Circulating Tumor Cell Number as a Response Measure of Prolonged Survival for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Is Real Circulating Tumor Cell Number Superior to Prostate-Specific Antigen?

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (22) ◽  
pp. 2353-2354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuanli Ren ◽  
Chongxu Han ◽  
Daxin Wang ◽  
Hui Chen
2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 204-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gurveen Kaur ◽  
Beerinder Singh ◽  
Himisha Beltran ◽  
Naveed Hassan Akhtar ◽  
David M. Nanus ◽  
...  

204 Background: Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is an aggressive variant of prostate cancer. Circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts as measured by CellSearch are prognostic for large groups with metastatic prostate cancer (PC), but are not well described in NEPC. Methods: With institutional review board approval, we retrospectively identified patients with metastatic PC and available CTC enumeration (CellSearch methodology) and compared counts/7.5 mL blood and overall survival (OS), measured from the first recorded CTC count until death or last follow up. Entry criteria for clinical trials were used to define NEPC, including histology (small cell/neuroendocrine carcinoma or adenocarcinoma with more than 50% NE staining), serum chromogranin greater than 5x ULN and/or neuron specific enolase greater than 2x ULN, and/or predominant liver/brain metastases with lack of prostate-specific antigen [Beltran ASCO 2013, clinicaltrials.gov NCT01799278 ]. Frequency of detectable and unfavorable counts was tabulated and OS was compared across groups. Results: Sixty one patients were identified: 21 NEPC with median age 73.7 and 40 patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) with median age 73.9 over contemporary time periods 2009 to 2012. Median OS for the entire group was 22.6 months (mo), with a trend for shorter OS in NEPC (20.7 mo) than CRPC (22.7 mo), p=0.11. 47.6% of NEPC and 55% of CRPC had detectable CTC counts (p=0.58); 38.1% of NEPC and 40.0% of CRPC had greater than or equal to five CTCs (p=0.89). CTC counts of 0 to 4 versus greater than or equal to five were prognostic for both groups: NEPC with 0 to 4 CTCs had median OS of 22.6 versus 6.6 mo for CTCs greater than or equal to 5 (p<0.001) and CRPC with 0 to 4 CTCs median OS not reached (mean 40.6 mo) versus 11.2 mo for those with greater than or equal to five CTCs (p<0.001). Conclusions: Patients with NEPC have similar frequency of detectable and elevated CTC counts by CellSearch methodology as compared to an overall CRPC population. CTC counts are prognostic for both groups.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 572-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glenn Heller ◽  
Robert McCormack ◽  
Thian Kheoh ◽  
Arturo Molina ◽  
Matthew R. Smith ◽  
...  

Purpose Measures of response that are clinically meaningful and occur early are an unmet need in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer clinical research and practice. We explored, using individual patient data, week 13 circulating tumor cell (CTC) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response end points in five prospective randomized phase III trials that enrolled a total of 6,081 patients—COU-AA-301, AFFIRM, ELM-PC-5, ELM-PC-4, and COMET-1— ClinicalTrials.Gov identifiers: NCT00638690, NCT00974311, NCT01193257, NCT01193244, and NCT01605227, respectively. Methods Eight response end points were explored. CTC nonzero at baseline and 0 at 13 weeks (CTC0); CTC conversion (≥ 5 CTCs at baseline, ≤ 4 at 13 weeks—the US Food and Drug Administration cleared response measure); a 30%, 50%, and 70% decrease in CTC count; and a 30%, 50%, and 70% decrease in PSA level. Patients missing week-13 values were considered nonresponders. The discriminatory strength of each end point with respect to overall survival in each trial was assessed using the weighted c-index. Results Of the eight response end points, CTC0 and CTC conversion had the highest weighted c-indices, with smaller standard deviations. For CTC0, the mean (standard deviation) was 0.81 (0.04); for CTC conversion, 0.79 (0.03); for 30% decrease in CTC count, 0.72 (0.06); for 50% decrease in CTC count, 0.72 (0.06); for 70% decrease in CTC count, 0.73 (0.05); for 30% decrease in PSA level, 0.71 (0.03); for 50% decrease in PSA level, 0.72 (0.06); and for 70% decrease in PSA level, 0.74 (0.05). Seventy-five percent of eligible patients could be evaluated with the CTC0 end point, compared with 51% with the CTC conversion end point. Conclusion The CTC0 and CTC conversion end points had the highest discriminatory power for overall survival. Both are robust and meaningful response end points for early-phase metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer clinical trials. CTC0 is applicable to a significantly higher percentage of patients than CTC conversion.


2007 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 7053-7058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel C. Danila ◽  
Glenn Heller ◽  
Gretchen A. Gignac ◽  
Rita Gonzalez-Espinoza ◽  
Aseem Anand ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shotaro Nakanishi ◽  
Masato Goya ◽  
Mitsuyoshi Tamaki ◽  
Takuma Oshiro ◽  
Seiichi Saito

Abstract Objective: To date, there are no useful markers for predicting the prognosis of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). We evaluated the effect of early changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) progression and overall survival (OS) in mHSPC patients. Results: In 71 primary mHSPC patients treated with ADT, the median times to CRPC and OS were 15 months and 92 months, respectively. In multivariate analysis, a Gleason score of ≥8 (p = 0.004), an extent of disease value (EOD) of ≥2 (p = 0.004), and a 3-month PSA level >1% of the pretreatment level (p = 0.017) were independent predictors of shorter time to CRPC. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was feasible at 0.822. For OS, a 3-month PSA level >1% of the pretreatment level was an independent predictor of time to CRPC (p = 0.004).Three factors were independent predictors of shorter time to CRPC. A 3-month PSA level >1% of the pretreatment level correlated with poor a prognosis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document