Androgenic suppression combined with radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate adenocarcinoma: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Locally advanced prostate cancer is often associated with elevated recurrence rates. Despite the modest response observed, external-beam radiotherapy has been the preferred treatment for this condition. More recent evidence from randomised trials has demonstrated clinical benefit with the combined use of androgen suppression in such cases. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the combination of distinct hormone therapy modalities versus radiotherapy alone for overall survival, disease-free survival and toxicity.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov) were scanned for randomised clinical trials involving radiotherapy with or without androgen suppression in local prostate cancer. The search strategy included articles published until October 2011. The studies were examined and the data of interest were plotted for meta-analysis. Survival outcomes were reported as a hazard ratio with corresponding 95% confidence intervals.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Data from ten trials published from 1988 to 2011 were included, comprising 6555 patients. There was a statistically significant advantage to the use of androgen suppression, in terms of both overall survival and disease free survival, when compared to radiotherapy alone. The use of long-term goserelin (up to three years) was the strategy providing the higher magnitude of clinical benefit. In contrast to goserelin, there were no trials evaluating the use of other luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogues as monotherapy. Complete hormonal blockade was not shown to be superior to goserelin monotherapy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Based on the findings of this systematic review, the evidence supports the use of androgen suppression with goserelin monotherapy as the standard treatment for patients with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy, which are at high risk of recurrence or metastases.</p

A dose escalation and pharmacokinetic study of biweekly pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumours

To determine the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), paclitaxel (PCX) and gemcitabine (GEM) combination administered biweekly in patients with advanced solid tumours. Twenty-two patients with advanced-stage solid tumours were treated with escalated doses of PLD on day 1 and PCX plus GEM on day 2 (starting doses: 10, 100 and 800 mg m−2, respectively) every 2 weeks. DLTs and pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of all drugs were determined during the first cycle of treatment. All but six (73%) patients had previously received at least one chemotherapy regimen. The DLT dose level was reached at PLD 12 mg m−2, PCX 110 mg m−2 and GEM 1000 mg m−2 with neutropaenia being the dose-limiting event. Of the 86 chemotherapy cycles delivered, grade 3 and 4 neutropaenia occurred in 20% with no cases of febrile neutropaenia. Non-haematological toxicities were mild. The recommended MTDs are PLD 12 mg m−2, PCX 100 mg m−2 and GEM 1000 mg m−2 administered every 2 weeks. The PK data revealed no obvious drug interactions. Biweekly administration of PLD, PCX and GEM is a well-tolerated chemotherapy regimen, which merits further evaluation in various types of solid tumours

Diethylstilboestrol exposure does not reduce testosterone production in human fetal testis xenografts

In rodents, in utero exposure to exogenous estrogens including diethylstilboestrol (DES) results in major suppression of steroidogenesis in fetal testes. Whether similar effects occur in the human fetal testis is equivocal. Based on the results of the rodent studies, we hypothesised that exposure of human fetal testes to DES would result in a reduction in testosterone production. We show, using a xenograft approach, that testosterone production is not reduced in human fetal testis following DES exposure. Human fetal testes (15-19 weeks' gestation, n = 6) were xenografted into castrate male nude mice which were then treated for 35 days with vehicle or 100 µg/kg DES three times a week. For comparison, similar treatment was applied to pregnant rats from e13.5-e20.5 and effects on fetal testes evaluated at e21.5. Xenograft testosterone production was assessed by measuring host seminal vesicle (SV) weights as an indirect measure over the entire grafting period, and single measurement of serum testosterone at termination. Human fetal testis xenografts showed similar survival in DES and vehicle-exposed hosts. SV weight (44.3 v 26.6 mg, p = 0.01) was significantly increased in DES compared to vehicle-exposed hosts, respectively, indicating an overall increase in xenograft testosterone production over the grafting period, whilst serum testosterone at termination was unchanged. In contrast intra-testicular testosterone levels were reduced by 89%, in fetal rats exposed to DES. In rats, DES effects are mediated via Estrogen Receptor α (ESR1). We determined ESR1 protein and mRNA expression in human and rat fetal testis. ESR1 was expressed in rat, but not in human, fetal Leydig cells. We conclude that human fetal testis exposure to DES does not impair testosterone production as it does in rats, probably because ESR1 is not expressed in human fetal Leydig cells. This indicates that DES exposure is likely to pose minimal risk to masculinization of the human fetus

Inorganic substances and their uses in Nikolaos Myrepsos’ Dynameron. Recent applications in modern therapy

Inorganic compounds have been known and used since antiquity. Dynameron is the largest Byzantine medical manuscript divided into 24 sections, in accordance with the letters of the Hellenic alphabet, which contains 2667 recipes. The majority of them contain ingredients of plant origin, followed by animal origin, while fewer inorganic substances are quoted. In the present study, the latter ones are listed. Moreover, the information on the uses of inorganic ingredients in the treatment of many diseases in the late Byzantine era is presented and their evaluation in light of the modern Pharmacology and Toxicology. © 2021 The Author