Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M A Eisenberger

Publications and source records attributed to M A Eisenberger.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

A phase II trial of estramustine and etoposide in hormone refractory prostate cancer: A Southwest Oncology Group trial (SWOG 9407).

BACKGROUND: The combination of oral estramustine and oral etoposide has generated response rates of 40-50% in patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer in single institution trials. This study tested this regimen in a multi-institutional setting. METHODS: Fifty-five patients were accrued over a period of 4 months between 1 March 1996 and 1 July 1996. Two patients were not analyzable and two patients were ineligible. They were given an oral regimen consisting of estramustine 15 mg/kg/day (capped at 1120 mg per day) and etoposide 50 mg/M(2)/day, days 1-21 every 28 days. Patients received a median of two cycles of therapy. RESULTS: Toxicities included 11 patients (20%) with grades 3 or 4 granulocytopenia, 5 patients (10%) with grades 3 or 4 edema, and 3 patients (6%) with a thrombotic event. There were two treatment-related deaths, one as a result of anemia and the other as a result of a myocardial infarction. Of the 32 men who received at least 2 cycles of therapy, 7 men (22%) demonstrated a partial response to this regimen as measured by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) criteria of a 50% decline from pretreatment values. CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrates the toxicity of estramustine delivered in high dose. It also illustrates the difficulty of conducting phase II trials in prostate cancer in the cooperative group setting where the experience and comfort level of oncologists with new agents is less than that of the physicians at the institution where the therapy was developed. As the activity of this regimen with low-dose estramustine is defined, further multi-institutional studies may be warranted.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

A structured debate: immediate versus deferred androgen suppression in prostate cancer-evidence for deferred treatment.

PURPOSE: We present a structured debate supporting the premise that immediate hormonal intervention has not been conclusively shown to provide a survival advantage in the management of advanced prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature emphasizing randomized trials was reviewed. Recommendations are based solely on a demonstrated advantage in survival. RESULTS: In patients with stage Tx Nx Mo or MI disease who did not receive other primary therapy there is no demonstrated survival advantage to immediate hormonal therapy. In men with positive lymph nodes who underwent radical prostatectomy a relatively small study showed a survival advantage in favor of immediate hormonal treatment compared to deferred treatment. This study did not reach the projected accrual of 240 patients and results have not been supported by other trials. In men with stages T2-4 Nx Mx disease who underwent primary treatment with radiotherapy a survival advantage for early hormonal therapy is primarily limited to high risk subgroups. In patients with biochemical relapse following primary treatment there are no trials. CONCLUSIONS: Because hormonal therapy is associated with the development of irreversible resistance in virtually all patients, it does not cure, there is usually a long interval from first prostate specific antigen elevation to the development of metastatic disease, and hormonal therapy has profound side effects and is expensive, delayed treatment is recommended in men with biochemical relapse following surgery or radiotherapy. Patients should be strongly encouraged to enter clinical trials to answer this question.

Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal↗
PubMed2001

Contemporary identification of patients at high risk of early prostate cancer recurrence after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a model that will identify a contemporary cohort of patients at high risk of early prostate cancer recurrence (greater than 50% at 36 months) after radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized disease. Data from this model will provide important information for patient selection and the design of prospective randomized trials of adjuvant therapies. METHODS: Proportional hazards regression analysis was applied to two patient cohorts to develop and cross-validate a multifactorial predictive model to identify men with the highest risk of early prostate cancer recurrence. The model and validation cohorts contained 904 and 901 men, respectively, who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy at Johns Hopkins Hospital. This model was then externally validated using a cohort of patients from the Mayo Clinic. RESULTS: A model for weighted risk of recurrence was developed: R(W)'=lymph node involvement (0/1)x1.43+surgical margin status (0/1)x1.15+modified Gleason score (0 to 4)x0.71+seminal vesicle involvement (0/1)x0.51. Men with an R(W)' greater than 2.84 (9%) demonstrated a 50% biochemical recurrence rate (prostrate-specific antigen level greater than 0.2 ng/mL) at 3 years and thus were placed in the high-risk group. Kaplan-Meier analyses of biochemical recurrence-free survival demonstrated rapid deviation of the curves based on the R(W)'. This model was cross-validated in the second group of patients and performed with similar results. Furthermore, similar trends were apparent when the model was externally validated on patients treated at the Mayo Clinic. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model that successfully stratifies patients on the basis of their risk of early prostate cancer recurrence.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Phase II trial of bicalutamide in patients with advanced prostate cancer in whom conventional hormonal therapy failed: a Southwest Oncology Group study (SWOG 9235).

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and tolerability of bicalutamide in patients with advanced prostate cancer with progression after conventional hormonal therapy. METHODS: Fifty-two patients received bicalutamide, 150 mg once daily, as second-line therapy after progressing following treatment with orchiectomy or luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue or diethylstilbestrol, alone or in combination. Patients had measurable (n = 8) or assessable (n = 44) disease, a Southwest Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2, and no prior antiandrogen therapy or chemotherapy. The objective response to treatment was assessed every 12 weeks; symptoms and pain were assessed monthly with questionnaires for 6 months. RESULTS: There was evidence of palliation with three measures of pain and, to a lesser extent, with a measure of overall symptom status after 3 months of taking bicalutamide. No complete or partial responses occurred. However, 9 (20%) of 44 subjects with adequate prostate-specific antigen data had a 50% or higher decrease in their prostate-specific antigen levels, which did not correlate with symptom improvement. The median survival time was 15 months. The most common side effects were hot flashes (23%) and nausea (21%). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that bicalutamide decreases pain and improves symptom status in patients with prostate cancer in whom first-line hormonal therapy failed.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2001

A Phase I clinical and pharmacological evaluation of sodium phenylbutyrate on an 120-h infusion schedule.

PURPOSE: Sodium phenylbutyrate (PB) demonstrates potent differentiating capacity in multiple hematopoietic and solid tumor cell lines. We conducted a Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of PB by continuous infusion to characterize the maximum tolerated dose, toxicities, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor effects in patients with refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were treated with a 120-h PB infusion every 21 days. The dose was escalated from 150 to 515 mg/kg/day. Pharmacokinetics were performed during and after the first infusion period using a validated high-performance liquid chromatographic assay and single compartmental pharmacokinetic model for PB and its principal metabolite, phenylacetate. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients were enrolled on study, with hormone refractory prostate cancer being the predominant tumor type. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and response. A total of 89 cycles were administered. The dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was neuro-cortical, exemplified by excessive somnolence and confusion and accompanied by clinically significant hypokalemia, hyponatremia, and hyperuricemia. One patient at 515 mg/kg/day and another at 345 mg/kg/day experienced this DLT. Toxicity resolved < or =12 h of discontinuing the infusion. Other toxicities were mild, including fatigue and nausea. The maximum tolerated dose was 410 mg/kg/day for 5 days. Pharmacokinetics demonstrated that plasma clearance of PB increased in a continuous fashion beginning 24 h into the infusion. In individuals whose V(max) for drug elimination was less than their drug-dosing rate, the active metabolite phenylacetate accumulated progressively. Plasma PB concentrations (at 410 mg/kg/day) remained above the targeted therapeutic threshold of 500 micromol/liter required for in vitro activity. CONCLUSION: The DLT in this Phase I study for infusional PB given for 5 days every 21 days is neuro-cortical in nature. The recommended Phase II dose is 410 mg/kg/day for 120 h.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Paclitaxel-induced stomal neuropathy: a unique cause of pain in a patient with ileal conduit.

We present a case of unusual chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity in a patient who had undergone radical cystoprostatectomy and ileal conduit diversion for invasive bladder cancer. On routine computed tomography scan several years later, he was diagnosed with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma involving the retroperitoneal lymph nodes. The patient received systemic chemotherapy, including a combination of paclitaxel (Taxol) and gemcitabine (Gemzar). During this treatment, the patient developed spasmodic pain and dysesthesia in the stoma area, with no apparent skin irritation or any other local finding. These symptoms resolved about 3 months after completion of the therapy.

Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic↗
PubMed2000

Identification and characterization of circulating prostate carcinoma cells.

BACKGROUND: Analysis of prostate carcinoma cells isolated from the peripheral blood suggested a classification based on three categories. METHODS: Centrifugation density gradients and magnetic cell sorting were used to isolate circulating prostate carcinoma cells from peripheral blood. Immunocytochemistry staining and fluorescent in situ hybridization allowed characterization of isolated cancer cells. RESULTS: Terminal cells can be divided into 3 classes: 1) large, buoyant, fragile cells with a large nucleus that were captured in a 1.068 g/mL gradient; 2) enucleate cells (4, 6-diamidino-2-phenylindole [DAPI] negative) that were positive for cytokeratin and PSMA antibodies; and 3) cellular debris exhibiting cytokeratin and PSMA positive staining as well as nuclear debris identified by DAPI staining, which included cytoplasmic debris. Growing cells also exhibited three morphologic characteristics: those possessing stem cell-like morphology and characteristics such as small size, high density, developed cytokeratin systems, PSMA expression, and aneuploidy; those in M phase; and cell clusters. The majority of isolated cells exhibited intermediate characteristics and thus comprised the third group of circulating cancer cells. CONCLUSIONS: Although the significance of the cluster remains undetermined, observation suggests that the cluster has the ability to circulate as a microtumor and subsequently arrest in the small veins and capillaries. It is hypothesized that the clusters could escape certain facets of immune surveillance and possibly gain a selective growth advantage over single cells in a distant site. Further hypothesis proposes that arrested cells recruit growth-promoting nutrients, which would result in the invasion of local blood vessels and vascularization.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Androgen deprivation and four courses of fixed-schedule suramin treatment in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer: A Southwest Oncology Group Study.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of administering a combination of suramin and hydrocortisone in addition to androgen deprivation in a cooperative group setting; to assess the feasibility of treatment with multiple courses of suramin; and to assess progression-free and overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer who underwent such treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer who had adequate hematologic, hepatic, renal, neurologic, and coagulation parameters were treated by combined androgen deprivation and suramin plus hydrocortisone. Suramin was administered on a 78-day fixed dosing schedule (one cycle), and suramin treatment cycles were repeated every 6 months for a total of four cycles. The statistical design was developed on the basis of the feasibility of administering suramin, as judged by the number of patients who developed neurotoxicity of grade 3 or higher or by treatment interruption of 4 weeks or longer due to any persistent suramin-related toxicity. RESULTS: Of the 62 patients enrolled onto the study between August 1994 and January 1997, 59 were eligible and assessable for toxicity on the first cycle. Thirty-two (54%) of 59 patients received a second cycle, 13 (22%) of 59 patients received a third cycle, and only five patients (8%) received a fourth cycle. During the first cycle, 27 patients were removed from the study: 17 because of toxicity, five because of disease progression, two who had died, and three because of other reasons. There was one therapy-related death. Grade 4 toxicities were noted in 11 and three patients during first and second courses, respectively. Neurotoxicity of grade 3 or higher was observed in nine and seven patients during the first and second cycles, respectively. Fifteen patients had treatment interruptions of 4 weeks or longer. Overall, only 54% (95% confidence interval, 41% to 67%) of the patients demonstrated acceptable limits of toxicity. CONCLUSION: Suramin plus hydrocortisone and androgen deprivation has limited applicability in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Complete androgen blockade for prostate cancer: what went wrong?

PURPOSE: We summarized and critically assessed all available data from phase III clinical trials on complete androgen blockade versus surgical or medical castration alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Published results in journals and abstracts of phase III trials, and published meta-analyses were reviewed. We also reviewed quality of life and toxicity issues associated with the addition of antiandrogens to medical or surgical castration. Finally, we discuss the original rationale for complete androgen blockade in the context of current knowledge. RESULTS: A total of 27 clinical trials using various combinations of androgen deprivation were identified, of which 3 showed a statistically significant benefit for the complete androgen blockade arm. There were 5 publications of meta-analyses that each used different selection criteria for the inclusion of studies in the final analysis. Toxicity and quality of life have not been widely investigated in prospective fashion but the available data suggest a higher toxicity rate and decreased quality of life with complete androgen blockade. CONCLUSIONS: The extensive body of data does not support routine use of antiandrogens in combination with medical or surgical castration as first line hormonal therapy in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Androgen Antagonists↗
PubMed2000

NCCN Practice Guidelines for Cancer-Related Fatigue.

These guidelines propose a treatment algorithm in which patients are evaluated regularly for fatigue, using a brief screening instrument, and are treated as indicated by their fatigue level. The algorithm's goal is to identify and treat all patients with fatigue that causes distress or interferes with daily activities or functioning. Management of fatigue begins with primary oncology team members who perform the initial screening and either provide basic education and counseling or expand the initial screening to a more focused evaluation for moderate or higher levels of fatigue. At this point the patient is assessed for the five primary factors known to be associated with fatigue: pain, emotional distress, sleep disturbance, anemia, and hypothyroidism. If any of these conditions are present, it should be treated according to practice guidelines, and the patient's fatigue should be reevaluated regularly. If none of the primary factors is present or the fatigue is unresolved, a more comprehensive assessment is indicated--with referral to other care providers as appropriate. The comprehensive assessment should include a thorough review of systems, review of medications, assessment of comorbidities, nutritional/metabolic evaluation, and assessment of activity level. Management of fatigue is cause-specific when conditions known to cause fatigue can be identified and treated. When specific causes, such as infection, fluid and electrolyte imbalances, or cardiac dysfunction, cannot be identified and corrected, nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment of the fatigue should be considered. Nonpharmacologic interventions may include a moderate exercise program to improve functional capacity and activity tolerance, restorative therapies to decrease cognitive alterations and improve mood state, and nutritional and sleep interventions for patients with disturbances in eating or sleeping. Pharmacologic therapy may include drugs such as antidepressants for depression or erythropoietin for anemia. A few clinical reports of the use of corticosteroids and psychostimulants suggest the need for further research on these agents as a potential treatment modalities in managing fatigue. Basic to these interventions, the effective management of cancer-related fatigue involves an informed and supportive oncology care team that assesses patients' fatigue levels regularly and systematically and incorporates education and counseling regarding strategies for coping with fatigue (Johnson, 1999), as well as using institutional fatigue management experts for referral of patients with unresolved fatigue.

Exercise↗
PubMed1999

Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy.

CONTEXT: In men who develop an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen level (PSA) after having undergone a radical prostatectomy, the natural history of progression to distant metastases and death due to prostate cancer is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the time course of disease progression in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. DESIGN: A retrospective review of a large surgical series with median (SD) follow-up of 5.3 (3.7) years (range, 0.5-15 years) between April 1982 and April 1997. SETTING: An urban academic tertiary referral institution. PATIENTS: A total of 1997 men undergoing radical prostatectomy, by a single surgeon, for clinically localized prostate cancer. None received neoadjuvant therapy, and none had received adjuvant hormonal therapy prior to documented distant metastases. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: After surgery, men were followed up with PSA assays and digital rectal examinations every 3 months for the first year, semiannually for the second year, and annually thereafter. A detectable serum PSA level of at least 0.2 ng/mL was evidence of biochemical recurrence. Distant metastases were diagnosed by radionuclide bone scan, chest radiograph, or other body imaging, which was performed at the time of biochemical recurrence and annually thereafter. RESULTS: The actuarial metastasis-free survival for all 1997 men was 82% (95% confidence interval, 76%-88%) at 15 years after surgery. Of the 1997 men, 315 (15%) developed biochemical PSA level elevation. Eleven of these underwent early hormone therapy after the recurrence and are not included in the study. Of the remaining 304 men, 103 (34%) developed metastatic disease within the study period. The median actuarial time to metastases was 8 years from the time of PSA level elevation. In survival analysis, time to biochemical progression (P<.001), Gleason score (P<.001), and PSA doubling time (P<.001) were predictive of the probability and time to the development of metastatic disease. An algorithm combining these parameters was constructed to stratify men into risk groups. Once men developed metastatic disease, the median actuarial time to death was 5 years. The time interval from surgery to the appearance of metastatic disease was predictive of time until death (P<.02). CONCLUSIONS: Several clinical parameters help predict the outcomes of men with PSA elevation after radical prostatectomy. These data may be useful in the design of clinical trials, the identification of men for enrollment into experimental protocols, and counseling men regarding the timing of administration of adjuvant therapies.

Disease Progression↗
PubMed1999

Incidental non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in patients with localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the outcome of patients with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy for cure and incidentally discovered concurrent low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma at time of surgery. METHODS: From September 1986 to September 1997, 4319 patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy at our institution. The records of 10 patients incidentally diagnosed to have low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma at the time of radical prostatectomy were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Of 4319 patients requiring radical prostatectomy, 10 (0.2%) were found to have low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. All 10 men had an uneventful postoperative course. Two patients subsequently developed progression of lymphoma, one of whom required treatment. One patient died of sepsis associated with his lymphoma and 1 patient died of an unrelated malignancy (lung cancer), both 7 years following surgery. Two patients developed biochemical prostate-specific antigen recurrence. The remainder of men were free of prostate cancer recurrence and experienced no progression of lymphoma at an average of 45 months (range 12 to 142). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, who are candidates for radical prostatectomy, experience long-term prostate cancer-free survival in the face of incidentally diagnosed low-grade lymphoma. Because the management of most incidentally discovered low-grade lymphomas is expectant, patients discovered at surgery to have this clinical entity should not be denied radical prostatectomy.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Rapid disease progression after the administration of bicalutamide in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

We report 5 patients with advanced metastatic prostate cancer who took bicalutamide 50 mg/day for "second-line" hormonal manipulation and demonstrated a rapid rise in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) shortly after the initiation of bicalutamide. After discontinuation of the drug, PSA levels declined in 4 patients and stabilized in the fifth. In 2 of the patients, the PSA rise was associated with an increase in pain level, which subsided after the treatment was stopped. The timing of the rapid changes in PSA and pain levels suggests a direct effect of bicalutamide. The most probable explanation for this observation is a very early agonist activation of androgen receptor by bicalutamide, similar to the underlying mechanism of the "antiandrogen withdrawal syndrome."

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Bilateral orchiectomy with or without flutamide for metastatic prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Combined androgen blockade for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer consists of an antiandrogen drug plus castration. In a previous trial, we found that adding the antiandrogen flutamide to leuprolide acetate (a synthetic gonadotropin-releasing hormone that results in medical ablation of testicular function) significantly improved survival as compared with that achieved with placebo plus leuprolide acetate. In the current trial, we compared flutamide plus bilateral orchiectomy with placebo plus orchiectomy. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who had never received antiandrogen therapy and who had distant metastases from adenocarcinoma of the prostate to treatment with bilateral orchiectomy and either flutamide or placebo. Patients were stratified according to the extent of disease and according to performance status. RESULTS: Of the 1387 patients who were enrolled in the trial, 700 were randomly assigned to the flutamide group and 687 to the placebo group. Overall, the incidence of toxic effects was minimal; the only notable differences between the groups were the greater rates of diarrhea and anemia with flutamide. There was no significant difference between the two groups in overall survival (P=0.14). The estimated risk of death (hazard ratio) for flutamide as compared with placebo was 0.91 (90 percent confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.01). Flutamide was not associated with enhanced benefit in patients with minimal disease. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of flutamide to bilateral orchiectomy does not result in a clinically meaningful improvement in survival among patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1998

Evaluation of biomarkers of survival response in hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients treated with suramin.

Hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients often have nonmeasurable disease. In such patients, predictive biomarkers other than tumor response may be required to compare therapeutic effects. We examined the predictive value for survival of various clinical and laboratory parameters, including prostate-specific antigen (PSA), in HRPC patients treated with suramin. Data from 103 HRPC patients were analyzed using various survival analyses, the likelihood ratio approach, and logistic regression analyses. When pretreatment factors, percentage decrease in PSA at 4 weeks from start of treatment (deltaPSA), and updated survival data were fit by a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, acid phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase, and deltaPSA were significant, with risk ratios close to 1. There was a decrease in likelihood ratio with increasing APSA. A logistic regression model was developed to predict the probability of <1 year of survival from the start of treatment. Hemoglobin and deltaPSA were found to be significant variables. However, in view of the complexities involving the relationship between PSA expression and prostate cancer growth and possible selective effect of treatment on PSA, further prospective testing is necessary. Therefore, deltaPSA cannot necessarily be used as a biomarker for survival response in individual patients during the evaluation of the therapeutic response of HRPC to new antineoplastic drugs.

Acid Phosphatase↗
PubMed1997

Assessment of hormone refractory prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To define guidelines for the assessment of treatment in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). METHODS: In the light of modern research, and taking new treatment options into account, the Committee essays to specify different categories of patients entering clinical trials, and to define response criteria and those endpoints that are relevant in phase III studies and in short-term follow-up. RESULTS: HRPC comprises a range of disease states with varying responsiveness to therapy and length of survival. Patients with progression as evaluated by increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values alone have a more favorable prognosis than those presenting with increasing tumor spread. In the assessment of these patients, the modes of previous therapy and the kind of tumor progression must be taken into account. The benefit of treatment of HRPC is often modest. While duration of survival remains the main and ultimate endpoint, the means of measuring short-term responsiveness to therapy are limited. A minority of patients have measurable tumor lesions. Decrease of PSA or other biochemical tumor markers may indicate depression of the tumor activity, but is not always associated with prolongation of survival. A variety of new treatments in HRPC are being investigated. They affect measurable tumor parameters in different ways. CONCLUSIONS: When a new agent is to be tested, it is important to measure all possible parameters before deciding which particular ones are appropriate for future investigations of this agent. In symptomatic patients, evaluation of subjective parameters, for example, relief of pain or improvement of performance status, is often the most reliable measure of treatment effect. However, these parameters should be clearly defined.

Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal↗