Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Estramustine”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

Phase II trial of oral estramustine, oral etoposide, and intravenous paclitaxel in hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the combination of intravenous (IV) paclitaxel, oral estramustine, and oral etoposide in patients with advanced hormone-refractory prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with carcinoma of the prostate that was progressing despite hormonal therapy and who had undergone antiandrogen withdrawal (if previously treated with an antiandrogen) were enrolled onto this phase II trial. Patients were treated with oral estramustine 280 mg tid and oral etoposide 100 mg/d for 7 days, with paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) IV over 1 hour on day 2 of each 21-day treatment cycle. Patients received a maximum of six cycles of therapy. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were assessable for response. Twenty-two had measurable disease at baseline; response was not assessable in six of these patients. Overall response was 45% (10 of 22 patients; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24% to 68%), and response was 63% (10 of 16) in assessable patients. Twenty-six patients had a > or = 50% decrease from their baseline prostate-specific antigen levels during therapy, for a response rate of 65% (95% CI, 48% to 79%) by this criterion. Median duration of response was 3.2 months, with an estimated median survival of 12.8 months. Major toxicities of therapy were leukopenia (eight patients had > or = grade 4 leukopenia) and anemia. Hematologic toxicity seemed to be associated with liver metastases. Serial measurements in 24 patients using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) showed no significant change in quality of life (QOL) as a result of therapy. CONCLUSION: The combination of IV paclitaxel, oral estramustine, and oral etoposide is active in patients with advanced prostate cancer. The regimen is tolerable and does not have a significant impact on QOL as measured by the FACT-P in a limited sample of patients.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2000

Results of a phase II study using estramustine phosphate and vinblastine in combination with high-dose three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility and tolerance of neoadjuvant and concomitant estramustine phosphate and vinblastine (EV) with high-dose three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer were enrolled onto a prospective study to determine the feasibility of combining EV with 3D-CRT. Patients were eligible if any of the following requirements were satisfied: (1) Gleason score > or =8 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 10 ng/mL; (2) Gleason score of 7 and PSA > 20 ng/mL; (3) clinical stage T3N0M0 disease with PSA > 20 ng/mL; (4) any patient with T4N0M0 disease; or (5) patients with TXN1MO disease. Therapy consisted of three 8-week cycles of EV and 8 weeks of 3D-CRT. Estramustine phosphate was given orally beginning on week 1 and continued until the completion of 3D-CRT. Each 8-week cycle of vinblastine consisted of 6 weekly intravenous injections followed by a 2-week rest period. Radiation therapy was administered using a three-dimensional conformal approach to a prescription dose of 75.6 Gy. The median follow-up was 26 months (range, 6 to 40 months). RESULTS: Twenty-three (85%) of 27 patients completed the entire course of therapy and were assessable for toxicities and biochemical outcome. Two patients (7%) developed grade 3 hematologic toxicity that resolved, and two patients (7%) developed grade 3 hepatoxicity, manifesting as persistent elevation of serum transaminase levels, necessitating discontinuation of the chemotherapy and withdrawal from the treatment program. The most prominent adverse effects from this regimen were mild to moderate (grade 1 to 2) nausea and fatigue related to estramustine. Mild peripheral edema was seen in 15% of patients and was treated with diuresis. 3D-CRT was tolerated well in these patients. Medications were required for relief of acute grade 2 rectal (gastrointestinal [GI]) and urinary (genitourinary [GU]) symptoms in 35% and 48% of patients, respectively. Three patients developed acute grade 3 GU toxicities. The 2-year actuarial likelihood of late grade 2 GI toxicity was 20%. No late grade 3 or 4 GI toxicities were observed. The 2-year actuarial likelihoods of late grade 2 and 3 GU toxicities were 25% and 12%, respectively. No grade 4 GU toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant and concomitant EV with high-dose 3D-CRT is well tolerated in patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Although the incidence of modest (grade 2) late GI and GU toxicities seem to be increased compared with 3D-CRT alone or in combination with androgen ablation therapy, no severe toxicities were encountered with this regimen.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2005

Multicenter randomized phase II study of two schedules of docetaxel, estramustine, and prednisone versus mitoxantrone plus prednisone in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Mitoxantrone-corticosteroid is currently the standard palliative treatment in hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients. Recent clinical trials documented the high activity of the docetaxel-estramustine combination. We conducted a randomized phase II study to evaluate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (primary end point) and safety of two docetaxel-estramustine-prednisone (DEP) regimens and mitoxantrone-prednisone (MP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty metastatic HRPC patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel (70 mg/m2 on day 2 or 35 mg/m2 on days 2 and 9 of each 21-day cycle) and estramustine (280 mg p.o. tid on days 1 through 5 and 8 through 12) or mitoxantrone 12 mg/m2 every 3 weeks; all patients received prednisone (10 mg daily). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven patients were assessable for PSA response and safety. A > or = 50% PSA decline was found in a greater percentage of patients in the docetaxel arms (67% and 63%) compared with MP (18%; P = .0001). Median time to PSA progression was five times longer with DEP than with MP (8.8 and 9.3 v 1.7 months, respectively; P = .000001). Overall survival was better in the docetaxel arms (18.6 and 18.4 months) compared with the MP arm (13.4 months), but not significantly so (P = .3). Crossover rates differed significantly among treatment arms (16%, 10%, and 48% in arms A, B, and C, respectively; P = .00001). Treatment-related toxicities were mild and mainly hematologic. CONCLUSION: The results of this randomized phase II study showed significantly higher PSA decline < or = 50% and longer times to progression in HRPC patients receiving DEP-based chemotherapy than MP, and that DEP could be proposed in this setting.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1997

Cellular changes in prostatic carcinoma after treatment with orchidectomy, estramustine phosphate and medroxyprogesterone acetate.

Thirty-three patients with prostatic carcinoma were treated with either estramustine phosphate, orchidectomy or high dose medroxyprogesterone acetate. Therapy response was evaluated by cytological examination of fine needle aspiration biopsies performed before and after 6 weeks treatment. At follow-up, 11 of 14 patients treated with estramustine phosphate had regressive and/or degenerative changes, in 2 patients there were no prostatic carcinoma cells in the smears and in one there was a marked reduction of the number of tumour cells. In 7 of 10 patients treated with orchidectomy there was a marked reduction of the percentage of malignant cells while smears from 3 patients were unchanged. In the 8 patients treated with high dose medroxyprogesterone acetate the cell patterns were unmodified compared with before treatment. We conclude that, in contrast to the lack of effect of treatment with medroxyprogesterone acetate, treatment with orchidectomy and especially estramustine phosphate caused morphologic cellular changes in prostatic carcinoma.

Aged↗
PubMed1991

Estramustine binding protein in human brain-tumor tissue.

Estramustine, an estradiol-17 beta and nornitrogen mustard complex, is used in the treatment of advanced prostatic carcinoma. A specific estramustine binding protein (EMBP) is important for its cytotoxic action, and the presence of EMBP has previously been demonstrated in rat and human prostatic cancer tissue. Significant levels of EMBP were detected by radioimmunoassay in human brain-tumor tissue. The EMBP concentrations (expressed as ng/mg protein) in 16 astrocytomas (mean 2.6 ng/mg, range 0.5 to 6.2 ng/mg) and seven meningiomas (mean 5.1 ng/mg, range 0.3 to 9.3 ng/mg) were significantly higher than that found in four samples of epileptic brain (mean 0.7 ng/mg, range 0.5 to 1 ng/mg) and 18 samples of normal brain (mean 0.5 ng/mg, range 0.2 to 1.0 ng/mg). The uptake, metabolism, and antiproliferative effects of the prostatic anticancer agent estramustine have been previously demonstrated in cultured glioma cells. The presence of EMBP may suggest a selective binding and effectiveness in human brain-tumor tissue.

Astrocytoma↗
PubMed1995

[Clinicopathological evaluation of etoposide or estramustine phosphate in castrated patients with advanced prostatic cancer].

BACKGROUND: We conducted a multicentric randomized trial to compare bilateral orchiectomy versus bilateral orchiectomy plus etoposide or estramustine phosphate as first-line therapy for advanced prostatic cancer (stage D2). METHODS: From January 1991 to December 1992 a total of 46 newly diagnosed cases (registered cases) of advanced (stage D2) prostatic cancer was randomized into 3 groups as follows; Group A: bilateral orchiectomy and 25 mg/day of etoposide every 2 weeks for 6 months. Group B: bilateral orchiectomy and 560 mg/day of estramustine phosphate for 6 months. Group C: bilateral orchiectomy alone. One of group A and one of group B were ineligible cases, so 44 were eligible. In the eligible cases, ages were ranged from 54 to 90 (mean of 71.2) years old. No significant difference of patients' characteristics was found among 3 groups and median follow-up period was 25 months. Response was evaluated based on the response criteria according to Japanese urological association. Specifically, a central pathologist who blinded to the treatment was employed for evaluating pathological response at six months. RESULTS: Of the 44 eligible patients, 33 and 25 were evaluated for clinically and pathological analyses, respectively. Clinical response rates were 80% (12/15) of group A, 100% (4/4) of group B and 78.6% (11/14) of group C. No significant difference in the clinical response and survival rate was shown among the three groups. Significantly higher frequencies of side effects were noted in the grop B compared to the other two groups (p < 0.05) and cardiovascular complications were the most frequent in group B. Favorable pathological response was obtained in all of group B, but not statistically significant compared with 7/21 (33.3%) of response rate in group A and C. The pathological response was significantly correlated with the clinical one in all patients (p < 0.01). While 8 of 11 patients (73%) with pathological response grade 1, 2 and 3 achieved clinical PR (partial response) or CR (complete response), only 5 of 14 (36%) with grade 0 received PR or CR. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that low dose administration of etoposide or estramustine phosphate dose not improve clinical response and survival in a short term in castrated patients, but increases the adverse effects due to the drugs in these patients. In addition, the pathological evaluation at 6 months after treatment appears to reflect the clinical response at that time in newly diagnosed patients with advanced prostatic cancer.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2004

[A clinical study of estramustine phosphate sodium for the treatment of hot flushes in men with prostate cancer].

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of estramustine sodium phosphate in men with hot flushes during combined androgen blockade (CAB) therapy for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven men with moderate to severe hot flushes were received estramustine sodium phosphate. Treatment response was assessed by hot flush score. RESULTS: A significant reduction in the hot flush score was seen with all patients. No thromboembolic complications occurred in any patients. CONCLUSIONS: Estramustine sodium phosphate appears to be a promising, well-tolerated and useful therapy for men with hot flushes during CAB treatment for prostate cancer.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Enhanced activity of estramustine, vinblastine, etoposide, and suramin in prostate carcinoma.

Following hormonal therapy, few treatment regimens have activity in metastatic prostate cancer. Cytotoxic agents have minimal activity in this disease. However, combinations of cytotoxic agents may be beneficial. The activity of estramustine, vinblastine, etoposide, and suramin on cell growth was evaluated. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) is routinely used as a surrogate marker for disease progression. Many pharmacological agents alter PSA levels independently of their effect on tumor growth, the effect of these agents on PSA secretion was determined. Each agent was evaluated alone and in combination with the other drugs in two prostate cancer cell lines. In LNCaP cells, estramustine and suramin were cytostatic, while vinblastine and etoposide were cytotoxic. Estramustine down-regulated etoposide PSA secretion, while suramin had no effect. The effects of etoposide and vinblastine on PSA secretion were not evaluable. In PC-3 cells, only etoposide was cytotoxic. Tandem combinations were more cytotoxic than single agents in both cell lines. The addition of a third agent to the tandem combination produced less cytotoxicity. In our hands, the best combinations were estramustine/vinblastine, suramin/vinblastine, and suramin/etoposide. These combinations yielded 20-60% higher cytotoxicity than any of the drugs alone.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1999

Preliminary evaluation of a short course of estramustine phosphate and docetaxel (Taxotere) in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Preclinical data suggest that small quantities of estramustine phosphate are synergistic with taxanes and may be useful in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer. The current trial was designed to reduce the duration of exposure to estramustine phosphate, which carries with it the risk of anorexia and gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and thromboembolic toxicity during long-term treatment. Patients with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate showing evidence of progressing disease 4 to 6 weeks after antiandrogen withdrawal were enrolled into the study. Patients may have received up to two prior chemotherapy regimens. Patients received estramustine phosphate 280 mg orally every 6 hours for a total of five doses (24-hour exposure), docetaxel (Taxotere; Rhône-Poulenc Rorer, Collegeville, PA) 70 mg/m2 intravenously over 1 hour, coumadin 2 mg orally every day, and dexamethasone as premedication for docetaxel. Cycles were repeated every 21 days, up to a maximum of 6. Of the 18 evaluable patients, seven showed more than 50% declines in prostate-specific antigen for a duration > or =4 weeks; two of eight patients had soft tissue partial responses. Nine of 11 had improvement in pain and/or urinary symptoms. In a total of 98 cycles, grade 3 toxicities observed included leukopenia (N = 7), neutropenia (N = 6), fatigue (N = 13), headache (N = 1), local skin reactions after extravasation (N = 2), nail changes (N = 1), diarrhea (N = 2), and hyperglycemia (N = 3); grade 4 toxicities included neutropenia/fever requiring admission (N = 2), leukopenia (N = 2), and neutropenia (N = 6). No thromboembolic complications were seen. All toxicities were reversible within 1 week after occurrence. Thus, preliminary evidence suggests that in this heavily pretreated patient population 1-day treatment with an estramustine/docetaxel combination is active and has acceptable toxicity.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1999

Docetaxel (Taxotere) and estramustine versus mitoxantrone and prednisone for hormone-refractory prostate cancer: scientific basis and design of Southwest Oncology Group Study 9916.

Hormone-refractory prostate cancer is the terminal step in the natural history of prostate cancer. To date, no chemotherapeutic agents have been shown to impact clinical outcome at this stage. Recently, the Food and Drug Administration approved the combination of mitoxantrone and prednisone based solely on its superior palliative effects as compared to steroids alone in 2 randomized trials. Progress in biologically driven drug development has led to the identification of several estramustine-based regimens that, although based on single institution experience, appear to have at least a comparable but very promising level of activity in hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients. One such combination, estramustine plus docetaxel (Taxotere; Rhône-Poulenc Rorer, Collegeville, PA), is particularly attractive because of its convenient schedule and side effect profile. To objectively assess the therapeutic benefit of this combination, the Southwest Oncology Group is initiating a randomized phase III trial comparing estramustine and docetaxel with the standard arm of mitoxantrone and prednisone using time to progression and survival as the primary end points. Secondary end points will include toxicity profiles, assessments of quality of life parameters, and magnitude of decline of prostate-specific antigen levels between the two treatment arms.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2000

Oral estramustine and cyclophosphamide in patients with metastatic hormone refractory prostate carcinoma: a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Nearly all cases of metastatic prostate carcinoma progress, after hormonal ablation, to a hormone refractory status. To the authors' knowledge no standard chemotherapy for patients with hormone refractory prostate carcinoma (HRPC) exists. In a prospective study, the efficacy and toxicity of an oral combination of estramustine and cyclophosphamide were evaluated. METHODS: Between March 1996 and April 1998, 32 consecutive patients (median age 74 years; range, 53-84 years) with metastatic HRPC were treated with oral estramustine (10 mg/kg/day) and oral cyclophosphamide (2 mg/kg/day) for 14 days every 28 days. Inclusion criteria were previous complete androgen blockade, antiandrogen withdrawal evaluation, and clinical or biochemical disease progression. Response assessment was based on a decrease > or =50% in the prostate specific antigen (PSA) level associated with improvement (or no worsening) in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) and relief of bone pain (if present). RESULTS: All patients were evaluable for efficacy and toxicity. PSA levels decreased by at least 50% in 14 patients (43.7%) (95% confidence interval, 26.5-60.9), remained stable in 12 patients (37.5%), and rose in 6 patients (18.8%). ECOG PS was 0 in 5 of 14 patients, improved from 1 to 0 in 7 patients, and remained unchanged in 2 patients. Bone pain, present in 8 of 14 patients, disappeared in 7 and was partially relieved in 1. The median duration of response was 30 weeks (range, 8-88+ weeks). An objective partial response was obtained in two cases. Toxicity was mild and mainly gastrointestinal (World Health Organization [WHO] Grade 1). No cases of WHO Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicity occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The oral combination of estramustine and cyclophosphamide appears to be safe and effective in patients with HRPC. In responding patients its use shows a clinical benefit in terms of improvement of ECOG PS and pain control.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Estramustine a radio sensitising agent.

The present study revealed that estramustine acts as a radio sensitising agent on the human renal cell cancer cell lines, A498 and CAKI-2. In vitro experiments used the Bürker chamber technique. Both cell lines were markedly resistant to external beam irradiation. While pretreatment of the cell cultures with estramustine prior to external beam irradiation revealed an arrest of cell growth in both cell lines. The results of this study suggest that estramustine could be utilised as a radiosensitizing agent. This in turn could open a new method for the management of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

Antineoplastic Agents↗
PubMed2003

Dose escalation study of intravenous estramustine phosphate in combination with Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in patients with advanced prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose is to determine a safe weekly dose of i.v. estramustine phosphate (EMP) to combine with weekly paclitaxel and monthly carboplatin in patients with advanced prostate cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced prostate cancer (castrate and noncastrate) were administered escalating doses of weekly 1-h infusion of i.v. EMP (500-1000-1500 mg/m(2)) in combination with weekly paclitaxel (100 mg/m(2) over 1 h) and i.v. carboplatin (area under the curve 6 mg/ml-min every 4 weeks). Four weeks of therapy were considered one cycle. In the first three cohorts, EMP was given i.v. 3 h before paclitaxel. Cohorts 4 and 5 reversed the administration order: EMP (doses 1000-1500 mg/m(2)) was given immediately after the end of paclitaxel infusion. Plasma levels of EMP and its metabolites, estramustine and estromustine, were monitored at time 0, at 120 min, and approximately at 20, 21, and 168 h from the start of EMP infusion. Paclitaxel concentrations were determined at basal (0), 30, 60, 90, and 120 min and 18 h after the start of paclitaxel infusion, and a concentration-time curve was estimated. Pharmacokinetic evaluation was performed in cycles 1 and 2 during the first week of therapy. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were entered on the initial three dose levels (cohorts 1-3). Dose-limiting transient hepatic toxicity was encountered in cohort 3 (EMP = 1500 mg/m(2)). An additional 13 patients were treated with paclitaxel (100 mg/m(2)) first, followed by i.v. EMP at 1000 mg/m(2) (cohort 4), and 1500 mg/m(2) (cohort 5). No dose-limiting toxicities were seen, and cohort 5 was determined safe for Phase II studies. Thromboembolic events were observed in 9% of patients (no prophylactic coumadin was used). Plasma concentrations of EMP and metabolites increased proportionally with dose. In all cohorts, there was a slight decrease in EMP and estramustine plasma concentrations between cycles 1 and 2. Although not significant, higher levels of estromustine at cycle 2 were observed in comparison to cycle 1. Decreased clearance of paclitaxel leading to higher than expected paclitaxel plasma concentrations was observed during the first cycle of therapy. Paclitaxel plasma concentrations were lower during cycle 2. In 17 patients with androgen-independent disease, 59% had >/=50% posttherapy decline in PSA and 22% showed measurable disease regression. CONCLUSIONS: The regimen of weekly i.v. EMP in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin can be safely administered with hepatic toxicity being transient and reversible. Pharmacokinetic results suggest that EMP competitively inhibits the biotransformation of paclitaxel after the first administration. This effect is counterbalanced, after repeated administrations, by a possible induction of the metabolic system caused by EMP. Phase II testing is ongoing to evaluate the efficacy of this combination.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Hormone refractory advanced prostate cancer treated with estramustine and paclitaxel combination.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of weekly paclitaxel administration in combination with oral estramustine in patients with prostate cancer refractory to hormonal manipulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1999 and 2000, 41 patients were included in the study. All patients had disease progression while on treatment with LH-RH and antiandrogens. After being off hormonal therapy for at least 4 weeks, oral estramustine 520 mg twice daily and 60 minutes paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 once weekly, were administered. In total 152 courses were given (median 3.71). RESULTS: Toxicity was well-tolerated. The most common adverse effect was low-grade (I-II) neurotoxicity. Objective partial responses were observed in 9 (22%) patients; when PSA decrease was included the total number of responders was 25 (61%) patients. Median survival was 17 months (range 4-42+ months). CONCLUSION: Long-term median and overall survival was achieved in patients with prostate cancer refractory to hormonal treatment, with oral estramustine and weekly paclitaxel administration. Toxicity was acceptable.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2005

[The place of estramustine in the treatment of prostate cancer].

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Prostate cancer is a dynamic disease. Androgen ablation is palliative, and does not cure advanced prostate cancer. The hormone-sensitive cells die, and the hormone-resistant cells come into excess; the disease then progresses, which results in a deterioration of the condition of the patient. The theoretical basis of the curing strategy is the fact that the prostate tumour itself changes during the progression; the molecular determinants of the resistance are present in the varying stages of the disease. The treatment of advanced prostate cancer remains unsolved; it is a well-known fact that a hormone-resistant state develops after the primary treatment forms (androgen withdrawal). The drug of choice for the secondary treatment is estramustine. This can be utilized as monotherapy or in combination. METHODS: In the present study, the results of estramustine treatment of 79 patients with advanced prostate cancer were evaluated. The preparation, known and clinically applied for more than 20 years, was studied in 12 centres. RESULTS: The mean prostate-specific antigen level improved for 6 months, but rose from the 9th month on. The improvement in the subjective condition of the patients paralleled the change in the prostate-specific antigen level. The shortness of the improvement was a consequence of the very high prostate-specific antigen level and the poor general condition. CONCLUSIONS: Estramustine administration is recommended when the prostate-specific antigen level becomes more than doubled following the primary treatment. At a starting prostate-specific antigen level of >100 ng/ml, the treatment leads to total androgen blockade. If the prostate-specific antigen level has not decreased after treatment for 3 months, the secondary strategy is to apply chemotherapy.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Administration of estramustine in response to changes in the prostate-specific antigen and Karnofsky index in the treatment of prostate cancer.

Androgen ablation is palliative and does not cure advanced prostate cancer. The hormone-sensitive cells die and the hormone-resistant cells overgrow, resulting in disease progression. The drug of choice for secondary treatment is estramustine (Estracyt). The success of the therapy is followed by changes of the prostate-specific antigen level and Karnofsky scale. In the present study, the results of estramustine treatment of 79 patients with advanced prostate cancer in 12 hospitals were evaluated. The mean prostate-specific antigen level improved for 6 months, but rose from the ninth month on. The improvement in the subjective condition of the patients paralleled the change in the prostate-specific antigen level. The short time of improvement was a consequence of the very high prostate-specific antigen level and the poor general condition. Estramustine administration is recommended when the prostate-specific antigen level becomes more than doubled following primary treatment. At a starting prostate-specific antigen level of > 100 ng/ml, the treatment leads to total androgen blockade. If the prostate-specific antigen level has not decreased after treatment for 3 months, the secondary strategy is to apply chemotherapy.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1991

The effects of estramustine on metaphase and anaphase in DU 145 prostatic carcinoma cells.

The chemotherapeutic drug, estramustine, has been shown to cause the disassembly of microtubules via binding to microtubule-associated proteins. In this report, estramustine is shown to be a potent inhibitor of mitotic progression in the human prostatic carcinoma cell line, DU 145. Examination of individual living cells via video-enhanced differential interference contrast (DIC) optics shows that the drug delays the onset of anaphase, reduces anaphase spindle-pole elongation (anaphase B), and delays cytokinesis. In addition, immunofluorescent studies demonstrate that estramustine causes a rapid disorganization of the mitotic apparatus at significantly lower concentrations than those reported previously. Electron microscopic studies show that microtubule bundles are present in drug-treated mitotic cells in association with kinetochores and centrioles.

Anaphase↗
PubMed1977

Effect of oral estramustine phosphate on pituitary, gonadal, and adrenal function in the green monkey (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus).

We studied the effects of estramustine phosphate on pituitary, gonadal, and adrenal function in the green monkey. A 2-week course of estramustine phosphate (75 mg per day) reversibly suppressed the luteinizing hormone and testosterone response to luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone but did not affect pituitary-adrenal function assessed by the 11-deoxycorticosterone response to metyrapone. Treatment with oral estramustine phosphate also resulted in a significant increase in corticosteroid-binding globulin but did not affect a series of liver enzymes nor hematology. The results are consistent with a pure estrogen effect produced by hydrolysis of the carbamate-ester bona at a site distant from estrogen target tissues and could explain most of the reported in vivo effects of this compound.

Administration, Oral↗