Prostatic Neoplasms: Tangen CM

Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, D'Amico AV, Dmochowski RR, Eton DT, Forman JD, Goldenberg SL, Hernandez J, Higano CS, Kraus SR, Moul JW, Tangen CM, Anonymous00324. · American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. · J Urol. · Pubmed #17509297 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Klein EA. · No affiliation provided · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #19433682 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Kristal AR. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #18957671 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Klein EA, Lippman SM. · Department of Urology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #16278467 No free full text.

Abstract: One randomized, prospective clinical trial for chemoprevention of prostate cancer has been completed, and two additional trials are ongoing. The investment, time, and effort for these trials are substantial. We reviewed the outcomes of these trials to address the value of the investment. The outcomes of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (testing finasteride) and the design of the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT; testing vitamin E and selenium) trial as well as the Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) trial (testing dutasteride) were reviewed. From a public health standpoint, there is tremendous potential for benefit from large-scale cancer prevention trials. Because of the volume of data that are collected, potential discoveries related to the biology of the disease are substantial. Translational scientific efforts are direct outgrowths of these studies. Prospective, randomized chemoprevention trials for prostate and other cancers are expensive and require long periods of time to conduct, yet the rewards are on a par with the investment.

Thompson IM, Albanes D, Basler JW, Crawford ED, Denis LJ, Djavan B, Fleshner N, Johnson-Pais TL, Klein EA, Kristal AR, Lucia MS, Parnes HL, Piazza GA, Platz EA, Pollock BH, Price DK, Reichardt JK, Tangen CM, Tolcher AW, McMann MC. · University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas 78229, USA. · J Urol. · Pubmed #14713744 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Flaig TW, Tangen CM, Hussain MH, Stadler WM, Raghavan D, Crawford ED, Glodé LM, Anonymous00173. · Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Health Science Center, Mail Stop 8117, P.O. Box 6511, Aurora, CO 80045-0511, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #18349405 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) study 9921 is a randomized, phase III, intergroup study to define the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We allocated 983 patients with prostate cancer with high-risk features to receive 2 years of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without six cycles of mitoxantrone (12 mg/m(2)) after prostatectomy. RESULTS: In January 2007, SWOG 9921 was closed to further accrual after three cases of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) were reported of a total of 487 patients in the mitoxantrone treatment arm. The key cytogenetic features of these cases included inv(16) in the first case, t(15;17) in the second, and del(5) in the third case. Time from the start of mitoxantrone to the detection of AML was 13, 48, and 72 months, respectively. Before SWOG 9921, there were no cases of mitoxantrone-induced AML reported in patients treated for prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: The emergence of this possible pattern of secondary malignancy emphasizes the importance of randomized controlled trials in defining safety and efficacy of new approaches for patients in the adjuvant setting.

Hussain M, Tangen CM, Lara PN, Vaishampayan UN, Petrylak DP, Colevas AD, Sakr WA, Crawford ED, Anonymous00196. · University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #16314632 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: The epothilones are a new class of tubulin-polymerizing agents with activity in taxane-sensitive and resistant tumor models. We evaluated ixabepilone (BMS-247550) in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). METHODS: Eligible patients had chemotherapy-naive metastatic HRPC, a Zubrod performance status of 0 to 2, and adequate organ function. All patients received BMS-247550 at 40 mg/m2 over 3 hours every 3 weeks. The primary end point was proportion of patients achieving a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with metastatic HRPC were registered. Forty-two patients were eligible, with a median age of 73 years and a median PSA level of 111 ng/mL; 78% had bone-only or bone and soft tissue metastases, and 88% had objective radiologic disease progression at registration. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 16 and three patients, respectively. All grade 4 toxicities were neutropenia or leukopenia. The most frequent grade 3 AEs were neuropathy (eight patients), hematologic toxicity (seven patients), flu-like symptoms, and infection (five patients each). There were no grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia or grade 5 AEs. There were 14 confirmed PSA responses (33%; 95% CI, 20% to 50%); 72% of PSA responders had declines greater than 80%, and two patients achieved an undetectable PSA. The estimated median progression-free survival is 6 months (95% CI, 4 to 8 months), and the median survival is 18 months (95% CI, 13 to 24 months). CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone has demonstrated activity in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic HRPC. Major toxicities were neutropenia and neuropathy. Further testing to define its activity relative to standard therapy is warranted.

Petrylak DP, Tangen CM, Hussain MH, Lara PN, Jones JA, Taplin ME, Burch PA, Berry D, Moinpour C, Kohli M, Benson MC, Small EJ, Raghavan D, Crawford ED. · Columbia University, Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, USA. · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #15470214 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Mitoxantrone-based chemotherapy palliates pain without extending survival in men with progressive androgen-independent prostate cancer. We compared docetaxel plus estramustine with mitoxantrone plus prednisone in men with metastatic, hormone-independent prostate cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 770 men to one of two treatments, each given in 21-day cycles: 280 mg of estramustine three times daily on days 1 through 5, 60 mg of docetaxel per square meter of body-surface area on day 2, and 60 mg of dexamethasone in three divided doses before docetaxel, or 12 mg of mitoxantrone per square meter on day 1 plus 5 mg of prednisone twice daily. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were progression-free survival, objective response rates, and post-treatment declines of at least 50 percent in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. RESULTS: Of 674 eligible patients, 338 were assigned to receive docetaxel and estramustine and 336 to receive mitoxantrone and prednisone. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the median overall survival was longer in the group given docetaxel and estramustine than in the group given mitoxantrone and prednisone (17.5 months vs. 15.6 months, P=0.02 by the log-rank test), and the corresponding hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.67 to 0.97). The median time to progression was 6.3 months in the group given docetaxel and estramustine and 3.2 months in the group given mitoxantrone and prednisone (P<0.001 by the log-rank test). PSA declines of at least 50 percent occurred in 50 percent and 27 percent of patients, respectively (P<0.001), and objective tumor responses were observed in 17 percent and 11 percent of patients with bidimensionally measurable disease, respectively (P=0.30). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenic fevers (P=0.01), nausea and vomiting (P<0.001), and cardiovascular events (P=0.001) were more common among patients receiving docetaxel and estramustine than among those receiving mitoxantrone and prednisone. Pain relief was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement in median survival of nearly two months with docetaxel and estramustine, as compared with mitoxantrone and prednisone, provides support for this approach in men with metastatic, androgen-independent prostate cancer.

Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Parnes HL, Minasian LM, Ford LG, Lippman SM, Crawford ED, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA. · Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex, USA. · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #15163773 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The optimal upper limit of the normal range for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is unknown. We investigated the prevalence of prostate cancer among men in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial who had a PSA level of 4.0 ng per milliliter or less. METHODS: Of 18,882 men enrolled in the prevention trial, 9459 were randomly assigned to receive placebo and had an annual measurement of PSA and a digital rectal examination. Among these 9459 men, 2950 men never had a PSA level of more than 4.0 ng per milliliter or an abnormal digital rectal examination, had a final PSA determination, and underwent a prostate biopsy after being in the study for seven years. RESULTS: Among the 2950 men (age range, 62 to 91 years), prostate cancer was diagnosed in 449 (15.2 percent); 67 of these 449 cancers (14.9 percent) had a Gleason score of 7 or higher. The prevalence of prostate cancer was 6.6 percent among men with a PSA level of up to 0.5 ng per milliliter, 10.1 percent among those with values of 0.6 to 1.0 ng per milliliter, 17.0 percent among those with values of 1.1 to 2.0 ng per milliliter, 23.9 percent among those with values of 2.1 to 3.0 ng per milliliter, and 26.9 percent among those with values of 3.1 to 4.0 ng per milliliter. The prevalence of high-grade cancers increased from 12.5 percent of cancers associated with a PSA level of 0.5 ng per milliliter or less to 25.0 percent of cancers associated with a PSA level of 3.1 to 4.0 ng per milliliter. CONCLUSIONS: Biopsy-detected prostate cancer, including high-grade cancers, is not rare among men with PSA levels of 4.0 ng per milliliter or less--levels generally thought to be in the normal range.

Tangen CM, Faulkner JR, Crawford ED, Thompson IM, Hirano D, Eisenberger M, Hussain M. · The Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA. · Clin Prostate Cancer. · Pubmed #15046683 No free full text.

Abstract: The objective of this analysis is to identify baseline covariates that predict which patients will be long-term survivors with metastatic prostate cancer. We analyzed data from Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S8894, a clinical trial in men with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer, to evaluate pretreatment characteristics associated with 10-year survival. There were 1286 eligible patients randomized to this study. Of these, 794 have been followed for > or = 10.5 years and are included in the analyses. Proportional odds models were used to predict 3 survival categories (survival for < 5 years, 5 up to 10 years, and > or = 10 years). Baseline patient and disease characteristics investigated were protocol treatment (flutamide vs. placebo), severity of disease, SWOG performance status (PS), bone pain, Gleason score, race, age, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at study entry. Of the 794 evaluable patients, 77% lived < 5 years, 16% lived 5 up to 10 years, and 7% lived > or = 10 years. Factors predicting a statistical significant association with longer survival (P < 0.05) included minimal disease, better PS, no bone pain, lower Gleason score, and lower PSA level. All but PS were also significant in multivariate analyses. However, only 13% of patients (5 of 38) who lived > or = 10 years were correctly predicted in their survival category based on the model, whereas 98% (405 of 414) who died within the first 5 years were correctly predicted. Although statistically significant baseline characteristics were identified in this clinical trial, they did not accurately predict the survival interval to which a patient belonged.

Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Crowley JJ, Carlin SM, Ryan A, Coltman CA, Ford LG, Thompson IM. · Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, M/S M3-C102, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, Box 19024, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA. · Control Clin Trials. · Pubmed #15020037 No free full text.

Abstract: The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial is a randomized double blind chemoprevention trial of 18,882 men. It is designed to test the difference in the histologically proven prostate cancer prevalence between a group of participants given finasteride and another given placebo for 7 years. We present an overview of the study design, details of the administrative structure of the study and a description of the successful implementation of the accrual phase.

Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Miller GJ, Ford LG, Lieber MM, Cespedes RD, Atkins JN, Lippman SM, Carlin SM, Ryan A, Szczepanek CM, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA. · University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, USA. · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #12824459 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Androgens are involved in the development of prostate cancer. Finasteride, an inhibitor of 5alpha-reductase, inhibits the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone, the primary androgen in the prostate, and may reduce the risk of prostate cancer. METHODS: In the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, we randomly assigned 18,882 men 55 years of age or older with a normal digital rectal examination and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 3.0 ng per milliliter or lower to treatment with finasteride (5 mg per day) or placebo for seven years. Prostate biopsy was recommended if the annual PSA level, adjusted for the effect of finasteride, exceeded 4.0 ng per milliliter or if the digital rectal examination was abnormal. It was anticipated that 60 percent of participants would have prostate cancer diagnosed during the study or would undergo biopsy at the end of the study. The primary end point was the prevalence of prostate cancer during the seven years of the study. RESULTS: Prostate cancer was detected in 803 of the 4368 men in the finasteride group who had data for the final analysis (18.4 percent) and 1147 of the 4692 men in the placebo group who had such data (24.4 percent), for a 24.8 percent reduction in prevalence over the seven-year period (95 percent confidence interval, 18.6 to 30.6 percent; P<0.001). Tumors of Gleason grade 7, 8, 9, or 10 were more common in the finasteride group (280 of 757 tumors [37.0 percent], or 6.4 percent of the 4368 men included in the final analysis) than in the placebo group (237 of 1068 tumors [22.2 percent], P<0.001 for the comparison between groups; or 5.1 percent of the 4692 men included in the final analysis, P=0.005 for the comparison between groups). Sexual side effects were more common in finasteride-treated men, whereas urinary symptoms were more common in men receiving placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Finasteride prevents or delays the appearance of prostate cancer, but this possible benefit and a reduced risk of urinary problems must be weighed against sexual side effects and the increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer.

Glass TR, Tangen CM, Crawford ED, Thompson I. · Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA. · J Urol. · Pubmed #12478127 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE While in patients with metastatic prostate cancer median survival is approximately 30 months when treated with hormonal therapy, there is substantial interpatient variation. To explain better the outcome in patients with advanced disease we developed a set of prognostic groups within a large-scale clinical trial.MATERIALS AND METHODS Southwest Oncology Group Study 8894 was a randomized prospective clinical trial that compared orchiectomy and flutamide to orchiectomy and placebo. Using the technique of recursive partitioning we analyzed 5-year survival outcomes using a substantial number of patient, treatment and disease related variables to develop a set of prognostic groups with significant differences in survival.RESULTS Of 1,286 eligible patients 1,076 had sufficient data for analysis. The patient data set was split to allow prognostic group development in the first half of patients, followed by validation in the second half of patients accrued to the study. After pruning the regression tree 4 factors had a major impact on outcome, namely appendicular versus axial disease, performance status 0 versus 1 to 3, prostate specific antigen less than 65 versus 65 ng./ml. or greater and Gleason score less than 8 versus 8 or greater. Using these criteria 3 prognostic groups were developed, including a good (hazards ratio 1), intermediate (hazards ratio 1.8) and poor (hazards ratio 2.8) group. Five-year survival estimates in the 3 groups were 42%, 21% and 9%, respectively. Using the validation test set similar 5-year survival estimates for the 3 groups of 46%, 25% and 14%, respectively.CONCLUSIONS These data from a large-scale randomized clinical trial provide a validated set of easily applied prognostic groups. We hope that our results may be validated by other investigators and we would encourage the future reporting of outcomes in patients with advanced prostate cancer using these prognostic groupings. Risk stratification is helpful for designing clinical trials and individual treatment, and it should be incorporated into future reports of outcomes of patients with metastatic disease.

Klein CE, Tangen CM, Braun TJ, Hussain MH, Peereboom DM, Nichols CR, Rivkin SE, Dakhil SR, Crawford ED. · University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA. · Prostate. · Pubmed #12210486 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in American men, and as many as 70% of those initially treated for localized disease will ultimately progress and be considered candidates to receive therapy for metastatic cancer [Fuks et al.: Int J Radiat Oncol Bio Phys 21:537-547, 1991; Chodak et al.: N Engl J Med 330:246-248, 1994]. Although most will respond initially to hormone manipulation, essentially all will fail and require additional therapy. No standard chemotherapy approach has been shown to prolong survival significantly, and new agents are desperately needed. Topotecan is a new topoisomerase-1 inhibitor whose early investigation suggested possible activity in hormone-refractory prostate cancer. METHODS: In this phase II trial, patients having failed one or two prior androgen ablative therapies were treated with 21-day continuous intravenous infusions of topotecan at a dose of 0.5 mg/m(2) per day every 28 days. RESULTS: Twenty-six eligible patients were entered on the study. There were no confirmed tumor responses. Median survival was 9 months. The most common toxicities were hematologic, with 8 of 24 assessable patients experiencing grade 4 toxicity. CONCLUSION: Topotecan infusions at this dose are ineffective in the management of hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D, Messing E, Forman J, Chin J, Swanson G, Canby-Hagino E, Crawford ED. · University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA. · J Urol. · Pubmed #19167731 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: Extraprostatic disease will be manifest in a third of men after radical prostatectomy. We present the long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial of radiotherapy to reduce the risk of subsequent metastatic disease and death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 431 men with pT3N0M0 prostate cancer were randomized to 60 to 64 Gy adjuvant radiotherapy or observation. The primary study end point was metastasis-free survival. RESULTS: Of 425 eligible men 211 were randomized to observation and 214 to adjuvant radiation. Of those men under observation 70 ultimately received radiotherapy. Metastasis-free survival was significantly greater with radiotherapy (93 of 214 events on the radiotherapy arm vs 114 of 211 events on observation; HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.54, 0.94; p = 0.016). Survival improved significantly with adjuvant radiation (88 deaths of 214 on the radiotherapy arm vs 110 deaths of 211 on observation; HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55, 0.96; p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for a man with pT3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces the risk of metastasis and increases survival.

Redman MW, Tangen CM, Goodman PJ, Lucia MS, Coltman CA, Thompson IM. · Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington 98109, USA. · Cancer Prev Res (Phila Pa). · Pubmed #19138953 No free full text.

Abstract: Finasteride taken for 7 years in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) reduced the risk of prostate cancer by 25%, but with an apparent increased risk of high-grade disease. Subsequent analyses found that finasteride biases toward improved prostate cancer detection and accuracy in prostate cancer grading at biopsy. In our first analysis of the present study, we accounted for these biases in estimating the effect of finasteride on the risk of overall and high-grade prostate cancer. This analysis used PCPT data that included 3-month longer collection of endpoints than in the original report with observed prostate cancer rates of 22.9% (4.8% with high grade; placebo) versus 16.6% (5.8% with high grade; finasteride). Based on these updated results, the bias-adjusted prostate cancer rates are estimated to be 21.1% (4.2% high grade; placebo) and 14.7% (4.8% high grade; finasteride), a 30% risk reduction in prostate cancer [relative risk (RR), 0.70; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.64-0.76; P < 0.0001] and a nonsignificant 14% increase in high-grade cancer (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.96-1.35; P = 0.12) with finasteride. We then estimated rates of high-grade prostate cancer based on an analysis that incorporated grading information from radical prostatectomies in 500 subjects diagnosed with cancer. The resulting estimates were high-grade cancer rates of 8.2% (placebo) versus 6.0% (finasteride), a 27% risk reduction (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.96; P = 0.02) with finasteride. Our third analysis examined the impact of biopsy sensitivity on the relative risk of high-grade prostate cancer and found that differential sensitivity of biopsy between the treatment arms can have a significant impact on risk ratio estimates. These collective results suggest that the observed, unadjusted higher risk of high-grade disease with finasteride seems to have been due to facilitated diagnosis resulting primarily from increased biopsy sensitivity with finasteride. Therefore, men undergoing regular prostate cancer screening or who express an interest in cancer prevention should be informed of the opportunity to take finasteride for preventing prostate cancer.

Swanson GP, Goldman B, Tangen CM, Chin J, Messing E, Canby-Hagino E, Forman JD, Thompson IM, Crawford ED, Anonymous00045. · University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas 78229-3900, USA. · J Urol. · Pubmed #18930488 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: From the randomized study Southwest Oncology Group 8794 we evaluated the effect of seminal vesicle involvement on outcomes and whether those patients benefited from post-prostatectomy adjuvant radiation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Southwest Oncology Group study 8794 randomized high risk patients (with seminal vesicle positive disease and/or capsular penetration and/or positive margins) to radiation vs observation after prostatectomy. A total of 431 subjects with pathologically advanced prostate cancer were randomized. RESULTS: Median followup was 12.2 years. Of the patients 139 had seminal vesicle involvement with or without capsular penetration and/or positive margins. Compared to the 286 patients with seminal vesicle negative disease there was poorer 10-year biochemical failure-free survival (33% for seminal vesicle negative and 22% for seminal vesicle positive, p = 0.04), metastasis-free survival (70% and 56%, respectively, p = 0.005) and overall survival (10-year overall survival 74% and 61%, respectively, p = 0.02) for those with seminal vesicle positive disease. Patients with seminal vesicle positive disease who received adjuvant radiation compared to observation realized an improvement in 10-year biochemical failure-free survival from 12% to 36% (p = 0.001), in 10-year overall survival from 51% to 71% (p = 0.08) and in metastasis-free survival from 47% to 66% (p = 0.09), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although seminal vesicle involvement is a negative prognostic factor, long-term control is possible especially if patients are given adjuvant radiation therapy. This therapy appears to be effective in patients with seminal vesicle involvement.

Neuhouser ML, Schenk J, Song YJ, Tangen CM, Goodman PJ, Pollak M, Penson DF, Thompson IM, Kristal AR. · Cancer Prevention Program, Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA. · Prostate. · Pubmed #18618736 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: We investigated whether peptides involved in cellular proliferation and apoptosis, [insulin-like growth factor I (IGFI) and its major binding protein (insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3)], predicted risk of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We conducted a nested-case-control study in the placebo arm of the prostate cancer prevention trial (PCPT). Cases (n = 727) were men with surgical or medical treatment for BPH; two or more IPSS scores >14; or two scores of at least five points over baseline one of which was >or=12. Controls (n = 727) were frequency matched by age to cases, reported no BPH treatment, and no IPSS score >8. Cases and controls remained on the PCPT placebo and were followed closely until their 7-year PCPT anniversary. Baseline serum was analyzed for IGFI and IGFBP3. Unconditional logistic regression and polytomous regression estimated the multivariate-adjusted odds ratio (OR) for BPH risk. RESULTS: IGFBP3 was inversely and the IGFI:IGFBP3 ratio was positively associated with BPH risk, but findings were statistically significant only for men with severe symptoms (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.40-0.90 for the fifth vs. first quintile of IGFBP3, P-trend = 0.01). Associations did not differ by age (<65 or >or=65 years), and there was a suggestion that the IGFI:IGFBP3 - BPH risk association may be stronger among overweight men. CONCLUSIONS: A high IGFI:IGFBP3 ratio was associated with increased BPH risk, and high serum IGFBP3 was associated with decreased BPH risk among men with severe symptoms. These results confirm findings from other recent studies.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, Lucia MS, Goodman P, Parnes H, Coltman CA. · University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA. · J Urol. · Pubmed #18550097 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: It has been suggested that prostate specific antigen has no predictive value for prostate cancer after a first negative biopsy has been performed. We compared the performance operating characteristics of prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer between a first and subsequent prostate biopsy in a group of men with complete verification of cancer status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the 18,882 participants in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial we examined men in the placebo group who had only a first biopsy or a first and second prostate biopsy with a prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination within 1 year before each biopsy. The receiver operating characteristic curve was estimated for prostate specific antigen for detection of prostate cancer on the first biopsy compared to the second, and the C-statistics were compared. RESULTS: Of this group 5,608 men had a first biopsy and 687 of those with a negative first biopsy underwent a second biopsy. The C-statistic was 0.650 (95% CI 0.632, 0.668) for the first biopsy and 0.664 (95% CI 0.607, 0.721) for the second biopsy. The C-statistic for the second biopsy was statistically significantly greater than 0.5 (p <0.001) and overlapped with that from the first biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate specific antigen does not lose predictive value for the detection of prostate cancer even after a first biopsy shows no evidence of cancer, and its performance characteristics are only slightly decreased.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Parnes HL, Lippman SM, Coltman CA. · Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas 78229, USA. · Urology. · Pubmed #18455628 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: Finasteride reduced the risk of prostate cancer by 24.8% in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT). Whether this represents treatment or prevention and who is most likely to benefit are unknown. We sought to clarify these issues by this investigation. METHODS: We fit a logistic regression model to men in the placebo group of the PCPT using risk factors for prostate cancer at entry to predict prostate cancer during the subsequent 7 years of study. Men in the two treatment groups were categorized into quintiles of risk of prostate cancer based on the predictive logistic model. A second model was fit evaluating finasteride's effect on prostate cancer for each subgroup defined by quartiles of baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) . The magnitude of the prevention effect of finasteride on prostate cancer was then evaluated across risk and PSA strata. RESULTS: Finasteride significantly reduced prostate cancer risk for all risk quintiles. For quintiles 1 through 5, odds ratios were 0.72, 0.52, 0.64, 0.66, and 0.71, respectively (all P < or = 0.05). For quartiles of risk of entry PSA (less than 0.7 ng/mL, 0.7 to 1.1 ng/mL, 1.1 to 1.7 ng/mL, and 1.8 to 3.0 ng/mL), odds ratios increased (smaller treatment effect) as PSA increased: 0.60, 0.62, 0.66, and 0.69, respectively, but remained significant for all strata (each P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Finasteride significantly reduced prostate cancer risk regardless of the level of this risk, estimated either by multivariable risk or by PSA stratum; this suggests that finasteride exerts both treatment and preventive effects. All men undergoing PSA screening should be informed of the potential for finasteride to reduce their risk of prostate cancer.

Sartor AO, Tangen CM, Hussain MH, Eisenberger MA, Parab M, Fontana JA, Chapman RA, Mills GM, Raghavan D, Crawford ED, Anonymous00182. · Lank Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Cancer. · Pubmed #18383517 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Antiandrogen withdrawal is a potential therapeutic maneuver for patients with progressive prostate cancer. This study was designed to examine antiandrogen withdrawal effects within the context of a large multi-institutional prospective trial. METHODS: Eligibility criteria included progressive prostate adenocarcinoma despite combined androgen blockade. Eligible patients received prior initial treatment with an antiandrogen plus orchiectomy or luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist. Patients were stratified according to type of antiandrogen, type of progression (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] or radiographic), presence or absence of metastatic disease, and prior LHRH agonist versus surgical castration. RESULTS: A total of 210 eligible and evaluable patients had a median follow-up of 5.0 years; 64% of patients previously received flutamide, 32% bicalutamide, and 3% nilutamide. Of the 210 patients, 21% of patients had confirmed PSA decreases of >or=50% (95% CI, 16% to 27%). No radiographic responses were recorded. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3 months (95% CI, 2 months to 4 months); however, 19% had 12-month or greater progression-free intervals. Median overall survival (OS) after antiandrogen withdrawal was 22 months (20 and 40 months for those with and without radiographic evidence of metastatic disease, respectively). Multivariate analyses indicated that longer duration of antiandrogen use, lower PSA at baseline, and PSA-only progression at study entry were associated with both longer PFS and OS. Longer antiandrogen use was the only significant predictor of PSA response. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate a relatively modest rate of PSA response in patients who were undergoing antiandrogen withdrawal; however, PFS can be relatively prolonged (>or=1 year) in approximately 19% of patients.

Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Lucia MS. · Department of Urology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA. · BJU Int. · Pubmed #18353157 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Montgomery RB, Goldman B, Tangen CM, Hussain M, Petrylak DP, Page S, Klein EA, Crawford ED, Anonymous00224. · University of Washington and Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA. · J Urol. · Pubmed #17868721 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: We evaluated the effect of body mass index on prostate specific antigen response, and progression-free and overall survival in men with androgen dependent or androgen independent metastatic prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined the prognostic impact of body mass index in patient cohorts from phase III randomized studies coordinated by the Southwest Oncology Group. The first study included 1,006 men treated with androgen deprivation for metastatic prostate cancer. The second study included 671 patients treated with chemotherapy for metastatic, androgen independent prostate cancer. RESULTS: Among men with androgen dependent disease, higher body mass index was associated with longer overall (p <0.001) and progression-free (p = 0.009) survival, as well as with an increased likelihood of achieving a prostate specific antigen nadir less than 4 ng/ml (p = 0.008). In multivariate analysis adjusting for risk factors, increasing body mass index was positively correlated with overall survival (p <0.01) and overweight but not obese patients (body mass index 27 to 29.9) had a significantly improved outcome compared to normal weight patients, with hazard ratios for risk of progression and death of 0.82 (95% CI 0.69, 0.98) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.63, 0.89), respectively. Among men with androgen independent prostate cancer, no clear association could be detected between body mass index and progression-free survival, overall survival or prostate specific antigen response. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed higher body mass index to be associated with better overall and progression-free survival in patients with androgen dependent metastatic prostate cancer. Among men who had androgen independent disease, no significant association was found between body mass index and survival.

Lucia MS, Epstein JI, Goodman PJ, Darke AK, Reuter VE, Civantos F, Tangen CM, Parnes HL, Lippman SM, La Rosa FG, Kattan MW, Crawford ED, Ford LG, Coltman CA, Thompson IM. · Department of Pathology, University of Colorado Denver and Health Sciences Center, 4200 E Ninth Ave, Box B-216, Denver, CO 80262, USA. · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #17848673 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) reported a decreased incidence of prostate cancer overall but an increase in the incidence of high-grade prostate cancer with finasteride compared with placebo. We assessed whether the increased high-grade prostate cancer associated with finasteride in the PCPT was due to finasteride's potential effects on tumor morphology or prostate size. METHODS: Prostate biopsies with Gleason score 8-10 (n = 90, finasteride; n = 52, placebo) were examined histologically for hormonal effects, and those with Gleason score 7-10 (n = 282, finasteride; n = 244, placebo) were examined for pathologic surrogates of disease extent. Prostate volumes were measured at biopsy. Samples from radical prostatectomies (n = 222, finasteride; n = 306, placebo) were examined for tumor grade and extent, and, where possible, grades at biopsy and prostatectomy were compared between the groups. Logistic regression was used to analyze differences between treatment groups with respect to pathologic criteria. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Degenerative hormonal changes in high-grade biopsies were equivalent between the finasteride and placebo groups, but prostate volumes were lower in the finasteride group (median = 25.1 versus 34.4 cm3, P<.001). Pathologic surrogates for tumor extent were lower with finasteride than with placebo, including mean percentage of positive cores (34% versus 38%, P = .016), mean tumor linear extent (greatest [4.4 versus 4.8 mm, P = .19] and aggregate [7.6 versus 9.2 mm, P = .13]), bilaterality (22.8% versus 30.6%, P = .046), and perineural invasion (14.2% versus 20.3%, P = .07). Among patients who had prostatectomy, the finasteride-associated increase in high-grade disease (Gleason score > or = 7) at biopsy (42.7% finasteride versus 25.4% placebo, P<.001) was diminished at prostatectomy (46.4% finasteride versus 38.6% placebo, P = .10). Biopsy identified a greater proportion of patients with high-grade disease present at prostatectomy in the finasteride group than in the placebo group (69.7% versus 50.5%, P = .01). The rate of upgrading (from low-grade cancer at biopsy to high-grade cancer at prostatectomy) and pathologic stage at prostatectomy were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Effects of finasteride on prostate volume and selective inhibition of low-grade cancer, rather than effects on tumor morphology, may have contributed to the increase in high-grade cancers with finasteride in the PCPT. Although induction of high-grade cancer cannot be excluded, the results suggest that high-grade cancer was detected earlier and was less extensive in the finasteride group than in the placebo group.

Thompson IM, Pauler Ankerst D, Chi C, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lippman SM, Lucia MS, Parnes HL, Coltman CA. · Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #17634486 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: Using data from men in the finasteride group of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT), we evaluated the impact of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and other risk factors on the risk of prostate cancer. METHODS: Four thousand four hundred forty men in the finasteride group of the PCPT underwent prostate biopsy, had at least one PSA and a digital rectal exam (DRE) during the year before biopsy, had at least two PSA values from the 3 years before biopsy, and were on finasteride at the time of PSA evaluation. Logistic regression was conducted using the variables age, race, family history of prostate cancer, PSA, PSA velocity, and DRE adjusting for history of prior prostate biopsy. RESULTS: Six hundred forty-nine (14.6%) of 4,440 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer; 250 had Gleason 7 or higher cancer. Factors associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer included high PSA value and a rising PSA (24.9% risk for PSA value of 1.0 ng/mL and 24.8% risk for a rising PSA), family history of prostate cancer, abnormal DRE result, African American race, and older age. Factors associated with an increased risk of Gleason 7 or higher grade prostate cancer included PSA, abnormal DRE, and older age. A prior negative biopsy was associated with decreased risk of prostate cancer and high-grade prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: Risk factors for prostate cancer on biopsy for men receiving finasteride include PSA, DRE, age, race, family history, and history of a prior negative biopsy. With the exception of the approximate reduction of PSA by half with finasteride, the impact of these risk factors is similar to men who do not receive finasteride.