Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the backbone of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer since the 1940s. We assessed whether concomitant treatment with ADT plus docetaxel would result in ...longer overall survival than that with ADT alone.
We assigned men with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer to receive either ADT plus docetaxel (at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks for six cycles) or ADT alone. The primary objective was to test the hypothesis that the median overall survival would be 33.3% longer among patients receiving docetaxel added to ADT early during therapy than among patients receiving ADT alone.
A total of 790 patients (median age, 63 years) underwent randomization. After a median follow-up of 28.9 months, the median overall survival was 13.6 months longer with ADT plus docetaxel (combination therapy) than with ADT alone (57.6 months vs. 44.0 months; hazard ratio for death in the combination group, 0.61; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001). The median time to biochemical, symptomatic, or radiographic progression was 20.2 months in the combination group, as compared with 11.7 months in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; P<0.001). The rate of a prostate-specific antigen level of less than 0.2 ng per milliliter at 12 months was 27.7% in the combination group versus 16.8% in the ADT-alone group (P<0.001). In the combination group, the rate of grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia was 6.2%, the rate of grade 3 or 4 infection with neutropenia was 2.3%, and the rate of grade 3 sensory neuropathy and of grade 3 motor neuropathy was 0.5%.
Six cycles of docetaxel at the beginning of ADT for metastatic prostate cancer resulted in significantly longer overall survival than that with ADT alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00309985.).
Summary Background A subset of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma show indolent growth of metastases. Because of the toxicity and non-curative nature of systemic therapy, some of these ...patients could benefit from initial active surveillance. We aimed to characterise the time to initiation of systemic therapy in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma under active surveillance. Methods In this prospective phase 2 trial, we enrolled patients with treatment-naive, asymptomatic, metastatic renal-cell carcinoma from five hospitals in the USA, Spain, and the UK. Patients were radiographically assessed at baseline, every 3 months for year 1, every 4 months for year 2, then every 6 months thereafter. Patients continued on observation until initiation of systemic therapy for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma; a decision that was made at the discretion of the treating physician and patient. The primary endpoint of the study was time to initiation of systemic therapy in the per-protocol population. The follow-up of patients is ongoing. Findings Between Aug 21, 2008, and June 7, 2013, we enrolled 52 patients. Median follow-up of patients in the study was 38·1 months (IQR 29·4–48·9). In the 48 patients included in analysis, median time on surveillance from registration on study until initiation of systemic therapy was 14·9 months (95% CI 10·6–25·0). Multivariate analysis showed that higher numbers of International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) adverse risk factors (p=0·0403) and higher numbers of metastatic disease sites (p=0·0414) were associated with a shorter surveillance period. 22 (46%) patients died during the study period, all from metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. Interpretation A subset of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma can safely undergo surveillance before starting systemic therapy. Additional investigation is required to further define the benefits and risks of this approach. Funding None.
Young women are at increased risk for developing more aggressive subtypes of breast cancer. Although previous studies have shown a higher risk of breast cancer recurrence and death among young women ...with early-stage breast cancer, they have not adequately addressed the role of tumor subtype in outcomes.
We examined data from women with newly diagnosed stage I to III breast cancer presenting to one of eight National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers between January 2000 and December 2007. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the relationship between age and breast cancer-specific survival.
A total of 17,575 women with stage I to III breast cancer were eligible for analysis, among whom 1,916 were ≤ 40 years of age at diagnosis. Median follow-up time was 6.4 years. In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model controlling for sociodemographic, disease, and treatment characteristics, women ≤ 40 years of age at diagnosis had greater breast cancer mortality (hazard ratio HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.7). In stratified analyses, age ≤ 40 years was associated with statistically significant increases in risk of breast cancer death among women with luminal A (HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.2) and luminal B (HR 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.9) tumors, with borderline significance among women with triple-negative tumors (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.8) but not among those with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 subtypes (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.9). In an additional model controlling for detection method, young age was associated with significantly increased risk of breast cancer death only among women with luminal A tumors.
The effect of age on survival of women with early breast cancer seems to vary by breast cancer subtype. Young age seems to be particularly prognostic in women with luminal breast cancers.
Summary Background Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and ...sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence. Methods In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00326898. Findings Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 44% of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 45% of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6–8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio HR 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85–1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7–not estimable NE) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80–1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5–NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 17% patients on sunitinib and 102 16% patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 15% patients on sunitinib and 208 33% patients on sorafenib), rash (15 2% patients on sunitinib and 95 15% patients on sorafenib), and fatigue (110 17% patients on sunitinib and 44 7% patients on sorafenib). There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity. Interpretation Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis. Funding US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.
Background
Depression is common after a diagnosis of prostate cancer and may contribute to poor outcomes, particularly among African Americans. The authors assessed the incidence and management of ...depression and its impact on overall mortality among African American and White veterans with localized prostate cancer.
Methods
The authors used the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse to identify 40,412 African American and non‐Hispanic White men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2001 to 2013. Patients were followed through 2019. Multivariable logistic regression was used to measure associations between race and incident depression, which were ascertained from administrative and depression screening data. Cox proportional hazards models were used to measure associations between incident depression and all‐cause mortality, with race‐by‐depression interactions used to assess disparities.
Results
Overall, 10,013 veterans (24.5%) were diagnosed with depression after a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Incident depression was associated with higher all‐cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio aHR, 1.27; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.23‐1.32). African American veterans were more likely than White veterans to be diagnosed with depression (29.3% vs 23.2%; adjusted odds ratio aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09‐1.21). Among those with depression, African Americans were less likely to be prescribed an antidepressant (30.4% vs 31.7%; aOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77‐0.93). The hazard of all‐cause mortality associated with depression was greater for African American veterans than White veterans (aHR, 1.32 95% CI, 1.26‐1.38 vs 1.15 95% CI, 1.07‐1.24; race‐by‐depression interaction P < .001).
Conclusions
Incident depression is common among prostate cancer survivors and is associated with higher mortality, particularly among African American men. Patient‐centered strategies to manage incident depression may be critical to reducing disparities in prostate cancer outcomes.
Compared with non‐Hispanic White US veterans, African American veterans with localized prostate cancer and no preexisting depression are more likely to be diagnosed with depression after their diagnosis but are less likely to be prescribed antidepressant therapy. Among prostate cancer survivors with depression, the association between depression and mortality is higher among African American veterans than non‐Hispanic Whites.
Many patients with localized node-negative renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are elderly with competing comorbidities. Their overall survival benefit after surgical treatment is unknown. We reviewed cases ...in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate the impact of kidney cancer versus competing causes of death in patients with localized RCC and develop a comprehensive nomogram to quantitate survival differences.
We identified individuals with localized, surgically treated clear-cell, papillary, or chromophobe RCC in SEER (1988 through 2003). We used Fine and Gray competing risks proportional hazards regressions to predict 5-year probabilities of three competing mortality outcomes: kidney cancer death, other cancer death, and noncancer death.
We identified 30,801 cases of localized RCC (median age, 62 years; median tumor size, 4.5 cm). Five-year probabilities of kidney cancer death, other cancer death, and noncancer death were 4%, 7%, and 11%, respectively. Age was strongly predictive of mortality and most predictive of nonkidney cancer deaths (P < .001). Increasing tumor size was related to death from RCC and inversely related to noncancer deaths (P < .001). Racial differences in outcomes were most pronounced for nonkidney cancer deaths (P < .001). Men were more likely to die than women from all causes (P < .002). This nomogram integrates commonly available factors into a useful tool for comparing competing risks of death.
Management of localized RCC must consider competing causes of mortality, particularly in elderly populations. Effective decision making requires treatment trade-off calculations. We present a tool to quantitate competing causes of mortality in patients with localized RCC.
Time to surgery (TTS) is of concern to patients and clinicians, but controversy surrounds its effect on breast cancer survival. There remains little national data evaluating the association.
To ...investigate the relationship between the time from diagnosis to breast cancer surgery and survival, using separate analyses of 2 of the largest cancer databases in the United States.
Two independent population-based studies were conducted of prospectively collected national data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The SEER-Medicare cohort included Medicare patients older than 65 years, and the NCDB cohort included patients cared for at Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities throughout the United States. Each analysis assessed overall survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery by evaluating 5 intervals (≤30, 31-60, 61-90, 91-120, and 121-180 days) and disease-specific survival at 60-day intervals. All patients were diagnosed with noninflammatory, nonmetastatic, invasive breast cancer and underwent surgery as initial treatment.
Overall and disease-specific survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery, after adjusting for patient, demographic, and tumor-related factors.
The SEER-Medicare cohort had 94 544 patients 66 years or older diagnosed between 1992 and 2009. With each interval of delay increase, overall survival was lower overall (hazard ratio HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.13; P < .001), and in patients with stage I (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; P < .001) and stage II disease (HR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .01). Breast cancer-specific mortality increased with each 60-day interval (subdistribution hazard ratio sHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.54; P = .03). The NCDB study evaluated 115 790 patients 18 years or older diagnosed between 2003 and 2005. The overall mortality HR was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.07-1.13; P < .001) for each increasing interval, significant in stages I (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.21; P < .001) and II (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13; P < .001) only, after adjusting for demographic, tumor, and treatment factors.
Greater TTS is associated with lower overall and disease-specific survival, and a shortened delay is associated with benefits comparable to some standard therapies. Although time is required for preoperative evaluation and consideration of options such as reconstruction, efforts to reduce TTS should be pursued when possible to enhance survival.
PDF
