Anti-Androgen Therapy Suspension following Prolonged Clinical and Biochemical Response: Outcomes in a Series of Elderly Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-245
Author(s):  
Bruno Castagneto ◽  
Ilaria Stevani ◽  
Valentino Ferraris ◽  
Laura Giorcelli ◽  
Massimo Perachino
2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 313-313
Author(s):  
Simon Yuen Fai Fu ◽  
Paula Barlow ◽  
Carmel Maree Jacobs ◽  
Fritha J. Hanning ◽  
Peter C.C. Fong

313 Background: Docetaxel (D) chemotherapy is a standard of care in men with advanced prostate cancer (APC), both metastatic castration sensitive (CS) and castration resistant (CR) disease. The risk of significant toxicities may deter D use in elderly patients. We aim to evaluate the real world efficacy and tolerability of D in men with APC. Methods: Between 04/2014 and 05/2017, data from men aged ≥75 with APC treated at Auckland City Hospital with 3 weekly D were retrospectively collected from the genitourinary medical oncology database. Results: 33 (CS 12, CR 21) men were identified. 70% had PSA decline ≥50% (CS 92%, CR 57%). Median time to next line of therapy was 0.5 y in the CR arm. One third (n = 2/6) of CR patients on opioid had improved pain control with D. 75% had upfront dose reduction (DR). The median dose intensity was 21 mg/m2/wk (CS) and 18 mg/m2/wk (CR). 9 patients had dose escalation after upfront DR, all but 3 needed DR later, and none was escalated to 75 mg/m2. 58% (CS 75%, CR 48%) completed 6 cycles, and only 6% (n = 2) completed 6 cycles at 75 mg/m2. 24% had ≥G3 hematological toxicities. Febrile neutropenia rate was 12% (CS 8%, CR 14%). Pegfilgrastim was used in 1 CS and 1 CR men. Admission rate was 39% (CS 25%, CR 48%), 77% (CS 100%, CR 70%) was treatment related, and 23% (CR 30%) due to malignancy. 15% (CS 25%, CR 9%) required RBC transfusions. 33% CR men progressed while on treatment, and two deaths from pneumonitis and disease progression were noted. Conclusions: Docetaxel is active in elderly men with APC. Toxicities are manageable but can be life-threatening. Admission is frequent especially in CR patients. Proactive dose reduction should be considered to balance benefits vs. risks in this population. [Table: see text]


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 1549-1555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin A. Spencer ◽  
Jin Joo Shim ◽  
Dawn L. Hershman ◽  
Brad E. Zacharia ◽  
Emerson A. Lim ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document