Prostatitis, other genitourinary infections and prostate cancer risk: Influence of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs? Results from the EPICAP study.

Epidemiological studies have suggested that prostatitis may increase the risk of prostate cancer due to chronic inflammation. We studied the association between several genitourinary infections and the risk of prostate cancer based on data from the EPICAP study. EPICAP is a population-based case-control study conducted in the département of Hérault, France, between 2012 and 2014. A total of 819 incident cases and 879 controls have been face to face interviewed using a standardized questionnaire gathering information on known or suspected risk factors of prostate cancer, and personal history of genitourinary infections: prostatitis, urethritis, orchi-epididymitis, and acute pyelonephritis. Odds Ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence interval were estimated using multivariate unconditional logistic regression. Overall, 139 (18%) cases and 98 (12%) controls reported having at least one personal history of genitourinary infections (OR = 1.64 [1.23-2.20]). The risk increased with the number of infections (p-trend < 0.05). The association was specifically observed with personal history of chronic prostatitis and acute pyelonephritis (OR = 2.95 [1.26-6.92] and OR = 2.66 [1.29-5.51], respectively) and in men who did not use any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (OR = 2.00 [1.37-2.91]). Our results reinforce the hypothesis that chronic inflammation, generated by a personal history of genitourinary infections, may play a role in prostate carcinogenesis.

[What is the objective of second-line chemotherapy after failure of first-line chemotherapy in hormone-resistant metastatic prostate?]. / Chimiothérapie de deuxième ligne après échec d'une chimiothérapie de première ligne dans le cancer de la prostate métastatique hormono-résistant. Pour quel objectif?

UNLABELLED: Chemotherapy occupies an increasingly important place in the management of hormone-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. For the first time in this disease, docetaxel increases the survival of patients, with a modest, but definite median gain of about 2 months. In everyday practice, the indication for second-line chemotherapy after immediate or delayed failure of first-line chemotherapy is sometimes considered, although objective data concerning its efficacy are limited. The objective of the present study was to retrospectively evaluate the results obtained with second-line chemotherapy in a patient cohort managed at the Montpellier Regional Cancer Centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical characteristics, treatments delivered and outcome of 43 patients who received two successive lines of chemotherapy were retrospectively collected by means of a standardized questionnaire. Three groups of patients were defined as a function of the chemotherapy protocols delivered: docetaxel alone or in combination, mitoxantrone and other protocols not comprising either docetaxel or mitoxantrone. Responses to chemotherapy were analysed according to three criteria: objective responses, laboratory responses and palliative responses. RESULTS: At the time of second-line chemotherapy, the median age of the patients was 69 years (range: 46 to 83). The median interval between the end of first-line chemotherapy and the start of second-line chemotherapy was 3 months (range: 1 to 15). The protocols administered comprised docetaxel alone (12 patients) or in combination with cisplatin (4 patients), mitoxantrone in 13 patients, or other cytotoxic molecules such as vinblastine, doxorubicin or etoposide in combination with a platinum salt (14 patients). The median number of cycles delivered was 4 (range: 1 to 10). No objective response was observed. Six (14%) patients obtained a laboratory response. A palliative response was observed in 16 (37%) patients, 7 of whom were treated with a docetaxel-based protocol, 6 were treated with mitoxantrone and 3 were treated by other protocols. The median duration of palliative response was 3 months (range: 1 to 6). The median survival was 8 months (range: 1 to 24), with no significant difference between the various protocols. CONCLUSION: In 2006, the objective of second-line chemotherapy in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer appears to be purely palliative. No reference protocol has been defined among currently available cytotoxic molecules. The indication must therefore take into account the benefit/risk balance to avoid compromising the patients quality of life. Therapeutic trials are essential to develop effective new molecules.