van Poppel as the liaison officer with the European Association of Urology (EAU). The support for EAU guidelines appears on the Web site and will be linked to all members in their own language (www.cancerworld.org/europauomo). The goals and activities of Europa Uomo have been condensed in a series of slides at the request of the Eurocan+Plus collaboration to facilitate international collaboration. These slides have been listed in Tables 16.3, 16.4 16.5, 16.6, 16.7, 16.8, 16.9, 16.10, 16.11, 16.12, 16.13 and 16.14. It should be noted that membership includes supporting activities for patients and adherence to our 10 objectives listed in the manifest (Tables 16.4-16.6). The bottom line is that the coalition focuses on peer-to-peer support, information and education, as well as partnership with professional associations. We in Europa Uomo hope to see the decrease in over-treatment and mortality of prostate cancer by the clinical activities, trials and research of the professional organizations. We have the great opportunity to be supported and sponsored by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and its director Dr. A. Costa. The European Society of Medical oncology (ESMO), the International Consultation of Urological Diseases (ICUD) and the International Prostate Health Council (IPHC) support our advice on scientific data. It is quite natural that all of our members have joined the European Cancer Patients Coalition (ECPC) to speak for all European patients with one voice. We are a young association but ambitious enough to launch several projects in addition to the Web site, such as the Prostate Passport, a global coalition of patient support organizations, and a series of patient symposia. In this way we are able to show our support and collaboration with all health workers, including nurses, social workers, nutritionists and psychologists. We like to conclude this contribution with a list of questions to the experts from our participation in the 6th International Consultation of Urological Diseases (ICUD) symposium in Paris (Hudson et al. 2006).

The prevention of prostate cancer.

From our better understanding of the natural history of prostate cancer, it is not unreasonable to believe that the disease is preventable. Prostate cancer has become a major healthcare problem worldwide, as life expectancy increases. Moreover, the cancer is slow growing, with a period of about 20-25 years from initiation to the stage when the clinically detectable phenotype can be identified. This review provides a simple overview of the endocrinology of prostate cancer and discusses some of the pharmaceutical agents that have been or are being tested to restrain, possibly arrest, the progression of this slowly growing cancer. Also discussed are many of the dietary factors that may influence the molecular or endocrine events implicated in its development. Dietary factors are considered responsible for the geographical differences in prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Since about 50% of all men worldwide, from both East and West, show evidence of microscopic cancer by 50 years of age, growth restraint would appear to be the pragmatic option to the possibility of preventing initiation.

Absolute Effect of Prostate Cancer Screening: Balance of Benefits and Harms by Center within the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening.

PURPOSE: The balance of benefits and harms in prostate cancer screening has not been sufficiently characterized. We related indicators of mortality reduction and overdetection by center within the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening (ERSPC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We analyzed the absolute mortality reduction expressed as number needed to invite (NNI = 1/absolute risk reduction; indicating how many men had to be randomized to screening arm to avert a prostate cancer death) for screening and the absolute excess of prostate cancer detection as number needed for overdetection (NNO = 1/absolute excess incidence; indicating the number of men invited per additional prostate cancer case), and compared their relationship across the seven ERSPC centers. RESULTS: Both absolute mortality reduction (NNI) and absolute overdetection (NNO) varied widely between the centers: NNI, 200-7,000 and NNO, 16-69. Extent of overdiagnosis and mortality reduction was closely associated [correlation coefficient, r = 0.76; weighted linear regression coefficient, ß = 33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5-62; R(2) = 0.72]. For an averted prostate cancer death at 13 years of follow-up, 12 to 36 excess cases had to be detected in various centers. CONCLUSIONS: The differences between the ERSPC centers likely reflect variations in prostate cancer incidence and mortality, as well as in screening protocol and performance. The strong interrelation between the benefits and harms suggests that efforts to maximize the mortality effect are bound to increase overdiagnosis and might be improved by focusing on high-risk populations. The optimal balance between screening intensity and risk of overdiagnosis remains unclear.

Metastatic Prostate Cancer Incidence and Prostate-specific Antigen Testing: New Insights from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has shown a 21% reduction in prostate cancer (PCa) mortality and a 1.6-fold increase in PCa incidence with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening (at 13 yr of follow-up). We evaluated PCa incidence by risk category at diagnosis across the study arms to assess the potential impact on PCa mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Information on arm, centre, T and M stage, Gleason score, serum PSA at diagnosis, age at randomisation, follow-up time, and vital status were extracted from the ERSPC database. Four risk categories at diagnosis were defined: 1, low; 2, intermediate; 3, high; 4, metastatic disease. PSA (≤100 or >100 ng/ml) was used as the indicator of metastasis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for screening versus control arm by risk category at diagnosis and follow-up time were calculated using Poisson regression analysis for seven centres. Follow-up was truncated at 13 yr. Missing data were imputed using chained equations. The analyses were carried out on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In the screening arm, 7408 PCa cases were diagnosed and 6107 in the control arm. The proportion of missing stage, Gleason score, or PSA value was comparable in the two arms (8% vs 10%), but differed among centres. The IRRs were elevated in the screening arm for the low-risk (IRR: 2.14; 95% CI, 2.03-2.25) and intermediate-risk (IRR: 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.34) categories at diagnosis, equal to unity for the high-risk category at diagnosis (IRR: 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89-1.13), and reduced for metastatic disease at diagnosis (IRR: 0.60; 95% CI, 0.52-0.70). The IRR of metastatic disease had temporal pattern similar to mortality, shifted forwards an average of almost 3 yr, although the mortality reduction was smaller. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm a reduction in metastatic disease at diagnosis in the screening arm, preceding mortality reduction by almost 3 yr. PATIENT SUMMARY: The findings of this study indicate that the decrease in metastatic disease at diagnosis is the major determinant of the prostate cancer mortality reduction in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Development of a Standardized Set of Patient-centered Outcomes for Advanced Prostate Cancer: An International Effort for a Unified Approach.

BACKGROUND: There are no universally monitored outcomes relevant to men with advanced prostate cancer, making it challenging to compare health outcomes between populations. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop a standard set of outcomes relevant to men with advanced prostate cancer to follow during routine clinical care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement assembled a multidisciplinary working group to develop the set. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We used a modified Delphi method to achieve consensus regarding the outcomes, measures, and case mix factors included. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The 25 members of the multidisciplinary international working group represented academic and nonacademic centers, registries, and patients. Recognizing the heterogeneity of men with advanced prostate cancer, the group defined the scope as men with all stages of incurable prostate cancer (metastatic and biochemical recurrence ineligible for further curative therapy). We defined outcomes important to all men, such as overall survival, and measures specific to subgroups, such as time to metastasis. Measures gathered from clinical data include measures of disease control. We also identified patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), such as degree of urinary, bowel, and erectile dysfunction, mood symptoms, and pain control. CONCLUSIONS: The international multidisciplinary group identified clinical data and PROMs that serve as a basis for international health outcome comparisons and quality-of-care assessments. The set will be revised annually. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our international group has recommended a standardized set of patient-centered outcomes to be followed during routine care for all men with advanced prostate cancer.

Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

Active surveillance (AS) is an important management strategy for men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The need for AS is increasing due to the awareness that many PCa are identified that show a low growth potential and therefore are likely to remain clinically asymptomatic during the lifetime of an individual. Currently there is no good method to prevent the overdiagnosis of indolent cancers upfront. During the last decade, several studies on AS around the world have made observations that feed the discussion on how to select and monitor these patients, how to proceed with the research to develop a better and more precise clinical definition of indolent cancers and how to manage men under AS clinically. Furthermore, patients' perspectives have become clearer, and quality of life studies give direction to the practical approach and care for patients and partners. This paper reflects the consensus on the state of the art and the future direction of AS, based on the Inside Track Conference "Active Surveillance for low risk prostate cancer" (Chairmen: C.H. Bangma, NL, and L. Klotz, CA; Co-Chairmen: L.J. Denis, BE, and C. Parker, UK; Scientific Coordinators: M. J. Roobol, NL, and E.W. Steyerberg, NL), organized by the European School of Oncology in collaboration with Europa Uomo in Rotterdam, the Netherlands in January 2012. Topics for discussion were the optimisation of patient selection based on indolent disease definition, the incorporation of therapeutic agents into AS programs, the optimisation of patient care, and the application of emerging technologies and biomarkers.

Predictive modeling in prostate cancer. Conclusions and reflections.

Validated prognostic factors are an integral part of any cancer diagnosis. The available proliferation of new markers and randomized clinical trial results leads to a complex decision making looking for optimal treatment and outcome results. Advanced mathematic models have been developed to weigh each specific prognostic factor into a single outcome number in nomograms modeled for specific predictive accuracy in key phases of the treated history of the disease. Despite this progress, it is important to realize that the results are an outcome stratification for groups rather than for the individual patient. It is clear that in the tumor prognosis, host and environmental factors need to be evaluated before any clinical decision is made. Cancer 2009;115(13 suppl):3160-2. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of cisplatin and troxacitabine administered intravenously every 28 days in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of administering troxacitabine, an L-nucleoside analog that is not a substrate for deoxycytidine deaminase, in combination with cisplatin, to identify pharmacokinetic interactions, and to seek preliminary evidence of antitumor activity. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid malignancies were treated with cisplatin intravenously over an hour followed by troxacitabine intravenously over 30 min on day 1 every 28 days at the following cisplatin/troxacitabine (mg/m(2)) dose levels 50/4.8, 75/4.8, 50/6.4, 75/6.4, and 75/8.0. Plasma and urine sampling were performed to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters of troxacitabine in combination with cisplatin. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients received 77 courses of cisplatin/troxacitabine at five dose levels. Grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 5 days and/or grade 4 thrombocytopenia were consistently experienced by minimally pretreated (MP) and heavily pretreated (HP) patients at doses exceeding 75/6.4 and 50/4.8 mg/m(2), respectively. Mean values for the volume of distribution at steady state and clearance of troxacitabine were 196-396 L and 7.2-9.8 L/h, respectively. A patient with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer experienced a 42% reduction in extent of disease for 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cisplatin and troxacitabine produces dose-limiting myelosuppression at lower doses of troxacitabine than single agent doses. The recommended phase II doses of cisplatin/troxacitabine are 75/6.4 and 50/4.8 mg/m(2), every 4 weeks, for MP and HP patients, respectively. The addition of cisplatin did not substantially alter the pharmacokinetic behavior of troxacitabine.

Estrogens and aspects of prostate disease.

Estrogens have long been associated with the processes involved in prostate carcinogenesis, particularly in cancer suppression. However, the synergistic influence of low concentrations of estrogens, together with androgens, in promoting aberrant growth of the gland has also been recognized. As new insights into the complex molecular events implicated in growth regulation of the prostate are revealed, the role of the estrogens has become clearer. The present review considers this role in relation to the pathogenesis of prostate cancer and the potential cancer-repressive influence of the dietary estrogens.