Project description:Opinion statementProstate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men, and cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death in patients with prostate cancer. Androgen deprivation therapy, the cornerstone of prostate cancer treatment, has been associated with adverse cardiovascular events. Emerging data supports decreased cardiovascular risk of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared to agonists. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing the relative safety of different modalities of androgen deprivation therapy. Racial disparities in cardiovascular outcomes in prostate cancer patients are starting to be explored. An intriguing inquiry connects androgen deprivation therapy with reduced risk of COVID-19 infection susceptibility and severity. Recognition of the cardiotoxicity of androgen deprivation therapy and aggressive risk factor modification are crucial for optimal patient care.
Project description:BackgroundProlonged androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is favored over short-term use in patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer (PC).ObjectivesThis study sought to compare cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality among patients with PC with and without ADT exposure and to explore how duration of ADT exposure influences CRF and CV mortality.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of patients referred for exercise treadmill testing (ETT) after a PC diagnosis. PC risk classification was based on Gleason score (GS): high risk if GS ≥8; intermediate risk if GS = 7; and low risk if GS <7. CRF was categorized by metabolic equivalents (METs): METs >8 defined as good CRF and METs ≤8 as reduced CRF. ADT exposure was categorized as short term (≤6 months) versus prolonged (>6 months).ResultsA total of 616 patients underwent an ETT a median of 4.8 years (interquartile range: 2.0, 7.9 years) after PC diagnosis. Of those, 150 patients (24.3%) received ADT prior to the ETT; 99 with short-term and 51 with prolonged exposure. 504 patients (81.8%) had ≥2 CV risk factors. Prolonged ADT was associated with reduced CRF (odds ratio [OR]: 2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.31 to 5.61; p = 0.007) and increased CV mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.87; 95% CI: 1.16 to 12.96; p = 0.028) in adjusted analyses. Although the association between short-term ADT exposure and reduced CRF was of borderline significance (OR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.00 to 2.94; p = 0.052), there was no association with CV mortality (HR: 1.60; 95% CI: 0.51 to 5.01; p = 0.420) in adjusted Cox regression models.ConclusionsAmong patients with PC and high baseline CV risk, prolonged ADT exposure was associated with reduced CRF and increased CV mortality.
Project description:Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the gold standard treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer (PC). Emerging evidence has documented a tight association between ADT and body composition, along with metabolic profile impairment. These alterations might underpin the observed ADT-related increase in cardiovascular (CV) and thromboembolic (venous thromboembolism, VTE) mortality and morbidity. However, the specific mechanisms underlying these associations have not yet been completely elucidated. In the present review we summarize and discussed the available evidence linking ADT to increased cardio-metabolic risk, using both preclinical and clinical data. When possible, meta-analytic studies were preferred. Preclinical evidence, using a rabbit model of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue-induced hypogonadism, indicates that the induced condition is associated with a dramatic increase in visceral adiposity and with an impairment of acetylcholine induced vascular relaxation, along with an increased propensity towards fatty liver. This suggests a direct role of ADT in inducing a worsened metabolic profile. In contrast, available clinical data are not sufficient to clarify a direct pathogeniclink between reduced testosterone (T) and altered metabolism. In fact, although T deprivation is associated with an altered metabolism, it is possible that the association between ADT and CV or VTE risk could simply be the result of a selection bias, related to the poor health status of patients with advanced PC. Despite the aforementioned considerations, all patients who are candidatesfor ADT should be screened for CV risk factors at baseline and monitored during the therapy. Life-style modifications and physical exercise are strongly encouraged.
Project description:PURPOSE Use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may be associated with an increased risk of diabetes mellitus but the risk of both acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and cardiovascular mortality remain controversial because few outcomes and conflicting findings have been reported. We sought to clarify whether ADT is associated with these outcomes in a large, representative cohort. METHODS Using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, men age 66 years or older with prostate cancer given continuous ADT for at least 6 months or who underwent bilateral orchiectomy (n = 19,079) were matched with men with prostate cancer who had never received ADT. Treated and untreated groups were matched 1:1 (ie, hard-matched) on age, prior cancer treatment, and year of diagnosis and propensity-matched on comorbidities, medications, cardiovascular risk factors, prior fractures, and socioeconomic variables. Primary outcomes were development of AMI, sudden cardiac death, and diabetes. Fragility fracture was also examined. Results The cohort was observed for a mean of 6.47 years. In time-to-event analyses, ADT use was associated with an increased risk of diabetes (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.21) and fragility fracture (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.53 to 1.77) but not with AMI (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.00) or sudden cardiac death (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.10). Increasing duration of ADT was associated with an excess risk of fragility fractures and diabetes but not cardiac outcomes. CONCLUSION Continuous ADT use for at least 6 months in older men is associated with an increased risk of diabetes and fragility fracture but not AMI or sudden cardiac death.
Project description:In the increasingly complex world of modern medicine, relationship-centered, team-based care is important in geriatric cardiology. Palliative cardiovascular care plays a central role in defining the scope and timing of medical therapies and in coordinating symptom-targeted care in line with patient wishes, values, and preferences. Palliative care addresses advance care planning, symptom relief and caregiver/family support and seeks to ameliorate all forms of suffering, including physical, psychological, and spiritual. Although palliative care grew out of the hospice movement and has traditionally been associated with care at the end of life, the current model acknowledges that palliative care can be delivered concurrent with invasive, life-prolonging interventions. As the population ages, patients with serious cardiovascular disease increasingly suffer from noncardiac, multimorbid conditions and become eligible for interventions that palliate symptoms but also prolong life. Management of implanted cardiac support devices at the end of life, whether rhythm management devices or mechanical circulatory support devices, can involve a host of complexities in decisions to deactivate, timing of deactivation and even the mechanics of deactivation. Studies on palliative care interventions have demonstrated clear improvements in quality of life and are more mixed on life prolongation and cost savings. There is and will remain a dearth of clinicians with specialist palliative care training. Therefore, cardiovascular clinicians have a role to play in provision of practical, "primary" palliative care.
Project description:ImportanceAndrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves survival outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radiotherapy (RT). Whether this benefit differs between patients with Gleason grade group (GG) 4 (formerly Gleason score 8) and GG 5 (formerly Gleason score 9-10) disease remains unknown.ObjectiveTo determine whether the effectiveness of ADT duration varies between patients with GG 4 vs GG 5 PCa.Design, setting, and participantsTraditional and network individual patient data meta-analyses of 992 patients (593 GG 4 and 399 GG 5) who were enrolled in 6 randomized clinical trials were carried out.Main outcomes and measuresMultivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to obtain hazard ratio (HR) estimates of ADT duration effects on overall survival (OS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Cause-specific competing risk models were used to estimate HRs for cancer-specific survival (CSS). The interaction of ADT with GS was incorporated into the multivariable models. Traditional and network meta-analysis frameworks were used to compare outcomes of patients treated with RT alone, short-term ADT (STADT), long-term ADT (LTADT), and lifelong ADT.ResultsFive hundred ninety-three male patients (mean age, 70 years; range, 43-88 years) with GG 4 and 399 with GG 5 were identified. Median follow-up was 6.4 years. Among GG 4 patients, LTADT and STADT improved OS over RT alone (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26-0.70 and HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38-0.93, respectively; P = .03 for both), whereas lifelong ADT did not (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.54-1.30; P = .44). Among GG 5 patients, lifelong ADT improved OS (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31-0.76; P = .04), whereas neither LTADT nor STADT did (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.45-1.44 and HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.69-1.87; P = .45 and P = .64, respectively). Among all patients, and among those receiving STADT, GG 5 patients had inferior OS compared with GG 4 patients (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.47 and HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05-1.88, respectively; P = .02). There was no significant OS difference between GG 5 and GG 4 patients receiving LTADT or lifelong ADT (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.89-1.65 and HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.53-1.37; P = .23 and P = .52, respectively).Conclusions and relevanceThese data suggest that prolonged durations of ADT improve survival outcomes in both GG 4 disease and GG 5 disease, albeit with different optimal durations. Strategies to maintain the efficacy of ADT while minimizing its duration (potentially with enhanced potency agents) should be investigated.
Project description:Androgen deprivation therapy is a cornerstone of prostate cancer treatment. Pharmacological androgen deprivation includes gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonism and antagonism, androgen receptor inhibition, and CYP17 (cytochrome P450 17A1) inhibition. Studies in the past decade have raised concerns about the potential for androgen deprivation therapy to increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events such as myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular mortality, possibly by exacerbating cardiovascular risk factors. In this review, we summarize existing data on the cardiovascular effects of androgen deprivation therapy. Among the therapies, abiraterone stands out for increasing risk of cardiac events in meta-analyses of both randomized controlled trials and observational studies. We find a divergence between observational studies, which show consistent positive associations between androgen deprivation therapy use and cardiovascular disease, and randomized controlled trials, which do not show these associations reproducibly.
Project description:BackgroundPrevious evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain.MethodsRADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047.FindingsBetween Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths.InterpretationCompared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy.FundingCancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.
Project description:Immune checkpoint inhibitors propelled the field of oncology with clinical responses in many different tumor types. Superior overall survival over chemotherapy has been reported in various metastatic cancers. Furthermore, prolonged disease-free and overall survival have been reported in the adjuvant treatment of stage III melanoma. Unfortunately, a substantial portion of patients do not obtain a durable response. Therefore, additional strategies for the treatment of cancer are still warranted. One of the numerous options is dendritic cell vaccination, which employs the central role of dendritic cells in activating the innate and adaptive immune system. Over the years, dendritic cell vaccination was shown to be able to induce an immunologic response, to increase the number of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and to provide overall survival benefit for at least a selection of patients in phase II studies. However, with the success of immune checkpoint inhibition in several malignancies and considering the plethora of other treatment modalities being developed, it is of utmost importance to delineate the position of dendritic cell therapy in the treatment landscape of cancer. In this review, we address some key questions regarding the integration of dendritic cell vaccination in future cancer treatment paradigms.