Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Schellhammer

Publications and source records attributed to P Schellhammer.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Conservative management of prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era: the incidence and time course of subsequent therapy.

PURPOSE: The long natural history of early stage prostate cancer is well recognized and a conservative approach to the treatment of elderly men is often encouraged. We assessed the ability of patients and physicians to adhere to a policy of watchful waiting in the prostate specific antigen (PSA) era. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all 199 men with stages T1-2 prostate cancer and PSA less than 20 ng./ml. who in our practice elected watchful waiting. Median followup in the population overall was 3.4 years. We performed Kaplan-Meier actuarial analysis of overall and disease specific survival, and most pertinent survival free from therapy. A questionnaire was administered to record the attitude of patients who ultimately proceeded to treatment to determine how therapy was triggered. RESULTS: Median patient age was 71 years and median PSA was 6.6 ng./ml. The tumor was impalpable in 52% of patients, Gleason sum was 6 or less in 80% and 11% used some form of herbal remedy or nutritional supplementation. Of the 37 men who died during observation, including 35 of co-morbid illness, only 6 underwent treatment. Overall survival at 5 and 7 years was 77% and 63% but disease specific survival was 98% and 98%, respectively. A total of 64 patients underwent treatment and actuarial freedom from treatment was 56% at 5 years, including 51% and 73% in those younger and older than 75 years at diagnosis. The likelihood of being alive and free from treatment was 43% at 5 years and 26% at 7. Of the 63 men treated 48 (76%) underwent radical therapy (brachytherapy in 17, external beam radiotherapy in 29 and prostatectomy in 2), while only 24% received androgen deprivation. The median PSA increase from diagnosis to treatment in treated patients was 2.9 ng./ml., and it was 0.9 ng./ml. from diagnosis to the last followup in those not treated. Of the treated patients 81% believed that the physician had initiated therapy due to a PSA increase or a nodule. However, physicians recorded having advocated treatment in only 24% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: When patients do not die of co-morbid illness, they are likely to proceed to therapy well within the first decade after diagnosis (57% by 5 years and 74% by 7). Therapy was usually definitive (radical) and triggered by slight, inevitable PSA increases. The patient perception was that the physicians initiated therapy in response to increasing PSA. However, the physicians more often perceived that treatment was initiated by patients. Therefore, watchful waiting in the PSA era often represents radical therapy delayed by a few years.

Actuarial Analysis↗
PubMed1999

An update on bicalutamide in the treatment of prostate cancer.

In this update, bicalutamide (Casodex, Zeneca Pharmaceuticals) has been confirmed as an effective, well-tolerated and convenient non-steroidal anti-androgen for advanced prostate cancer. Preclinical and clinical studies have indicated its potential as monotherapy, with quality of life advantages compared with castration. A head-to-head comparison with flutamide, where both anti-androgens were used as part of combined androgen blockade, has suggested that the choice of components in this regimen can influence outcome, and has demonstrated that bicalutamide is better tolerated than flutamide. There is also preliminary evidence to support the potential use of bicalutamide in treatment of early-stage disease and tumours that are refractory to other non-steroidal anti-androgens.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1997

Assessment of endpoints for clinical trials for localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The AUA Practice Guidelines Panel convened to address the issue of appropriate endpoints for assessment of treatment modalities for localized carcinoma of the prostate. METHODS: A review of the literature and the design of existing clinical trials produced a consensus, which was presented to and critiqued by the members of the general conference. RESULTS: The pitfalls associated with identification of local failure endpoints were discussed, and the more accurate endpoints of freedom from metastatic progression and overall survival were recognized. The strict definition that must be fulfilled for intermediate endpoints to become surrogates for metastasis free and/or survival endpoints was stressed. For more efficient and rapid conduct of future clinical trials, the urgent need to validate such surrogate endpoints by evaluation in randomized control trials is obvious. PSA, while an indicator of disease activity and a critical marker for estimating disease progression or regression in response to therapy, is not a surrogate for metastasis free or overall survival. CONCLUSION: Until surrogate endpoints are validated, the committee has evaluated the endpoints in current use, reviewed their limitations, and stressed the importance of quality-of-life assessment together with the traditional endpoint assessment.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed1996

Maximal androgen blockade for patients with metastatic prostate cancer: outcome of a controlled trial of bicalutamide versus flutamide, each in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy. Casodex Combination Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: To review the outcome of therapy with maximal androgen blockade and compare the efficacy and safety of bicalutamide and flutamide, each used in combination with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue (LHRH-A) therapy, in patients with untreated metastatic (Stage D2) prostate cancer. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy), multicenter study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. A total of 813 patients were allocated 1:1 to bicalutamide (50 mg once daily) or flutamide (250 mg three times daily), plus 2:1 to goserelin acetate (3.6 mg every 28 days) or leuprolide acetate (7.5 mg every 28 days). RESULTS: At the time of analysis (median follow-up, 49 weeks), bicalutamide plus LHRH-A was associated with a statistically significant improvement in time-to-treatment failure, the primary endpoint, when compared with flutamide plus LHRH-A. The results with longer follow-up (median, 95 weeks) support previous findings of an improved time-to-treatment failure with bicalutamide plus LHRH-A; however, the difference between groups was not statistically significant. A treatment failure endpoint was reached by 68% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group, compared with 72% of patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. The hazard ratio of bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-1.03; P = 0.10). The upper one-sided 95% confidence limit for survival was 1.00, meeting the definition for equivalence (< 1.25). With longer follow-up, overall mortality was 34%, with equivalent survival between groups: 32% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group died, compared with 35% in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group. The hazard ratio of bicalutamide plus LHRH-A to flutamide plus LHRH-A was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.69-1.11; P = 0.29). The upper one-sided 95% confidence limit for survival was 1.07, meeting the definition for equivalence (< 1.25). Diarrhea occurred in 24% of patients in the flutamide plus LHRH-A group compared with 10% of patients in the bicalutamide plus LHRH-A group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic prostate cancer, bicalutamide plus LHRH-A is effective and well tolerated. Because of its efficacy and tolerability profile, together with its convenient once-daily dosing formulation, bicalutamide represents a prime candidate for antiandrogen of first choice in combination with LHRH-A therapy in the treatment of men with metastatic prostate cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

A controlled trial of Casodex (bicalutamide) vs. flutamide, each in combination with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue therapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Casodex Combination Study Group.

Between January 1992 and September 1993, 813 patients with stage D2 prostate cancer were enrolled in a multicentre, double-blind (for antiandrogen therapy) trial and randomised to antiandrogen therapy with Casodex (bicalutamide, 50 mg once daily) or flutamide (250 mg three times daily) and to luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogue therapy with Zoladex (goserelin, 3.6 mg every 28 days) or leuprolide (7.5 mg every 28 days). Time to treatment failure was the primary efficacy endpoint. At a median follow-up time of 49 weeks, there was a significant (p = 0.005) difference between groups in time to treatment failure in favour of Casodex plus LHRH analogue. Overall, 168 (42%) of 404 patients in the Casodex plus LHRH analogue group and 218 (53%) of 409 patients in the flutamide plus LHRH analogue group reached a treatment failure endpoint. Although a cause-specific treatment-failure analysis was not performed, the difference between groups in treatment failure attributed to adverse events (mainly diarrhoea) was evident primarily in the first 7 months of therapy. The difference between groups in treatment failure for objective progression was most evident after 1 year of therapy. With further follow-up (median time of 95 weeks), the result for time to treatment failure, although no longer statistically significant, were consistent with the previous finding of an improvement in time to treatment failure associated with Casodex plus LHRH analogue therapy. With a median of 95 weeks of follow-up, 34% of deaths had occurred. The survival analysis was not dissimilar between the 2 groups. At 49 weeks median follow up, the incidence of diarrhoea was significantly (p < 0.001) lower among patients in the Casodex plus LHRH analogue group. Diarrhoea led to withdrawal from therapy for 2 patients in the Casodex plus LHRH analogue group, compared with 25 patients in the flutamide plus LHRH analogue group. In conclusion, Casodex plus LHRH analogue is well tolerated and effective with an improvement in time to treatment failure over flutamide plus LHRH analogue. Survival was not dissimilar between the 2 treatment groups.

Androgen Antagonists↗
PubMed1995

Repair of obliterative vesicourethral stricture after radical prostatectomy: a technique for preservation of continence.

We present the open surgical repair of complete obstruction of the bladder neck unresponsive to endoscopic management. By combining abdominal and perineal dissection, partial pubectomy, and omental wrapping, repeat anastomosis is possible without the need for bladder tubularization. Two patients have been repaired successfully. Although both men presented with indwelling suprapubic tubes and a defect of greater than 1.5 cm, they are now voiding normally at 18 and 7 months post-operatively without the need for pads, medication, or instrumentation. Complete obliteration of the bladder neck after radical prostatectomy can be functionally reconstructed. Postoperative continence will depend on the function of the membranous urethra. If incontinence occurs, this can be managed in a reconstructed open urethra.

Humans↗