Outcome of patients with metastatic sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma: results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma is associated with poor prognosis. Data regarding outcome in the targeted therapy era are lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical, prognostic, and treatment parameters in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients with and without sarcomatoid histology treated with targeted therapy were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred eighty-six patients were identified (sRCC: n = 230 and non-sRCC: n = 2056). sRCC patients had significantly worse IMDC prognostic criteria compared with non-sRCC (11% vs. 19% favorable risk; 49% vs. 57% intermediate risk, and 40% vs. 24% poor risk; P < .0001). Time from original diagnosis to relapse (excluding synchronous metastatic disease) was shorter in the sRCC group (18.8 vs. 42.9 months; P < .0001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of central nervous system metastases (6%-8%) or underlying clear cell histology (87%-88%). More than 93% of patients received VEGF inhibitors as first-line therapy; objective response was less common in sRCC whereas primary refractory disease was more common (21% vs. 26% and 43% vs. 21%; P < .0001, for both). sRCC patients had significantly less use of second- (P = .018) and third-line (P < .0001) systemic therapy. The median progression-free survival (PFS)/overall survival (OS) was 4.5/10.4 months in sRCC patients and 7.8/22.5 months in non-sRCC patients (P < .0001 for both). Sarcomatoid histology was associated with a significantly worse PFS and OS after adjusting for individual IMDC risk factors in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 1.5; P < .0001 for both). CONCLUSION: Patients with sRCC have a shorter time to relapse, worse baseline prognostic criteria, and worse clinical outcome with targeted therapy. Additional insight into the biology of sRCC is needed to develop alternative therapeutics.

A randomized trial of external beam radiotherapy versus cryoablation in patients with localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Localized prostate cancer can be treated several different ways, but head-to-head comparisons of treatments are infrequent. The authors of this report conducted a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial to compare cryoablation with external beam radiotherapy in these patients. METHODS: From December 1997 through February 2003, 244 men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer were assigned randomly to receive either cryoablation or radiotherapy (122 men in each arm). All received neoadjuvant antiandrogen therapy. The primary endpoint was disease progression at 36 months based on a trifecta definition: 1) radiologic evidence of metastatic disease, or 2) initiation of further antineoplastic therapy, or 3) biochemical failure. Two definitions of biochemical failure were used: 1) 2 consecutive rises in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) with a final value >1.0 ng/mL, and 2) a rise above PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, disease-specific survival, and prostate biopsy at 36 months. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 100 months. Disease progression at 36 months was observed in 23.9% (PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL, 17.1%) of men in the cryoablation arm and in 23.7% (PSA nadir + 2 ng/mL, 13.2%) of men in the radiotherapy arm. No difference in overall or disease-specific survival were observed. At 36 months, more patients in the radiotherapy arm had a cancer-positive biopsy (28.9%) compared with patients in the cryoablation arm (7.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The observed difference in disease progression at 36 months was small, 0.2%; however, because of the wide confidence interval, from -10.8% to 11.2%, it was not possible to rule out inferiority (defined a priori as a 10% difference). With longer term follow-up, the trend favors cryoablation. Significantly fewer positive biopsies were documented after cryoablation than after radiotherapy.

A randomized trial of external beam radiotherapy versus cryoablation in patients with localized prostate cancer: quality of life outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomized trial to compare external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to cryoablation for localized disease showed cryoablation to be noninferior to external beam EBRT in disease progression and overall and disease-specific survival. We report on the quality of life (QOL) outcomes for this trial. METHODS: From December 1997 through February 2003, 244 men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer were randomly assigned to cryoablation or EBRT (median dose 68 Gy). All patients received neoadjuvant antiandrogen therapy. Patients completed the EORTC QLQ C30 and the Prostate Cancer Index (PCI) before treatment and at 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months post-treatment. RESULTS: Regardless of treatment arm, participants reported high levels of QOL with few exceptions. cryoablation was associated with more acute urinary dysfunction (mean PCI urinary function cryoablation=69.4; mean EBRT=90.7; P<.001), which resolved over time. No late arising QOL issues were observed. Both EBRT and cryoablation participants reported decreases in sexual function at 3 months with the cryoablation patients reporting poorer functioning (mean cryoablation=7.2: mean EBRT=32.9; P<.001). Mean sexual function score was 15 points lower at 3 years for the cryoablation group and 13% more of the cryoablation men said that sexuality was a moderate or big problem. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, no long-term QOL advantage for either treatment was apparent with the exception of poorer sexual function reported by those treated with cryoablation. Men who wish to increase their odds of retaining sexual function might be counseled to choose EBRT over cryoablation.

A randomized phase II and pharmacokinetic study of the antisense oligonucleotides ISIS 3521 and ISIS 5132 in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Protein kinase C (PKC)-alpha and Raf-1 are important elements of proliferative signal transduction pathways in both normal and malignant cells. Abrogation of either Raf-1 or PKC-alpha function can both inhibit cellular proliferation and induce apoptosis in several experimental cancer models including prostate cancer cell lines. ISIS 3521 and ISIS 5132 are antisense phosphorothioate oligonucleotides that inhibit PKC-alpha and Raf-1 expression, respectively, and induce a broad spectrum of antiproliferative and antitumor effects in several human tumor cell lines. In Phase I evaluation both ISIS 3521 and ISIS 5132 could be safely administered on 21-day i.v. infusion schedules and demonstrated preliminary evidence of antitumor activity. On the basis of these findings, a randomized Phase II study of ISIS 3521 and ISIS 5132 was performed in two comparable cohorts of patients who had chemotherapy-naïve, hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with documented evidence of metastatic HRPC and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value > or =20 ng/ml were randomized to receive treatment with either ISIS 3521 or ISIS 5132 as a continuous i.v. infusion for 21 days repeated every 4 weeks. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of bidimensionally measurable disease at the time of randomization. The principal endpoints included PSA response, objective response in patients with bidimensionally measurable disease, and treatment failure defined as new or worsening symptoms; a fall in performance status of 2 levels; new or objective progression of disease; or a rise in PSA for 12 weeks without symptom improvement. Plasma samples were collected to assess individual steady-state concentrations and to relate this pharmacokinetic parameter to observed toxicities and responses. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were randomized in this study; 15 patients received 43 courses of ISIS 3521 and 16 patients received 48 courses of ISIS 5132. The most common toxicities observed were mild to moderate (grade 1 or 2) fatigue and lethargy in 21% and 56% of patients treated with ISIS 3521 and ISIS 5132, respectively. Although no objective or PSA responses were observed in any patient treated with ISIS 3521 or ISIS 5132, persistent stable disease was observed in 3 patients for 5 or more months, and in 5 patients the PSA values did not rise >25% for 120 days or longer. CONCLUSIONS: The antisense oligonucleotides ISIS 3521 and ISIS 5132, at these doses and on this schedule, do not possess clinically significant single-agent antitumor activity in HRPC. Protracted stable disease in some patients may indicate a cytostatic effect. Additional work is required to define the optimal role of PKC-alpha or Raf-1 inhibition in the treatment of HRPC.