Inflammation in benign prostate tissue and prostate cancer in the finasteride arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

BACKGROUND: A previous analysis of the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) reported 82% overall prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation and identified a link between inflammation and higher-grade prostate cancer and serum PSA. Here we studied these associations in the PCPT finasteride arm. METHODS: Prostate cancer cases (N=197) detected either on a clinically indicated biopsy or on protocol-directed end-of-study biopsy, and frequency-matched controls (N=248) with no cancer on an end-of-study biopsy were sampled from the finasteride arm. Inflammation in benign prostate tissue was visually assessed using digital images of H&E stained sections. Logistic regression was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: In the finasteride arm, 91.6% of prostate cancer cases and 92.4% of controls had at least one biopsy core with inflammation in benign areas; p < 0.001 for difference compared to placebo arm. Overall, the odds of prostate cancer did not differ by prevalence (OR=0.90, 95% CI 0.44-1.84) or extent (P-trend=0.68) of inflammation. Inflammation was not associated with higher-grade disease (prevalence: OR=1.07, 95% CI 0.43-2.69). Furthermore, mean PSA concentration did not differ by the prevalence or extent of inflammationin either cases or controls. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation was higher in the finasteride than placebo arm of the PCPT, with no association with higher-grade prostate cancer. IMPACT: Finasteride may attenuate the association between inflammation and higher-grade prostate cancer. Moreover, the missing link between intraprostatic inflammation and PSA suggests that finasteride may reduce inflammation-associated PSA elevation

Tissue Effects in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Short-term Finasteride in Early Prostate Cancer.

BackgroundIn the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, finasteride selectively suppressed low-grade prostate cancer and significantly reduced the incidence of prostate cancer in men treated with finasteride compared with placebo. However, an apparent increase in high-grade disease was also observed among men randomized to finasteride. We aimed to determine why and hypothesized that there is a grade-dependent response to finasteride.MethodsFrom 2007 to 2012, we randomized dynamically by intranet-accessible software 183 men with localized prostate cancer to receive 5mg finasteride or placebo daily in a double-blind study during the 4-6weeks preceding prostatectomy. As the primary end point, the expression of a predefined molecular signature (ERβ, UBE2C, SRD5A2, and VEGF) differentiating high- and low-grade tumors in Gleason grade (GG) 3 areas of finasteride-exposed tumors from those in GG3 areas of placebo-exposed tumors, adjusted for Gleason score (GS) at prostatectomy, was compared. We also determined androgen receptor (AR) levels, Ki-67, and cleaved caspase 3 to evaluate the effects of finasteride on the expression of its downstream target, cell proliferation, and apoptosis, respectively. The expression of these markers was also compared across grades between and within treatment groups. Logistic regression was used to assess the expression of markers.FindingsWe found that the predetermined molecular signature did not distinguish GG3 from GG4 areas in the placebo group. However, AR expression was significantly lower in the GG4 areas of the finasteride group than in those of the placebo group. Within the finasteride group, AR expression was also lower in GG4 than in GG3 areas, but not significantly. Expression of cleaved caspase 3 was significantly increased in both GG3 and GG4 areas in the finasteride group compared to the placebo group, although it was lower in GG4 than in GG3 areas in both groups.InterpretationWe showed that finasteride's effect on apoptosis and AR expression is tumor grade dependent after short-term intervention. This may explain finasteride's selective suppression of low-grade tumors observed in the PCPT

The future of enterprise groupware applications

This paper provides a review of groupware technology and products. The purpose of this review is to investigate the appropriateness of current groupware technology as the basis for future enterprise systems and evaluate its role in realising, the currently emerging, Virtual Enterprise model for business organisation. It also identifies in which way current technological phenomena will transform groupware technology and will drive the development of the enterprise systems of the future

Prevention and early detection of prostate cancer

This Review was sponsored and funded by the International Society of Cancer Prevention (ISCaP), the European Association of Urology (EAU), the National Cancer Institute, USA (NCI) (grant number 1R13CA171707-01), Prostate Cancer UK, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) (grant number C569/A16477), and the Association for International Cancer Research (AICR

Design by taking perspectives: How engineers explore problems

Background: Problem exploration includes identifying, framing, and defining design problems and bounding problem spaces. Intentional and unintentional changes in problem understanding naturally occur as designers explore design problems to create solutions. Through problem exploration, new perspectives on the problem can emerge along with new and diverse ideas for solutions. By considering multiple problem perspectives varying in scope and focus, designers position themselves to increase their understandings of the “real” problem and engage in more diverse idea generation processes leading to an increasing variety of potential solutions. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to investigate systematic patterns in problem exploration in the early design phases of mechanical engineers. Design/Method: Thirty-five senior undergraduate students and experienced designers with mechanical engineering backgrounds worked individually following a think-aloud protocol. They explored problems and generated solutions for two of four randomly assigned design problems. After generating solutions, participants framed and rewrote problem statements to reflect their perspectives on the design problem their solutions addressed. Thematic analysis and a priori codes guided the identification of problem exploration patterns within and across problems. Results: The set of patterns in engineers\u27 problem exploration that emerged from the analysis documents alternative strategies in exploring problems to arrive at solutions. The results provide evidence that engineering designers, working individually, apply both problem-specific and more general strategies to explore design problems. Conclusions: Our study identified common patterns in the explorations of presented problems by individual engineering designers. The observed patterns, described as Problem Exploration Perspectives, capture alternative approaches to discovering problems and taking multiple problem perspectives during design. Learning about Problem Exploration Perspectives may be helpful in creating alternative perspectives on a design problem, potentially leading to more varied and innovative solutions. This paper concludes with an extended example illustrating the process of applying Problem Exploration Perspectives to move between problem perspectives to generate varied design outcomes

Long-Term Survival of Participants in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

In the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT), finasteride significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer but was associated with an increased risk of high-grade disease. With up to 18 years of follow-up, we analyzed rates of survival among all study participants and among those with prostate cancer

Differential Effects of Comorbidity on Antihypertensive and Glucose-Regulating Treatment in Diabetes Mellitus – A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Comorbidity is often mentioned as interfering with "optimal" treatment decisions in diabetes care. It is suggested that diabetes- related comorbidity will increase adequate treatment, whereas diabetes- unrelated comorbidity may decrease this process of care. We hypothesized that these effects differ according to expected priority of the conditions. METHODS: We evaluated the relationship between comorbidity and treatment intensification in a study of 11,248 type 2 diabetes patients using the GIANTT (Groningen Initiative to Analyse type 2 diabetes Treatment) database. We formed a cohort of patients with a systolic blood pressure >/= 140 mmHg (6,820 hypertensive diabetics), and a cohort of patients with an HbA1c >/= 7% (3,589 hyperglycemic diabetics) in 2007. We differentiated comorbidity by diabetes-related or unrelated conditions and by priority. High priority conditions include conditions that are life- interfering, incident or requiring new medication treatment. We performed Cox regression analyses to assess association with treatment intensification, defined as dose increase, start, or addition of drugs. RESULTS: In both the hypertensive and hyperglycemic cohort, only patients with incident diabetes-related comorbidity had a higher chance of treatment intensification (HR 4.48, 2.33-8.62 (p<0.001) for hypertensives; HR 2.37, 1.09-5.17 (p = 0.030) for hyperglycemics). Intensification of hypertension treatment was less likely when a new glucose-regulating drug was prescribed (HR 0.24, 0.06-0.97 (p = 0.046)). None of the prevalent or unrelated comorbidity was significantly associated with treatment intensification. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes-related comorbidity induced better risk factor treatment only for incident cases, implying that appropriate care is provided more often when complications occur. Diabetes- unrelated comorbidity did not affect hypertension or hyperglycemia management, even when it was incident or life-interfering. Thus, the observed "undertreatment" in diabetes care cannot be explained by constraints caused by such comorbidity

Surrogate markers and survival in women receiving first-line combination anthracycline chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer

Surrogate markers may help predict the effects of first-line treatment on survival. This metaregression analysis examines the relationship between several surrogate markers and survival in women with advanced breast cancer after receiving first-line combination anthracycline chemotherapy 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (FAC) or 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (FEC) . From a systematic literature review, we identified 42 randomised trials. The surrogate markers were complete or partial tumour response, progressive disease and time to progression. The treatment effect on survival was quantified by the hazard ratio. The treatment effect on each surrogate marker was quantified by the odds ratio (or ratio of median time to progression). The relationship between survival and each surrogate marker was assessed by a weighted linear regression of the hazard ratio against the odds ratio. There was a significant linear association between survival and complete or partial tumour response (P<0.001, R2=34%), complete tumour response (P=0.02, R2=12%), progressive disease (P<0.001, R2=38%) and time to progression (P<0.0001, R2=56%); R2 is the proportion of the variability in the treatment effect on survival that is explained by the treatment effect on the surrogate marker. Time to progression may be a useful surrogate marker for predicting survival in women receiving first-line anthracycline chemotherapy and could be used to estimate the survival benefit in future trials of first-line chemotherapy compared to FAC or FEC. The other markers, tumour response and progressive disease, were less good

Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change

A vast range of disorders—from indolent to fast-growing lesions—are labelled as cancer. Therefore, we believe that several changes should be made to the approach to cancer screening and care, such as use of new terminology for indolent and precancerous disorders. We propose the term indolent lesion of epithelial origin, or IDLE, for those lesions (currently labelled as cancers) and their precursors that are unlikely to cause harm if they are left untreated. Furthermore, precursors of cancer or high-risk disorders should not have the term cancer in them. The rationale for this change in approach is that indolent lesions with low malignant potential are common, and screening brings indolent lesions and their precursors to clinical attention, which leads to overdiagnosis and, if unrecognised, possible overtreatment. To minimise that potential, new strategies should be adopted to better define and manage IDLEs. Screening guidelines should be revised to lower the chance of detection of minimal-risk IDLEs and inconsequential cancers with the same energy traditionally used to increase the sensitivity of screening tests. Changing the terminology for some of the lesions currently referred to as cancer will allow physicians to shift medicolegal notions and perceived risk to reflect the evolving understanding of biology, be more judicious about when a biopsy should be done, and organise studies and registries that offer observation or less invasive approaches for indolent disease. Emphasis on avoidance of harm while assuring benefit will improve screening and treatment of patients and will be equally effective in the prevention of death from cancer