Modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab with and without nivolumab for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: phase 2 results from the CheckMate 9X8 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan and a biologic agent. Immunotherapy may enhance antitumor activity in combination with standard therapies in patients with mCRC. Here, we present phase 2 results of nivolumab plus standard-of-care therapy (SOC; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab) versus SOC in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC (CheckMate 9X8). METHODS: CheckMate 9X8 was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 2/3 trial. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with unresectable mCRC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab 240 mg plus SOC or SOC alone every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. Secondary endpoints included PFS by investigator assessment; objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, duration of response, and time to response, all by BICR and investigator assessments; overall survival; and safety. Preplanned exploratory biomarker analyses were also performed. RESULTS: From February 2018 through April 2019, 310 patients were enrolled, of which 195 patients were randomized to nivolumab plus SOC (n=127) or SOC (n=68). At 21.5-month minimum follow-up, PFS with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance; median PFS by BICR was 11.9 months in both arms (HR, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.23); p=0.30). Higher PFS rates after 12 months (18 months: 28% vs 9%), higher ORR (60% vs 46%), and durable responses (median 12.9 vs 9.3 months) were observed with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 75% versus 48% of patients; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The CheckMate 9X8 trial investigating first-line nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in patients with mCRC did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS by BICR. Nivolumab plus SOC showed numerically higher PFS rates after 12 months, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC alone, with acceptable safety. Further investigation to identify subgroups of patients with mCRC that may benefit from nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in the first-line setting is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03414983.

Expression of the Androgen Receptor Governs Radiation Resistance in a Subset of Glioblastomas Vulnerable to Antiandrogen Therapy.

New approaches are needed to overcome intrinsic therapy resistance in glioblastoma (GBM). Because GBMs exhibit sexual dimorphism and are reported to express steroid hormone receptors, we reasoned that signaling through the androgen receptor (AR) could mediate therapy resistance in GBM, much as it does in AR-positive prostate and breast cancers. We found that nearly half of GBM cell lines, patient-derived xenografts (PDX), and human tumors expressed AR at the transcript and protein level-with expression levels overlapping those of primary prostate cancer. Analysis of gene expression datasets also revealed that AR expression is higher in GBM patient samples than normal brain tissue. Multiple clinical-grade antiandrogens slowed the growth of and radiosensitized AR-positive GBM cell lines and PDXs in vitro and in vivo Antiandrogens blocked the ability of AR-positive GBM PDXs to engage adaptive transcriptional programs following radiation and slowed the repair of radiation-induced DNA damage. These results suggest that combining blood-brain barrier permeable antiandrogens with radiation may have promise for patients with AR-positive GBMs.

A population pharmacokinetic analysis of the oral CYP17 lyase and androgen receptor inhibitor seviteronel in patients with advanced/metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer or breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Seviteronel is an orally-administered selective cytochrome P450c17a 17,20-lyase and androgen receptor inhibitor with anti-tumor activity in vitro and in vivo, and clinical activity in men with advanced castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and men and women with advanced breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) of seviteronel across the aforementioned populations. METHODS: This report describes the PK of seviteronel (50-750 mg, QD or BID) using noncompartmental and population approaches from 243 patients with advanced breast or prostate cancer pooled across 4 clinical studies. First dose and steady-state PK were examined, as well as covariates including prandial status, sex and concomitant dexamethasone. RESULTS: Seviteronel PK can be characterized by transit absorption and a bi-phasic first-order elimination while accounting for covariance between random effects. Prandial status did not significantly affect any parameters to a clinically-relevant extent. Both sex and body weight were significant covariates on clearance, explaining 37% of the interindividual variability on that parameter. There were no significant effects from the race or the presence of a corticosteroid (either dexamethasone or prednisone). CONCLUSIONS: Seviteronel demonstrates linear PK over the dose range of 50-750 mg given either BID or QD in men with advanced CRPC or men and women with breast cancer. The disposition of seviteronel following oral administration is well described by this population PK model and can be used for accurate simulations for future studies with body weight and sex affecting clearance, but not to a clinically-meaningful degree requiring a change in the current dosing scheme.

Male breast cancer: a disease distinct from female breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Male breast cancer (BC) is rare, representing approximately 1% of cancers that occur in men and approximately 1% of all BCs worldwide. Because male BC is rare, not much is known about the disease, and treatment recommendations are typically extrapolated from data available from clinical trials enrolling female BC patients. METHODS: We review the epidemiology, risk factors, prognosis, and the varied molecular and clinicopathologic features that characterize male BC. In addition, we summarize the available data for the use of systemic therapy in the treatment of male BC and explore the ongoing development of targeted therapeutic agents for the treatment of this subgroup of BCs. RESULTS: There are important biological differences between male and female BC. Male BC is almost exclusively hormone receptor positive (+), including the androgen receptor (AR), and is associated with an increased prevalence of BRCA2 germline mutations, especially in men with increased risk for developing high-risk BC. Additional research is warranted to better characterize male BC. To accomplish this, a multi-national consortium approach, such as the International Male Breast Cancer Program, is needed in response to the scarcity of patients. This approach allows the pooling of information from a large number of men with BC and the creation of registries for future therapeutic-focused clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Given the unique biology of BC in men, promising new therapeutic targets are currently under investigation, including the use of poly-ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors or AR-targeted agents either as monotherapy or in combination with other agents.

Phase I Study of Seviteronel, a Selective CYP17 Lyase and Androgen Receptor Inhibitor, in Men with Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Purpose: Seviteronel (INO-464) is a selective cytochrome P450c17a (CYP17) 17,20-lyase (lyase) and androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor with antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo This open-label phase I clinical study evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and activity of once-daily seviteronel in male chemotherapy-naïve subjects with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).Patients and Methods: Seviteronel was administered at 600 mg once daily with dose titration (DT) and in modified 3 + 3 dose escalation once-daily cohorts at 600, 750, and 900 mg without DT. The primary objectives of this study were to establish safety, tolerability, and the MTD of seviteronel in chemotherapy-naïve subjects with or without prior treatment with FDA-approved CRPC treatments, abiraterone acetate (AA), and enzalutamide. Secondary objectives were to assess pharmacokinetics, PSA, tumor response, and endocrine results.Results: Twenty-one subjects were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed through 750 mg once daily. Most treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) reported at grade 1-2. The most commonly reported AEs were fatigue (71%), dizziness (52%), blurred vision (38%), and dysgeusia (33%), with most AEs improving after dose reduction or dose interruption.Conclusions: Once-daily seviteronel was generally well tolerated in this phase I study of men with CRPC, a majority of which had progressed on prior AA or enzalutamide, or both. Of the doses evaluated, 600 mg once daily was chosen as the recommended phase II dose for future studies in subjects with CRPC. Clin Cancer Res; 24(21); 5225-32. ©2018 AACR.

Phase 1 study of seviteronel, a selective CYP17 lyase and androgen receptor inhibitor, in women with estrogen receptor-positive or triple-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Seviteronel (INO-464) is an oral, selective cytochrome P450c17a (CYP17) 17,20-lyase (lyase) and androgen receptor inhibitor with in vitro and in vivo anti-tumor activity. This open-label phase 1 clinical study evaluated safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and activity of once-daily (QD) seviteronel in women with locally advanced or metastatic TNBC or ER+ breast cancer. METHODS: Seviteronel was administered in de-escalating 750, 600, and 450 mg QD 6-subject cohorts. The 750 mg QD start dose was a phase 2 dose determined for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer in (Shore et al. J Clin Oncol 34, 2016). Enrollment at lower doses was initiated in the presence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The primary objective of this study was to determine seviteronel safety, tolerability, and MTD. The secondary objectives included description of its PK in women and its initial activity, including clinical benefit rate at 4 (CBR16) and 6 months (CBR24). RESULTS: Nineteen women were enrolled. A majority of adverse events (AEs) were Grade (Gr) 1/2, independent of relationship; the most common were tremor (42%), nausea (42%), vomiting (37%), and fatigue (37%). Four Gr 3/4 AEs (anemia, delirium, mental status change, and confusional state) deemed possibly related to seviteronel occurred in four subjects. DLTs were observed at 750 mg (Gr 3 confusional state with paranoia) and 600 mg (Gr 3 mental status change and Gr 3 delirium) QD, with none at 450 mg QD. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 450 mg QD, and at the RP2D, 4 of 7 subjects reached at least CBR16 (2 TNBC subjects and 2 ER+ subjects achieved CBR16 and CBR24, respectively); no objective tumor responses were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily seviteronel was generally well tolerated in women with and 450 mg QD was chosen as the RP2D.

Harnessing a Different Dependency: How to Identify and Target Androgen Receptor-Positive Versus Quadruple-Negative Breast Cancer.

The androgen receptor (AR) is a promising therapeutic target for a subset of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) in which AR is expressed. However, the mechanistic action of AR and the degree to which primary and metastatic tumors depend on AR, both before and after conventional treatment, remain to be defined. We discuss preclinical and clinical data for AR+ TNBC, the difficulties in monitoring AR protein levels, new methods for determining AR status, the influence of AR on "stemness" in the context of TNBC, the role of combined inhibition of sex steroid production and AR, and the role of AR in regulation of the immune system. Although the exact role of AR in subsets of TNBC is still being characterized, new therapies that target AR and the production of androgens may provide additional options for patients with TNBC for whom chemotherapy is currently the sole treatment option.

Intermittent Versus Continuous Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Patients with Relapsing or Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Phase 3b Randomised Study (ICELAND).

BACKGROUND: Intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) has received increasing attention; however, the current literature is still limited, especially in nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa), and the relative efficacy and safety benefits of IAD versus continuous androgen deprivation (CAD) remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To add to the knowledge base regarding efficacy and potential benefits, including reduced side effects and improved quality of life (QoL), of IAD versus CAD in patients with nonmetastatic relapsing or locally advanced PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A 42-mo phase 3b open-label randomised study in 933 patients from 20 European countries. INTERVENTION: Following a 6-mo induction with leuprorelin acetate (Eligard) 22.5mg 3-mo depot, patients were randomised to CAD or IAD with leuprorelin for 36 mo. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary end point was time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression while receiving luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist, defined as three consecutive increasing PSA values ≥ 4 ng/ml ≥ 2 wk apart. Secondary end points included PSA progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), testosterone levels, performance status, and QoL. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 933 patients entered the induction phase; 701 were randomised. The median number of injections administered after randomisation was 12 (range: 1-12) for the CAD group and 3 (range: 1-10) for the IAD group. There were no statistically significant or clinically relevant differences between the groups for time to PSA progression, PSA PFS, OS, mean PSA levels over time, or QoL. A similar number of adverse events was observed in each group; the most common were hot flushes and hypertension. Study limitations include the open-label design and absence of formal testosterone recovery assessment. CONCLUSIONS: IAD and CAD demonstrated similar efficacy, tolerability, and QoL in men with nonmetastatic PCa. The principal benefit of IAD compared with CAD is a potential cost reduction with comparable OS rates. There are no apparent QoL benefits. PATIENT SUMMARY: This randomised trial showed that both intermittent and continuous hormone therapy had similar efficacy, tolerability, and quality-of-life profiles in patients with relapsing M0 or locally advanced prostate cancer. Intermittent therapy may be a valid option for selected patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00378690.

Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Enzalutamide Monotherapy in Hormone-naïve Prostate Cancer: 1- and 2-Year Open-label Follow-up Results.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide is an androgen receptor inhibitor with a demonstrated overall survival benefit in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. A phase 2 study of enzalutamide monotherapy in patients with hormone-naïve prostate cancer (HNPC) showed a high response rate for the prespecified primary endpoint (ie, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] response at week 25), regardless of metastases at baseline, and favorable tolerability. OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term efficacy and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy at 1 and 2 yr. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, single-arm study in patients with HNPC and noncastrate testosterone (≥230 ng/dl). INTERVENTION: Oral enzalutamide 160mg/d until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS: PSA response (≥80% decline from baseline) assessed at 1 yr (49 wk) and 2 yr (97 wk). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median (range) age was 73 (48-86) yr and 26 patients (39%) presented with metastases at study entry. Of 67 patients enrolled, 45 (67%) remained on enzalutamide at week 97. For patients remaining on therapy, the PSA response rate at week 97 was 100% (95% confidence interval 92-100%). Of 26 patients with metastases at baseline, 13 (50%) had a complete and four (15.4%) had a partial response as best overall tumor response up to 97 wk on treatment. There was overall maintenance of total-body bone mineral density (BMD) and moderate changes in lean and fat body mass at 49 and 97 wk. The most common adverse events were gynecomastia, nipple pain, fatigue, and hot flushes. The study limitations include lack of a control group and of endocrine, glycemic, and lipid data at 97 wk. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term enzalutamide monotherapy in men with noncastrate HNPC is associated with large sustained reductions in PSA, signals indicating a favorable tumor response, and favorable safety/tolerability profile, with relatively small negative effects on total-body BMD. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this long-term follow-up of the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy in patients with hormone-naïve prostate cancer, enzalutamide maintained long-term reductions in prostate-specific antigen, with a minimal impact on total-body bone mineral density. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01302041.

Potential utility of cancer-specific biomarkers for assessing response to hormonal treatments in metastatic prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men and there is an urgent clinical need to improve its detection and treatment. The introduction of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a biomarker for prostate cancer several decades ago represented an important step forward in our ability to diagnose this disease and offers the potential for earlier and more effective treatment. PSA measurements are now routinely conducted alongside digital rectal examination, with raised PSA levels leading to biopsy. PSA is also used to monitor disease and assess therapeutic response. However, there are some important limitations to its use, not least its lack of specificity for prostate cancer, and increased PSA screening may have resulted in overdiagnosis and overtreatment of early, low-risk prostate cancer. Therefore, there is a need for more specific and sensitive biomarkers for the diagnosis and monitoring of prostate cancer and treatment response; in particular, biomarkers of response to hormonal treatments in prostate cancer and predictive biomarkers to identify who is most likely to respond to these treatments. Here we review the current utilization of PSA and data on potentially more specific and sensitive biomarkers for the diagnosis and monitoring of prostate cancer: prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and the TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene. A description of the design of an ongoing study of the 6-month extended release formulation of leuprorelin acetate (Eligard(®) 45 mg) will provide preliminary data on the potential utility of these new biomarkers for detecting therapeutic response after hormonal therapy.

In vitro and in vivo characterisation of ASP9521: a novel, selective, orally bioavailable inhibitor of 17ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 5 (17ßHSD5; AKR1C3).

BACKGROUND: Aldo-keto reductase 1C3 [AKR1C3;17ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 5 (17ßHSD5)], plays a crucial role in persistent production of androgens despite castration, by catalysing conversion of the adrenal androgens dehydroepiandrosterone and androstenedione (AD) into androstenediol and testosterone (T). Hence, AKR1C3 is a promising therapeutic target in castration-resistant prostate cancer, as combination of an AKR1C3 inhibitor and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue may lead to complete androgen blockade. This study describes the preclinical characterisation of the novel AKR1C3 inhibitor ASP9521. METHODS: The inhibitory effect of ASP9521 on AKR1C3-mediated conversion from AD into T was evaluated both in vitro and in vivo, using CWR22R xenografted mice. The effect of ASP9521 on PSA production and cell proliferation was tested using LNCaP cells stably expressing human AKR1C3 (LNCaP-AKR1C3). Pharmacokinetics of ASP9521 were studied in rats, dogs and cynomolgus monkeys. RESULTS: ASP9521 inhibited conversion of AD into T by recombinant human or cynomolgus monkey AKR1C3 in a concentration-dependent manner (IC50,human: 11 nmol/L; IC50,monkey: 49 nmol/L). ASP9521 showed >100-fold selectivity for AKR1C3 over the isoform AKR1C2. In LNCaP-AKR1C3 cells, ASP9521 suppressed AD-dependent PSA production and cell proliferation. In CWR22R xenografts, single oral administration of ASP9521 (3 mg/kg) inhibited AD-induced intratumoural T production and this inhibitory effect was maintained for 24 h. After oral administration, ASP9521 was rapidly eliminated from plasma, while its intratumoural concentration remained high. The bioavailability of ASP9521 after oral administration (1 mg/kg) was 35 %, 78 % and 58 % in rats, dogs and monkeys, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ASP9521 is a potent, selective, orally bioavailable AKR1C3 inhibitor.

Enzalutamide monotherapy in hormone-naive prostate cancer: primary analysis of an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The androgen receptor inhibitor enzalutamide is approved for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that has progressed on docetaxel. Our aim was to assess the activity and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy in men with hormone-naive prostate cancer. METHODS: This trial is an ongoing open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, done across 12 European sites. Men aged over 18 years, with hormone-naive prostate cancer for whom hormone therapy was indicated, and who had non-castration levels of testosterone and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 2 ng/mL or greater at screening, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0, received oral enzalutamide 160 mg/day. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with an 80% or greater decline in PSA at week 25. All analyses included all patients who had received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01302041. FINDINGS: 67 men were enrolled into the study. 62 patients (92.5%, 95% CI 86.2-98.8) had a decline in PSA of 80% or greater at week 25. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events up to week 25 were gynaecomastia (n=24), fatigue (n=23), nipple pain (n=13), and hot flush (n=12), all of which were of mild to moderate severity. Nine patients had a treatment-emergent adverse event of grade 3 or higher, most of which were reported in one patient each, except for pneumonia (grade 3, two patients) and hypertension (grade 3, four patients). Five patients reported serious adverse events, none of which were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that enzalutamide monotherapy in men with hormone-naive prostate cancer of varying severity provides a level of disease suppression, and was generally well tolerated. These findings provide a rationale for further investigation of clinical response and outcomes with enzalutamide in non-castrate men with prostate cancer.

Safety, tolerability and anti-tumour activity of the androgen biosynthesis inhibitor ASP9521 in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: multi-centre phase I/II study.

BACKGROUND: ASP9521 is a first-in-class orally available inhibitor of the enzyme 17 ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 5 (17 ßHSD5; AKR1C3), catalysing the conversion of dehydroepiandrosterone and androstenedione into 5-androstenediol and testosterone. It has demonstrated anti-tumour activity in in vitro and in vivo preclinical models. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This first-in-man phase I/II study utilised a 3 + 3 dose escalation design starting at 30 mg ASP9521/day, with the aim of defining a maximum tolerated dose, as defined by the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities. Eligible patients received ASP9521 orally for 12 weeks. Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics and anti-tumour activity were assessed. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (median age: 68 years; range 52-76) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing after chemotherapy were included; 12 patients discontinued treatment at or before week 13, mainly due to disease progression. The most common adverse events were grade 1/2 and included asthenia (N = 5), constipation (N = 4), diarrhoea (N = 3), back pain (N = 3) and cancer pain (N = 3). PK demonstrated a half-life (t1/2) ranging from 16 to 35 h, rapid absorption and dose proportionality. No biochemical or radiological responses were identified; neither endocrine biomarker levels nor circulating tumour cell counts were altered by ASP9521. Given the lack of observable clinical activity, the study was terminated without implementing a planned 12-week dose expansion part at selected doses or a planned food-effect study part. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mCRPC, ASP9521 demonstrated dose-proportional increase in exposure over the doses evaluated, with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. However, the novel androgen biosynthesis inhibitor showed no relevant evidence of clinical activity.

Treatment patterns and characteristics of European patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: European treatment guidelines recommend the use of hormonal therapy for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer, including castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), but there is little understanding of how common practices in prostate cancer treatment compare across Europe. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the management of CRPC patients across five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK). METHODS: Data were drawn from the Adelphi Real World Prostate Cancer Disease Specific Programme (DSP), a cross-sectional survey of patients undertaken between December 2009 and May 2010. The study is based on physician interviews, physician-completed detailed patient record forms, and a patient-completed questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 348 physicians (191 urologists and 157 oncologists) reported on 3477 patients with prostate cancer. Of the 3477 patients, 1405 (40%) were categorised as having CRPC, and 1119 of these had metastatic CRPC. Bone metastases were the most common (78%), followed by liver (37%) and lung (30%). The mean age of CRPC patients was 71 years, 35% were current or ex-smokers and 10% had a family history of prostate cancer. CRPC patients had a mean of 1.8 comorbidities; 66% had hypertension and 32% had diabetes. Most physicians estimated their patients would stop responding to initial hormone therapy after 19-24 months. Overall, addition of an anti-androgen to a luteinising-hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist was the most commonly prescribed therapy when patients failed initial LHRH agonist therapy, although there were considerable variations between countries. While 72% of physicians in Europe would choose chemotherapy as the next treatment option after diagnosis of CRPC, 31% of this group would initially prescribe this without an LHRH agonist. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this analysis highlight inconsistencies in common hormonal therapy treatment patterns for CRPC and hormonal therapy across the EU.

PCA: prostate cancer, patient-centred approach or both?

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Several studies have explored patient-specific expectations of prostate cancer management, while others have investigated physicians' perceptions. However, the opinions of both groups have seldom been compared in one study. Therefore, the present study compares the results of two surveys, one among physicians and one among patients, on patient-physician communication and patients' expectations of prostate cancer management. The present review aims to highlight the differences and similarities in opinion on prostate cancer management between physicians and patients. It reflects the most important results of two surveys on patient-specific expectations in prostate cancer management, done among European prostate cancer specialists and patients with prostate cancer. These results are compared with published data. In addition, the authors' opinion on the survey results and on optimal prostate cancer management is included. To evaluate differences and similarities in opinions on and expectations of prostate cancer management between physicians and patients. Two surveys on patient-specific opinions and expectations in prostate cancer management were done in 2011 among European prostate cancer specialists and patients with prostate cancer. Survey results were complemented with existing published data and with the authors' opinion. Most specialists spent 15-29 min on delivering the diagnosis, and about the same amount of time on explaining treatment options. This time was considered insufficient by 35% and 48% of patients, respectively. There was a large discrepancy between physicians' and patients' opinions about the type of provided prognostic and therapeutic information, indicating that patients may not have completely understood this information. Shared decision-making was preferred by both patients and specialists. Treatment efficacy was the most important factor determining treatment choice for both groups, while the physician's opinion or experience also had a great impact on patients' treatment choice. Patient-support groups have an important role in providing relevant information and in exchanging experiences between patients. The supportive role of partners/relatives was more appreciated when discussing treatment options than during diagnosis. Although patients' expectations are generally matched by their caring physician(s), physicians can still improve quality of care by taking adequate time for their patients, by using terminology that is easily understood by patients and by encouraging shared decision-making. A multidisciplinary team may be an important part of the treatment paradigm, with the individual patient's needs and preferences as the centre of care.

Preliminary report of the Hepatic Encephalopathy Assessment Driving Simulator (HEADS) score.

INTRODUCTION: Audiovisual simulations of real-life driving (ie, driving simulators) have been used to assess neurologic dysfunction in a variety of medical applications. However, the use of simulated driving to assess neurologic impairment in the setting of liver disease (ie, hepatic encephalopathy) is limited. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis was to develop a scoring system based on simulated driving performance to assess mild cognitive impairment in cirrhotic patients with hepatic encephalopathy. METHODS: This preliminary analysis was conducted as part of the Hepatic Encephalopathy Assessment Driving Simulator (HEADS) pilot study. Cirrhotic volunteers initially underwent a battery of neuropsychological tests to identify those cirrhotic patients with mild cognitive impairment. Performance during an audiovisually simulated course of on-road driving was then compared between mildly impaired cirrhotic patients and healthy volunteers. A scoring system was developed to quantify the likelihood of cognitive impairment on the basis of data from the simulated on-road driving. RESULTS: Mildly impaired cirrhotic patients performed below the level of healthy volunteers on the driving simulator. Univariate logistic regression and correlation models indicated that several driving simulator variables were significant predictors of cognitive impairment. Five variables (run time, total map performance, number of collisions, visual divided attention response, and average lane position) were incorporated into a quantitative model, the HEADS scoring system. The HEADS score (0-9 points) showed a strong correlation with cognitive impairment as measured by area under the receiver-operator curve (.89). CONCLUSION: The HEADS system appears to be a promising new tool for the assessment of mild hepatic encephalopathy.

Matching graft to recipient by predicted survival: can this be an acceptable strategy to improve utilization of deceased donor kidneys?

A new kidney allocation scheme is needed to address the current shortage of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the United States. With this goal in mind, we have derived a novel utility-based system to balance supply and demand. Our system uses a North American-based recipient risk score and the deceased donor score to maximize the total number of years of renal allograft function as a means to improve allocation of kidneys from deceased donors. Essentially, donor renal allografts are matched to a wait-listed candidate with similar predicted survival, which poses an ethical issue. However, this novel utility-based system is practical and could improve deceased donor renal allocation by minimizing both waste and need for retransplantation.

Constitutive androstane receptor agonist, TCPOBOP, attenuates steatohepatitis in the methionine choline-deficient diet-fed mouse.

AIM: To ascertain whether constitutive androstane receptor (CAR) activation by 1,4-bis-[2-(3,5,-dichloropyridyloxy)] benzene (TCPOBOP) modulates steatohepatitis in the methionine choline-deficient (MCD) diet-fed animal. METHODS: C57/BL6 wild-type mice were fed the MCD or standard diet for 2 wk and were treated with either the CAR agonist, TCPOBOP, or the CAR inverse agonist, androstanol. RESULTS: Expression of CYP2B10 and CYP3A11, known CAR target genes, increased 30-fold and 45-fold, respectively, in TCPOBOP-treated mice fed the MCD diet. TCPOBOP treatment reduced hepatic steatosis (44.6 +/- 5.4% vs 30.4 +/- 4.5%, P < 0.05) and serum triglyceride levels (48 +/- 8 vs 20 +/- 1 mg/dL, P < 0.05) in MCD diet-fed mice as compared with the standard diet-fed mice. This reduction in hepatic steatosis was accompanied by an increase in enzymes involved in fatty acid microsomal omega-oxidation and peroxisomal beta-oxidation, namely CYP4A10, LPBE, and 3-ketoacyl-CoA thiolase. The reduction in steatosis was also accompanied by a reduction in liver cell apoptosis and inflammation. In contrast, androstanol was without effect on any of the above parameters. CONCLUSION: CAR activation stimulates induction of genes involved in fatty acid oxidation, and ameliorates hepatic steatosis, apoptosis and inflammation.

A recipient risk score for deceased donor renal allocation.

BACKGROUND: The current shortage of deceased donor kidneys makes it difficult to design a kidney allocation scheme that balances optimal utility with supply. The aim of this study is to derive a recipient risk score (RRS) that could be used with the deceased donor score (DDS) to maximize the total number of years of renal allograft function as a means to improve allocation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 47,535 adult recipients of deceased donor renal transplants between 1995 and 2002 from the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research Files. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to derive an RRS and estimate recipient and graft survival as a function of RRS. Annual rates of organ supply and recipient demand for deceased donor kidneys were estimated from expectancy data and expressed in renal years (years provided by a functioning kidney allograft). Renal-year analyses were used to optimize allocation. RESULTS: The strongest predictors of recipient survival after transplantation used in the RRS were recipient age, history of diabetes mellitus, history of angina, and time on dialysis therapy. When used with DDS, RRS provided a utility-based allocation system for deceased donor kidneys that theoretically increased the annual (2002) rate of supply by 15%. CONCLUSION: The RRS is a practical system that, when combined with a method to assess donor organs, such as DDS, may improve deceased donor renal allocation.

Improving utilization of deceased donor kidneys by matching recipient and graft survival.

Younger renal transplant recipients often outlive their allografts, whereas older recipients often die before their allograft fails. Thus, our aim was to assess the utility of matching recipient and graft survival to improve allocation of deceased donor kidneys. We reviewed the records of 49,206 patients (United Network for Organ Sharing, 1995-2002). Donor grafts were stratified by Deceased Donor Score (DDS). We observed a disparity between recipient survival and renal graft survival which contributed to an annual gap between supply and demand of renal transplants. Utilization of DDS and distribution of marginal kidneys to older recipients would improve allocation.