Efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis of the scalp: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3b study.

BACKGROUND: Scalp psoriasis is common and difficult to treat. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab for the treatment of scalp psoriasis. METHODS: In this Phase 3b, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled study (NCT03897088), patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis affecting the scalp (Investigator Global Assessment modified [IGA mod] 2011 [scalp] ≥3, Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index [PSSI] ≥12, ≥30% scalp surface area affected) received tildrakizumab 100 mg or PBO at W0 and W4. The primary endpoint was IGA mod 2011 (scalp) score of "clear" or "almost clear" with ≥2-point reduction from baseline at W16 (IGA mod 2011 [scalp] response). Key secondary endpoints were PSSI 90 response at W12 and W16 and IGA mod 2011 (scalp) response at W12. Safety was assessed from adverse events. RESULTS: Of patients treated with tildrakizumab (n = 89) vs PBO (n = 82), 49.4% vs 7.3% achieved IGA mod 2011 (scalp) response at W16 (primary endpoint) and 46.1% vs 4.9% at W12; 60.7% vs 4.9% achieved PSSI 90 response at W16 and 48.3% vs 2.4% at W12 (all P < .00001). No serious treatment-related adverse events occurred. LIMITATIONS: Only short-term data are presented. CONCLUSION: Tildrakizumab was efficacious for the treatment of scalp psoriasis with no new safety signals.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 2a Study of Tildrakizumab Efficacy and Safety in Patients With Active Ankylosing Spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: Tildrakizumab is an anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody approved to treat moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multinational trial ( clinicaltrials.gov NCT02980705), patients with active AS, according to modified New York criteria and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index Score ≥4, were randomized 1:1 to tildrakizumab 200 mg or placebo every 4 weeks until week 24. Thereafter, all patients received tildrakizumab 200 mg every 4 weeks until week 48. The primary outcome was proportion of patients achieving 20% improvement from baseline by Assessment in SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria (ASAS20) at week 24. This outcome was analyzed in subgroups defined by prior treatment experience, weight, age, and sex using the full analysis set. Safety was assessed through treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: From December 5, 2017-September 3, 2019, 101 patients (76.2% male, 97% White) enrolled and were randomized to treatment. At week 24, the ASAS20 response rate was 74.0% in patients receiving tildrakizumab 200 mg (n = 50) versus 80.4% in placebo-treated patients (n = 51; treatment difference, -6.31%; 95% confidence interval, -22.34 to 9.71; p = 0.44). No difference in treatment effect by subgroups was observed. Tildrakizumab treatment was generally well tolerated, with no unexpected safety findings. The study was terminated after the week 24 interim analysis due to lack of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Tildrakizumab treatment was generally well tolerated but did not improve ASAS20 response rate versus placebo in patients with AS.

Plasma and cerebrospinal fluid pharmacokinetics of vodobatinib, a neuroprotective c-Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence suggests that c-Abl is critical in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's Disease (PD). Vodobatinib (K0706) is a potent, specific Abl kinase inhibitor currently being developed for the treatment of PD. In previously reported studies, nilotinib, a multikinase c-Abl inhibitor, did not show clinical activity as evidenced by no improvement of symptoms or the rate of decline after one to six months of treatment at the maximum permissible dose, presumably because of insufficient CNS penetration. Here we report clinical PK and safety data for vodobatinib. OBJECTIVES: To determine safety, plasma PK, and CSF penetration of vodobatinib in healthy volunteers and PD subjects following oral administration, and compare CSF levels to in vitro concentrations required for c-Abl inhibition relative to data reported for nilotinib. METHODS: Inhibition of c-Abl kinase activity and c-Abl binding affinity were first assessed in vitro. Healthy human volunteers and PD patients received various oral doses of vodobatinib once-daily for seven and fourteen days respectively, to assess safety, and plasma and CSF PK. RESULTS: In in vitro assays, vodobatinib was more potent (kinase IC50 = 0.9 nM) than nilotinib (kinase IC50 = 15-45 nM). Administration of vodobatinib 48, 192 and 384 mg to healthy subjects for 7 days yielded mean Cmax, CSF values of 1.8, 11.6, and 12.2 nM respectively, with the two highest doses exceeding the IC50 over the entire dosing interval. Cavg, CSF values were 6-8 times greater than the IC50. Comparable CSF levels were observed in PD patients. All doses were well tolerated in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: Based on achieved CSF concentrations, the potential for c-Abl inhibition in the brain is substantially higher with vodobatinib than with nilotinib. The CSF PK profile of vodobatinib is suitable for determining if c-Abl inhibition will be neuroprotective in PD patients.

Intravenous pegylated liposomal prednisolone outperforms intramuscular methylprednisolone in treating rheumatoid arthritis flares: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are potent anti-inflammatory drugs but their use is limited by systemic exposure leading to toxicity. Targeted GC delivery to sites of inflammation via encapsulation in long-circulating liposomes may improve the therapeutic index. We performed a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multi-center study in which intravenously (i.v.) administered pegylated liposomal prednisolone sodium phosphate (Nanocort) was compared to equipotent intramuscular (i.m.) methylprednisolone acetate (Depo-Medrol®; i.e. a current standards-of-care for treating flares in rheumatoid arthritis patients). We enrolled 172 patients with active arthritis who met all eligibility criteria, eventually resulting in 150 patients randomized in three groups: (1) Nanocort 75 mg i.v. infusion plus i.m. saline injection; (2) Nanocort 150 mg i.v. infusion plus i.m. saline injection; and (3) Depo-Medrol® 120 mg i.m. injection plus i.v. saline infusion. Dosing in each group occurred at baseline and on day 15 (week 2). Study visits occurred at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12, to assess both efficacy and safety. The primary endpoint was the "European League Against Rheumatism" (EULAR) responder rate at week 1. Safety was determined by the occurrence of adverse events during treatment and 12 weeks of follow-up. Treatment with Nanocort was found to be superior to Depo-Medrol® in terms of EULAR response at week 1, with p-values of 0.007 (good response) and 0.018 (moderate response). Treatments were well tolerated with a comparable pattern of adverse events in the three treatment groups. However, the Nanocort groups had a higher incidence of hypersensitivity reactions during liposome infusion. Our results show that liposomal Nanocort is more effective than Depo-Medrol® in treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis flares and has similar safety. This is the first clinical study in a large patient population showing that i.v. administered targeted drug delivery with a nanomedicine formulation improves the therapeutic index of glucocorticoids.

A phase II study of clinical activity of SCH 717454 (robatumumab) in patients with relapsed osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Robatumumab (19D12; MK-7454 otherwise known as SCH717454) is a fully human antibody that binds to and inhibits insulin-like growth factor receptor-1 (IGF-1R). This multiinstitutional study (P04720) determined the safety and clinical efficacy of robatumumab in three separate patient groups with resectable osteosarcoma metastases (Group 1), unresectable osteosarcoma metastases (Group 2), and Ewing sarcoma metastases (Group 3). PROCEDURE: Robatumumab infusions were administered every 2 weeks and were well tolerated with minimal toxicity. Centrally reviewed response data were available for 144 patients. RESULTS: Low disease burden was important for osteosarcoma response: three of 31 patients had complete response or partial response (PR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in resectable patients (Group 1) versus zero of 29 in unresectable patients (Group 2); median overall survival was 20 months in Group 1 versus 8.2 months in Group 2. In centrally reviewed patients with Ewing sarcoma with PET-CT data (N = 84/115), there were six PR, 23 stable disease, and 55 progression of disease by RECIST at 2 months. Patients with Ewing sarcoma had a median overall survival of 6.9 months. However, responding patients with Ewing sarcoma were allowed to continue on treatment after study closure. A minority of patients with metastatic Ewing sarcoma showed clinical responses and have remained healthy after receiving 25-115 doses of robatumumab with remissions of >4 years duration (N = 6). CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that although the IGF-1R remains an attractive treatment target, additional research is needed to identify responders and/or means to achieve durable remissions in order to successfully exploit IGF-1R signal blockade in Ewing sarcoma (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00617890).

Fifteen-year Outcomes Following Conservative Management Among Men Aged 65 Years or Older with Localized Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: To understand the threat posed by localized prostate cancer and the potential impact of surgery or radiation, patients and healthcare providers require information on long-term outcomes following conservative management. OBJECTIVE: To describe 15-yr survival outcomes and cancer therapy utilization among men 65 years and older managed conservatively for newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: This is a population-based cohort study with participants living in predefined geographic areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. The study includes 31 137 Medicare patients aged ≥65 yr diagnosed with localized prostate cancer in 1992-2009 who initially received conservative management (no surgery, radiotherapy, cryotherapy, or androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]). All patients were followed until death or December 31, 2009 (for prostate cancer-specific mortality [PCSM]) and December 31, 2011 (for overall mortality). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Competing-risk analyses were used to examine PCSM, overall mortality, and utilization of cancer therapies. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The 15-yr risk of PCSM for men aged 65-74 yr diagnosed with screening-detected prostate cancer was 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7-8.0%) for T1c Gleason 5-7 and 22% (95% CI 16-35%) for Gleason 8-10 disease. After 15 yr of follow-up, 24% (95% CI 21-27%) of men aged 65-74 yr with screening-detected Gleason 5-7 cancer received ADT. The corresponding result for men with Gleason 8-10 cancer was 38% (95% CI 32-44%). The major study limitations are the lack of data for men aged <65 yr and detailed clinical information associated with secondary cancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The 15-yr outcomes following conservative management of newly diagnosed Gleason 5-7 prostate cancer among men aged ≥65 yr are excellent. Men with Gleason 8-10 disease managed conservatively face a significant risk of PCSM. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the long-term survival outcomes for a large group of patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who did not have surgery, radiotherapy, cryotherapy, or androgen deprivation therapy in the first 6 mo after cancer diagnosis. We found that the 15-yr disease-specific survival is excellent for men diagnosed with Gleason 5-7 disease. The data support conservative management as a reasonable choice for elderly patients with low-grade localized prostate cancer.

Fifteen-year survival outcomes following primary androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer.

IMPORTANCE: One in 6 American men will be diagnosed as having prostate cancer during their lifetime. Although there are no data to support the use of primary androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for early-stage prostate cancer, primary ADT has been widely used for localized prostate cancer, especially among older patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term survival impact of primary ADT in older men with localized (T1/T2) prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a population-based cohort study of 66,717 Medicare patients 66 years or older diagnosed from 1992 through 2009 who received no definitive local therapy within 180 days of prostate cancer diagnosis. The study was conducted in predefined US geographical areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. Instrumental variable analysis was used to assess the impact of primary ADT and control for potential biases associated with unmeasured confounding variables. The instrumental variable comprised combined health services areas with various usage rates of primary ADT. The analysis compared survival outcomes in the top tertile areas with those in the bottom tertile areas. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Prostate cancer-specific survival and overall survival. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 110 months, primary ADT was not associated with improved 15-year overall or prostate cancer-specific survival following the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer. Among patients with moderately differentiated cancers, the 15-year overall survival was 20.0% in areas with high primary ADT use vs 20.8% in areas with low use (difference: 95% CI, -2.2% to 0.4%), and the 15-year prostate cancer survival was 90.6% in both high- and low-use areas (difference: 95% CI, -1.1% to 1.2%). Among patients with poorly differentiated cancers, the 15-year cancer-specific survival was 78.6% in high-use areas vs 78.5%, in low-use areas (difference: 95% CI, -1.8% to 2.4%), and the 15-year overall survival was 8.6% in high-use areas vs 9.2% in low-use areas (difference: 95% CI, -1.5% to 0.4%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Primary ADT is not associated with improved long-term overall or disease-specific survival for men with localized prostate cancer. Primary ADT should be used only to palliate symptoms of disease or prevent imminent symptoms associated with disease progression.

A randomized, phase II study of the anti-insulin-like growth factor receptor type 1 (IGF-1R) monoclonal antibody robatumumab (SCH 717454) in patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Overexpression of insulin-like growth factor receptor type 1 (IGF-1R) may promote tumor development and progression in some cancer patients. Our objective was to assess tumor uptake of fluorodeoxyglucose by positron-emission tomography in patients with chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer treated with an anti-insulin-like growth factor receptor type 1 (anti-IGF-1R) monoclonal antibody, robatumumab. This was a randomized, open-label study with two periods (P1 and P2). Patients were randomized 3:1 into treatment arms R/R and C/R that received, respectively, one cycle of 0.3 mg/kg robatumumab or one or more cycles of second-line chemotherapy in P1, followed in either case by 10 mg/kg robatumumab biweekly in P2. The primary measure of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake was maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in the R/R arm having a mean percent decrease from baseline in SUV(max) (DiSUV) greater than 20% 12-14 days postdose in P2. Secondary endpoints included Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)-defined tumor response and pharmacodynamic measures of target engagement. Among 41 patients who were evaluable for the primary endpoint, seven (17%, 95% CI 7%-32%) had DiSUV greater than 20%. Fifty robatumumab-treated patients were evaluable for RECIST-defined tumor response and six (12%) had stable disease lasting greater than or equal to 7 weeks in P2. Pharmacodynamic endpoints indicated target engagement after dosing with 10 mg/kg robatumumab, but not 0.3 mg/kg. The most frequently reported adverse events were fatigue/asthenia, nausea, anorexia, and gastrointestinal disturbances. In this study, few patients with chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer appeared to benefit from treatment with the IGF-1R antagonist robatumumab.

Randomized phase II trial of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib (MK-7965) versus capecitabine in patients with advanced breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Effective therapies after failure of treatment with anthracyclines and taxanes are needed for patients with metastatic breast cancer. Dinaciclib (MK-7965, formerly SCH727965), a small-molecule cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated antitumor activity in phase I studies with solid-tumor patients. This phase II trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of dinaciclib compared with that of capecitabine in women with previously treated advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either dinaciclib at 50 mg/m(2), administered as a 2-hour infusion every 21 days, or 1250 mg/m(2) capecitabine, administered orally twice daily in 21-day cycles. RESULTS: An unplanned interim analysis showed that the time to disease progression was inferior with dinaciclib treatment compared with capecitabine treatment; therefore, the trial was stopped after 30 patients were randomized. Dinaciclib treatment demonstrated antitumor activity in 2 of 7 patients with estrogen receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer (1 confirmed and 1 unconfirmed partial response), as well as acceptable safety and tolerability. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were common and included neutropenia, leukopenia, increase in aspartate aminotransferase, and febrile neutropenia. Population pharmacokinetic model-predicted mean dinaciclib exposure (area under the concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity [AUC[I]]) at 50 mg/m(2) was similar to that observed in a previous phase I trial, and no drug accumulation was observed after multiple-dose administration. CONCLUSION: Although dinaciclib monotherapy demonstrated some antitumor activity and was generally tolerated, efficacy was not superior to capecitabine. Future studies may be considered to evaluate dinaciclib in select patient populations with metastatic breast cancer and in combination with other agents.

Randomized phase 2 study of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib (MK-7965) versus erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Dinaciclib (MK-7965, formerly SCH 727965), a novel, small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases, has been shown to induce apoptosis in preclinical studies of human tumor cell lines, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells. Erlotinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of advanced NSCLC as second- or third-line therapy. This phase 2, randomized, multicenter, open-label study compared dinaciclib with erlotinib in patients with previously treated NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was comprised of 2 parts: in part 1, patients were randomized to either intravenous (IV) dinaciclib (50 mg/m2) or oral erlotinib (150 mg) using an adaptive Bayesian design that adjusted the randomization ratio in favor of the more active arm, and in part 2, patients who had progressed on erlotinib were permitted to cross over to receive dinaciclib at the same dosage as in part 1. Patients were followed until disease progression or death, initiation of nonstudy cancer treatment, discontinuation, or withdrawal of consent. The primary efficacy end point was time-to-progression (TTP) in part 1 and objective response rate (ORR) in part 2. RESULTS: Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates, the median TTP was 1.49 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.31, 2.63) following initial treatment with dinaciclib, compared with 1.58 months (95% CI: 1.38, 2.83) with erlotinib. No objective responses were observed following initial treatment with dinaciclib. Common severe (grade 3 or 4) drug-related adverse effects included neutropenia, leukopenia, vomiting, and diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Dinaciclib, administered IV, was well tolerated at the 50 mg/m2 dose, but does not have activity as monotherapy in previously treated NSCLC. Evaluation of dinaciclib in combination with other agents for other indications including breast cancer and multiple myeloma is in progress.

A first-in-human, phase 1, dose-escalation study of dinaciclib, a novel cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, administered weekly in subjects with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Dinaciclib, a small-molecule, cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, inhibits cell cycle progression and proliferation in various tumor cell lines in vitro. We conducted an open-label, dose-escalation study to determine the safety, tolerability, and bioactivity of dinaciclib in adults with advanced malignancies. METHODS: Dinaciclib was administered starting at a dose of 0.33 mg/m2, as a 2-hour intravenous infusion once weekly for 3 weeks (on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle), to determine the maximum administered dose (MAD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), and safety and tolerability. Pharmacodynamics of dinaciclib were assessed using an ex vivo phytohemagglutinin lymphocyte stimulation assay and immunohistochemistry staining for retinoblastoma protein phosphorylation in skin biopsies. Evidence of antitumor activity was assessed by sequential computed tomography imaging after every 2 treatment cycles. RESULTS: Forty-eight subjects with solid tumors were treated. The MAD was found to be 14 mg/m2 and the RP2D was determined to be 12 mg/m2; DLTs at the MAD included orthostatic hypotension and elevated uric acid. Forty-seven (98%) subjects reported adverse events (AEs) across all dose levels; the most common AEs were nausea, anemia, decreased appetite, and fatigue. Dinaciclib administered at the RP2D significantly inhibited lymphocyte proliferation, demonstrating a pharmacodynamic effect. Ten subjects treated at a variety of doses achieved prolonged stable disease for at least 4 treatment cycles. CONCLUSIONS: Dinaciclib administered every week for 3 weeks (on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) was generally safe and well tolerated. Initial bioactivity and observed disease stabilization support further evaluation of dinaciclib as a treatment option for patients with advanced solid malignancies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT00871663.

Does primary androgen-deprivation therapy delay the receipt of secondary cancer therapy for localized prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that shows no survival advantage, many older patients receive primary androgen-deprivation therapy (PADT) shortly after the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer (PCa). OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates whether the early use of PADT affects the subsequent receipt of additional palliative cancer treatments such as chemotherapy, palliative radiation therapy, or intervention for spinal cord compression or bladder outlet obstruction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This longitudinal population-based cohort study consists of Medicare patients aged ≥ 66 yr diagnosed with localized PCa from 1992 to 2006 in areas covered by the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program. SEER-Medicare linked data through 2009 were used to identify the use of PADT and palliative cancer therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Instrumental variable analysis methods were used to minimize confounding effects. Confidence intervals were derived from the bootstrap estimates. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: This study includes 29 775 men who did not receive local therapy for T1-T2 PCa within the first year of cancer diagnosis. Among low-risk patients (Gleason score 2-7 in 1992-2002 and Gleason score 2-6 in 2003-2006) with a median age of 78 yr and a median follow-up of 10.3 yr, PADT was associated with a 25% higher use of chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.44) and a borderline higher use of any palliative cancer treatment (HR: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97-1.19) within 10 yr of diagnosis in regions with high PADT use compared with regions with low PADT use. Because this study was limited to men >65 yr, the results may not be applicable to younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment of low-risk, localized PCa with PADT does not delay the receipt of subsequent palliative therapies and is associated with an increased use of chemotherapy.

Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management.

CONTEXT: Most newly diagnosed prostate cancers are clinically localized, and major treatment options include surgery, radiation, or conservative management. Although conservative management can be a reasonable choice, there is little contemporary prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-era data on outcomes with this approach. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of clinically localized prostate cancer managed without initial attempted curative therapy in the PSA era. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based cohort study of men aged 65 years or older when they were diagnosed (1992-2002) with stage T1 or T2 prostate cancer and whose cases were managed without surgery or radiation for 6 months after diagnosis. Living in areas covered by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, the men were followed up for a median of 8.3 years (through December 31, 2007). Competing risk analyses were performed to assess outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ten-year overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and major cancer related interventions. RESULTS: Among men who were a median age of 78 years at cancer diagnosis, 10-year prostate cancer-specific mortality was 8.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2%-12.8%) for men with well-differentiated tumors; 9.1% (95% CI, 8.3%-10.1%) for those with moderately differentiated tumors, and 25.6% (95% CI, 23.7%-28.3%) for those with poorly differentiated tumors. The corresponding 10-year risks of dying of competing causes were 59.8% (95% CI, 53.2%-67.8%), 57.2% (95% CI, 52.6%-63.9%), and 56.5% (95% CI, 53.6%-58.8%), respectively. Ten-year disease-specific mortality for men aged 66 to 74 years diagnosed with moderately differentiated disease was 60% to 74% lower than earlier studies: 6% (95% CI, 4%-8%) in the contemporary PSA era (1992-2002) compared with results of previous studies (15%-23%) in earlier eras (1949-1992). Improved survival was also observed in poorly differentiated disease. The use of chemotherapy (1.6%) or major interventions for spinal cord compression (0.9%) was uncommon. CONCLUSIONS: Results following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 1992 through 2002 are better than outcomes among patients diagnosed in the 1970s and 1980s. This may be due, in part, to additional lead time, overdiagnosis related to PSA testing, grade migration, or advances in medical care.

Survival following primary androgen deprivation therapy among men with localized prostate cancer.

CONTEXT: Despite a lack of data, increasing numbers of patients are receiving primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) as an alternative to surgery, radiation, or conservative management for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between PADT and survival in elderly men with localized prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A population-based cohort study of 19,271 men aged 66 years or older receiving Medicare who did not receive definitive local therapy for clinical stage T1-T2 prostate cancer. These patients were diagnosed in 1992-2002 within predefined US geographical areas, with follow-up through December 31, 2006, for all-cause mortality and through December 31, 2004, for prostate cancer-specific mortality. Instrumental variable analysis was used to address potential biases associated with unmeasured confounding variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prostate cancer-specific survival and overall survival. RESULTS: Among patients with localized prostate cancer (median age, 77 years), 7867 (41%) received PADT, and 11,404 were treated with conservative management, not including PADT. During the follow-up period, there were 1560 prostate cancer deaths and 11,045 deaths from all causes. Primary androgen deprivation therapy was associated with lower 10-year prostate cancer-specific survival (80.1% vs 82.6%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.33) and no increase in 10-year overall survival (30.2% vs 30.3%; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05) compared with conservative management. However, in a prespecified subset analysis, PADT use in men with poorly differentiated cancer was associated with improved prostate cancer-specific survival (59.8% vs 54.3%; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70-1.00; P = .049) but not overall survival (17.3% vs 15.3%; HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.84-1.01). CONCLUSION: Primary androgen deprivation therapy is not associated with improved survival among the majority of elderly men with localized prostate cancer when compared with conservative management.

Population based study of hormonal therapy and survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Although the palliative benefits of hormonal therapy for metastatic prostate cancer are widely recognized, little information is available regarding the effect of hormonal therapy on cancer specific and overall survival, and the types of patients who might benefit the most or least from hormonal therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prostate cancer specific and overall survival according to hormonal therapy use was determined by the Kaplan-Meier method in 6,098 men 65 years or older diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer in 1991 to 1999 who were identified through the population based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, and Medicare linked database. Cox proportional hazards and propensity score methods were used to adjust for potential confounders, such as disease status and patient comorbidity. RESULTS: Propensity score adjusted median overall survival was 26 months in men who received hormonal therapy compared with 13 months in those who did not (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.17-0.70, p <0.0001). The benefit of hormonal therapy was observed across all comorbidity strata and races. Effects were most evident in patients with poorly differentiated cancer (cancer specific mortality in favor of treatment HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.53-0.69, p <0.001). Benefit was not found in patients with well differentiated cancer (cancer specific mortality in favor of no treatment HR 1.92, 95% CI 0.90-4.10, p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Hormonal therapy is associated with improved prostate cancer specific and overall survival in men with poorly differentiated cancer. Improved survival does not appear evident in men with well differentiated disease.