Addition of estramustine to chemotherapy and survival of patients with castration-refractory prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Department of Medicine, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
The Lancet Oncology (Impact Factor: 24.73). 12/2007; 8(11):994-1000. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70284-X
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Estramustine phosphate is a mustard-oestradiol conjugate, and has hormonal and non-hormonal effects. In phase II trials of patients with cancer, response to microtubule inhibitors increases when these drugs are combined with estramustine. We aimed to assess whether combining estramustine with chemotherapy increases survival in patients with castration-refractory prostate cancer.
We systematically searched for randomised clinical trials that compared chemotherapy regimens with and without estramustine in patients with histologically-proven prostate cancer and were published between 1966 and 2004. Data from these studies were verified centrally and updated individual patient data were analysed. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, time to PSA progression, and toxicity. A Cox regression model that was stratified by trial and adjusted for covariates at baseline was used.
The initial search identified seven eligible trials that included 742 patients, from which data from five trials including 605 patients had been collected. Individual patient data from two trials (137 patients) were no longer available. The 605 patients had been accrued between Jan 1, 1993 and Dec 1, 2003 and randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus estramustine or to chemotherapy without estramustine. Chemotherapy (with or without estramustine) consisted of docetaxel, paclitaxel, ixabepilone, and vinblastine. Median follow-up was 2.8 years (range 0.0-3.4), and 510 deaths had occurred by the end of follow-up. Cox regression analysis stratified by trial showed that concentrations of serum haemoglobin (p<0.0001), use of chemotherapy plus estramustine (p=0.008), performance status (p=0.002), and serum PSA concentrations (p=0.04) were associated independently with overall survival. Overall survival was significantly better in patients assigned chemotherapy plus estramustine (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.77 [95% CI 0.63-0.93], p=0.008). Estimated absolute increase in overall survival when estramustine was added to chemotherapy was 9.5% (SE 4.0) at 1 year after randomisation. We did not note a significant association between treatment effect on overall survival and age, concentration of serum haemoglobin, performance status, or serum PSA concentration. Patients who received chemotherapy plus estramustine had a better PSA response than those who received chemotherapy without estramustine (RR 0.53 [0.38-0.72], p<0.0001). Time to PSA progression was significantly longer in patients assigned chemotherapy plus estramustine than in those assigned chemotherapy without estramustine (HR 0.74 [0.58-0.94], p=0.01). Patients assigned chemotherapy and estramustine had more grade 3 or grade 4 thromboembolic events compared with those assigned chemotherapy without estramustine (12 of 271 vs 1 of 275).
In patients with castration-refractory prostate cancer, addition of estramustine to chemotherapy increases time to PSA progression and overall survival compared with chemotherapy without estramustine. However, this benefit should be balanced with the risk of increased thromboembolic events in patients who receive estramustine and chemotherapy in combination compared with chemotherapy without estramustine.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Androgen deprivation is the therapy of choice in the majority of patients with metastatic prostate cancer. However, a state of castration resistance ultimately occurs after hormone therapy, thus defining metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). mCRPC has historically been considered a relatively chemoresistant tumor. However, due to its ability to improve survival and the quality of life in comparison with mitoxantrone, docetaxel has been established as the standard chemotherapeutic agent for first-line therapy since 2004. Moreover, recent results have shown that the novel taxane cabazitaxel is able to prolong the overall survival of patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel. Even though these taxanes display a favorable toxicity profile, their routine use in clinical practice requires knowledge about the most frequent and distinct adverse events that may result from their administration.
    Critical reviews in oncology/hematology 09/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2014.02.003 · 4.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer is a very common malignancy among Western males. Although most tumors are indolent and grow slowly, some grow and metastasize aggressively. Because prostate cancer growth is usually androgen-dependent, androgen ablation offers a therapeutic option to treat post-resection tumor recurrence or primarily metastasized prostate cancer. However, patients often relapse after the primary response to androgen ablation therapy, and there is no effective cure for cases of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). The mechanisms of tumor growth in CRPC are poorly understood. Although the androgen receptors (ARs) remain functional in CRPC, other mechanisms are clearly activated (e.g., disturbed growth factor signaling). Results from our laboratory and others have shown that dysregulation of fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling, including FGF receptor 1 (FGFR1) activation and FGF8b overexpression, has an important role in prostate cancer growth and progression. Several experimental models have been developed for prostate tumorigenesis and various stages of tumor progression. These models include genetically engineered mice and rats, as well as induced tumors and xenografts in immunodeficient mice. The latter was created using parental and genetically modified cell lines. All of these models greatly helped to elucidate the roles of different genes in prostate carcinogenesis and tumor progression. Recently, patient-derived xenografts have been studied for possible use in testing individual, specific responses of tumor tissue to different treatment options. Feasible and functional CRPC models for drug responsiveness analysis and the development of effective therapies targeting the FGF signaling pathway and other pathways in prostate cancer are being actively investigated.
    Reproductive biology 03/2014; 14(1):16-24. DOI:10.1016/j.repbio.2014.01.002 · 1.05 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The sub Comittee prostate of the CCAFU established guidelines for diagnostic, treatment, evaluation and standart of care of prostate cancer. Guidelines 2010 were updated based on systematic literature search performed by the sub-Comittee in Medline and PubMed databases to evaluate references, levels of evidence and grade of recommandation. Pathological examination of the tissue specimens was defined specifically for Gleason score according to ISP 2005 recommandations. Prostate and pelvis RMN became the reference in terms of radiological exam. Individual and early diagnosis of prostate cancer was defined and role of PSA was precised. Active surveillance became one of the standart of care of low-risk tumors, radical prostatectomy remained one of the options for all risk group tumors, length of hormonotherapy in association with radiotherapy was precised according to the risk group. Side effects of hormonotherapy treament needed specific supervision ; hormonotherapy had no indication in case of non metastatic tumors and intermittent hormonotherapy in metastatic tumors. New hormonal drugs in pre and post chemotherapy and bone target drugs opened new therapeutics pathways. From 2010 to 2013, standarts of care of prostate cancer were modified because of results of prospective studies and new therapeutics. They allowed precise treatments for each specific clinical situation. In the future, multidisciplinary treatments for high risk tumors, time of adjuvant treatment and sequencies of new hormonal treatment had to be defined.
    Progrès en Urologie 11/2013; 23 Suppl 2:S69-S101. DOI:10.1016/S1166-7087(13)70048-4 · 0.77 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Oct 21, 2014