NEOADJUVANT AND ADJUVANT CHEMOHORMONAL THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH HIGH-RISK AND VERY HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER: OUR EXPERIENCE

Background. The approach to the management of prostate cancer with lymph node metastases has recently moved towards aggressive multimodal treatment with the use of the most rational combinations that are currently available.

Objective: to assess the efficacy and tolerability of chemohormonal therapy (CHT) in patients with high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer.

Materials and methods. An open prospective clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of neoadjuvant and adjuvant CHT in patients with high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer was initiated in 2016 at the P.A. Herzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute. Patient recruitment is still ongoing.

A total of 64 patients with high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer (сT3N0–T3N+М0, prostate specific antigen (PSA) ≥20 ng/mL, and Gleason score of 8–10)  were recruited since July 2016. All patients were examined prior to treatment initiation and after 3 and 6 courses of therapy. The examination included pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound imaging of the abdominal cavity and retroperitoneal space, transrectal ultrasound imaging, and chest radiography or computed tomography. Serum PSA level was evaluated before each course of therapy. Bone scintigraphy was performed before treatment and after its completion. Study participants were divided into two groups. Group A included patients that initially underwent surgical treatment and then 6 courses of CHT no later than 6 weeks after surgery: docetaxel 75 mg/m2 given intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle and oral prednisolone 10 mg/day. Patients also received hormonal therapy with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue (aLHRH) given in depot injections every 28 days.

Group B included patients that initially received 6 courses of CHT: docetaxel 75 mg/m2 given intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle and oral prednisolone 10 mg/day. After that, patients underwent radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy no later than 4 weeks after the completion of chemotherapy. Patients also received hormonal therapy with aLHRH given in depot injections every 28 days. The total treatment duration was 6 months.

Results. The group of adjuvant CHT included 24 patients with high-risk prostate cancer (T3b–4N+М0 with at least 5 regional lymph node metastases detected by morphological examination of surgical specimens). All patients had Gleason score 8–10 tumors. Mean age of patients was 63.0 ± 7.7 years (range: 46–72 years). In total, all patients received 142 courses of CHT. By the time of publishing this article, 23 (96 %) of patients completed their treatment.

The group of neoadjuvant CHT included 40 patients with very high-risk prostate cancer (T3b–4N+М0 with metastases to pelvic and retroperitoneal lymph nodes detected by instrumental examination). All patients had Gleason score 8–10 tumors. Mean age of patients was 61.0± 6.4 years (range: 43–69 years). In total, all patients received 236 courses of CHT. By the time of publishing this article, 36 (90 %) of patients completed their treatment. Thirty-five patients (87 %) underwent radical prostatectomy with extensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy. Routine pathological examination demonstrated that all patients had signs of tumor destruction. Thirty-three participants (94 %) had grade II therapeutic pathomorphosis, whereas 2 patients (6 %) had grade III therapeutic pathomorphosis.

Median PSA relapse-free survival (PSA-RFS) rate in the neoadjuvant CHT group was 10 months. Serum PSA of 0.1 ng/mL 1 month postoperatively correlated with longer RFS (р = 0.04). Biochemical relapse (PSA level >0.2 ng/mL) was observed in 6 patients (15 %) from this group. Later these patients received hormonal therapy with aLHRH. Median PSA-RFS in the adjuvant CHT group was 11 months.

The main adverse events in the two groups were hematological toxicity, observed in 24 patients (34.29 %), and gastrointestinal toxicity, observed in 9 patients (12.86 %) (diarrhea (n = 6) and stomatitis (n = 3)). Only grade I–II toxicity was registered so far. Two patients (3.1 %) had febrile neutropenia, which required cytostatic dose reduction by 20 %. Relatively good tolerability and acceptable quality of life allowed the vast majority of patients to be treated on an outpatient basis.

Conclusion. So far, we can make only a preliminary conclusion that adjuvant and neoadjuvant CHT is a promising treatment strategy for high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer.

1. Malignant tumors in Russia in 2016 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: А.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow: MNIOI im. P.A. Gertsena – filial FGBU “NMIRTS” Minzdrava Rossii, 2018. 250 p. (In Russ.).

2. Chi K.N., Chin J.L., Winquist E. et al. Multicenter phase II study of combined neoadjuvant docetaxel and hormone therapy before radical prostatectomy for patients with high risk localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2008;180(2):565–70. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.04.012. PMID: 18554663.

3. Clark P.E., Peereboom D.M., Dreicer R. et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant estramustine and etoposide plus radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Urology 2001;57(2):281–5. PMID: 11182337.

4. Dreicer R., Magi-Galluzzi C., Zhou M. et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant docetaxel before radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Urology 2004;63(6):1138–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.01.040. PMID: 15183967.

5. Febbo P.G. Neoadjuvant docetaxel before radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11(14):5233–40. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0299. PMID: 16033841. Available at: http://clin-cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0299.

6. Friedman J., Dunn R.L., Wood D. et al. Neoadjuvant docetaxel and capecitabine in patients with high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2008;179(3):911–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.064. PMID: 18207190.

7. Garzotto M., Higano C.S., O’Brien C. et al. Phase 1/2 study of preoperative docetaxel and mitoxantrone for high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer 2010;116(7):1699–708. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24960. PMID: 20143429.

8. Konety B.R., Eastham J.A., Reuter V.E. et al. Feasibility of radical prostatectomy after neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy for patients with high risk or locally advanced prostate cancer: results of a phase I/II study. J Urol 2004;171(2):709–13. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000108122.36893.5a. PMID: 14713792. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534705625621.

9. Mellado B., Font A., Alcaraz A. et al. Phase II trial of short-term neoadjuvant docetaxel and complete androgen blockade in high-risk prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 2009;101(8):1248–52. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605320. PMID: 19755998. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605320.

10. Narita S., Tsuchiya N., Kumazawa T. et al. Short-term clinicopathological outcome of neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy comprising complete androgen blockade, followed by treatment with docetaxel and estramustine phosphate before radical prostatectomy in Japanese patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer. World J Surg Oncol 2012;10:2–7. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7819-10-1. PMID: 22214417.

11. Zurita A.J., Pisters L.L., Wang X. et al. HHS Public Access. 2016;18(3): 276–80.

12. Prayer-galetti T., Sacco E., Pagano F. et al. Long-term follow-up of a neoadjuvant chemohormonal taxane-based phase II trial before radical prostatectomy in patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2007;100(2):274–80. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06760.x. PMID: 17355369.

13. Sella A., Zisman A., Kovel S. et al. Neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy in poorprognosis localized prostate cancer. Urology 2008;71(2):323–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.08.060. PMID: 18308112.

14. Shepard D.R., Dreicer R., Garcia J. et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel in high risk patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2009;181(4):1672–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.121. PMID: 19230915. Available at: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.121.

15. Womble P.R., Vanveldhuizen P.J., Nisbet A.A. et al. A phase II clinical trial of neoadjuvant ketoconazole and docetaxel chemotherapy before radical prostatectomy in high risk patients. J Urol 2011;186(3):882–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.087. PMID: 21791342. Available at: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.087.

16. Epstein J.I., Carmichael M., Partin A.W., Walsh P.C. Is tumor volume an independent predictor of progression following radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis of 185 clinical stage B adenocarcinomas of the prostate with 5 years of followup. J Urol 1993;149(6):1478–81. PMID: 8501792.

17. Nelson B.A., Shappell S.B., Chang S.S. et al. Tumour volume is an independent predictor of prostate-specific antigen recurrence in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2006;97(6):1169–72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06148.x. PMID: 16686706.

18. Stamey T.A. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. Jama 1999;281(15):1395. PMID: 10217055. Available at: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.281.15.1395.

19. Pettaway C.A., Pisters L.L., Troncoso P. et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and hormonal therapy followed by radical prostatectomy: feasibility and preliminary results. J Clin Oncol 2000;18(5):1050–7. PMID: 10694556. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.5.1050.

20. Eastham J.A., Kelly W.K., Grossfeld G.D. et al. Cancer and leukemia group B (CALGB) 90203: a randomized phase 3 study of radical prostatectomy alone versus estramustine and docetaxel before radical prostatectomy for patients with high-risk localized disease. Urology 2003;55–62. PMID: 14747042.

21. Fizazi K., Faivre L., Lesaunier F. et al. Androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel and estramustine versus androgen deprivation therapy alone for high-risk localised prostate cancer (GETUG 12): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2015;16(7):787–94. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00011-X. PMID: 26028518.

22. Ahlgren G.M., Flodgren P., Tammela T.L.J. et al. Docetaxel versus surveillance after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: results from the prospective randomised, open-label phase 3 scandinavian prostate cancer group 12 trial. Eur Urol 2018;73(6):870–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.01.012. PMID: 29395502.