Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review
  • Published:

Measuring therapeutic efficacy in the changing paradigm of castrate-resistant prostate cancer

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 12, pages 241–246 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

One of the current challenges in the evaluation of novel agents for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer is the identification of a surrogate end point for overall survival (OS). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels have been used as a screening tool and a biomarker of response to both hormonal and cytotoxic agents. However, PSA levels do not seem to be a suitable surrogate end point for OS in trials of targeted agents for castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). These findings suggest the need for adopting measures of efficacy that more accurately reflect the mechanisms of action of these agents in phase II trials, in order to realize improvements in OS in the phase III setting. The Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2) have recently made recommendations for the design of future trials and advised that PSA levels should not be the sole criterion on which to base clinical decisions. Here, we appraise the end points that have been used in phase II and III trials in patients with CRPC, and highlight the need for the adoption of the PCWG2 guidelines, the recommendations of which include radiographic imaging, in addition to bone scintigraphy, and symptomatic or radiographic disease progression criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Prentice RL . Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria. Stat Med 1989; 8: 431–440.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Collette L . Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a surrogate end point for survival in prostate cancer clinical trials. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 6–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bubley GJ, Carducci M, Dahut W, Dawson N, Daliani D, Eisenberger M et al. Eligibility and response guidelines for phase II clinical trials in androgen-independent prostate cancer: recommendations from the Prostate-Specific Antigen Working Group. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 3461–3467.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Newling DWW . Issues with the use of prostate-specific antigen as a surrogate end point in hormone-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol Suppl 2009; 8: 13–19.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Scher HI, Mazumdar M, Kelly WK . Clinical trials in relapsed prostate cancer: defining the target. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88: 1623–1634.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Petrylak DP, Ankerst DP, Jiang CS, Tangen CM, Hussain MH, Lara PN et al. Evaluation of prostate-specific antigen declines for surrogacy in patients treated on SWOG 99-16. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98: 516–521.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tannock IF, de Wit R, Berry WR, Horti J, Pluzanska A, Chi KN et al. Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 1502–1512.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Beer TM, Ryan CW, Venner PM, Petrylak DP, Chatta GS, Ruether JD et al. Double-blinded randomized study of high-dose calcitriol plus docetaxel compared with placebo plus docetaxel in androgen-independent prostate cancer: a report from the ASCENT Investigators. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 669–674.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lin AM, Hershberg RM, Small EJ . Immunotherapy for prostate cancer using prostatic acid phosphatase loaded antigen presenting cells. Urol Oncol 2006; 24: 434–441.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. James ND, Caty A, Borre M, Zonnenberg BA, Beuzeboc P, Morris T et al. Safety and efficacy of the specific endothelin a receptor antagonist ZD4054 in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases who were pain free or mildly symptomatic: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, Phase II trial. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1112–1123.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Carducci MA, Saad F, Abrahamsson PA, Dearnaley DP, Schulman CC, North SA et al. A phase 3 randomized controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of atrasentan in men with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Cancer 2007; 110: 1959–1966.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nelson JB, Love W, Chin JL, Saad F, Schulman CC, Sleep DJ et al. Phase 3, randomized, controlled trial of atrasentan in patients with nonmetastatic, hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Cancer 2008; 113: 2478–2487.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dawson NA . Targeted therapy in prostate cancer—are we our own worst enemy? Cancer 2008; 113: 2376–2378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Scher HI, Halabi S, Tannock I, Morris M, Sternberg CN, Carducci MA et al. Design and end points of clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 1148–1159.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Scher HI, Halabi S, Tannock IF, Morris M, Sternberg CN, Carducci MA et al. Trial design for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer [reply]. J Clin Oncol 2009; 26: 3648–3649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ning YM, Gulley J, Arlen P, Parnes H, Wright J, Latham L et al. An exploratory analysis of the association between PSA Working Group I (PSAWG) progression and clinical progression (radiographic or symptomatic) in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with a docetaxel-based regimen. Genitourinary Cancers Symposium Proceedings 2009; Abst 192.

  17. Aragon-Ching JB, Jain L, Gulley JL, Arlen PM, Wright JJ, Steinberg SM et al. Final analysis of a phase II trial using sorafenib for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. BJU Int 2009; 103: 1636–1640.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Beer TM, Ryan CW . The hazards of intermediate endpoints. Cancer 2007; 110: 1877–1879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gignac GA, Morris MJ, Heller G, Schwartz LH, Scher HI . Assessing outcomes in prostate cancer clinical trials: a twenty-first century tower of Babel. Cancer 2008; 113: 966–974.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Scher HI, Warren M, Heller G . The association between measures of progression and survival in castrate-metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 1488–1492.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Armstrong AJ, Garrett-Mayer E, Ou Yang YC, Carducci MA, Tannock I, de WR et al. Prostate-specific antigen and pain surrogacy analysis in metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3965–3970.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sternberg CN, Petrylak D, Witjes F, Ferrero J, Eymard J, Falcon S et al. Satraplatin (S) demonstrates significant clinical benefits for the treatment of patients with HRPC: results of a randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25, abst 5019.

  23. Fleming TR, DeMets DL . Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med 1996; 125: 605–613.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scher HI, Morris MJ, Kelly WK, Schwartz LH, Heller G . Prostate cancer clinical trial end points: ‘RECIST’ing a step backwards. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 5223–5232.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Tombal B, Rezazadeh A, Therasse P, Van Cangh PJ, Vande BB, Lecouvet FE . Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton enables objective measurement of tumor response on prostate cancer bone metastases. Prostate 2005; 65: 178–187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I . The detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: 99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, single- and multi-field-of-view SPECT, 18F-fluoride PET, and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 287–297.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Heidenreich A . Imaging in oncological urology. Considerations: imaging in prostate cancer. In: Rosette JJMCH de la, Manyak MJ, Harisinghani MG, Wijkstra H (eds). Springer-Verlag: Heidelberg, Germany, 2009, 269–276.

  28. Osoba D, Tannock IF, Ernst DS, Neville AJ . Health-related quality of life in men with metastatic prostate cancer treated with prednisone alone or mitoxantrone and prednisone. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1654–1663.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rock EP, Scott JA, Kennedy DL, Sridhara R, Pazdur R, Burke LB . Challenges to use of health-related quality of life for Food and Drug Administration approval of anticancer products. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2007; 37: 27–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Joly F, Vardy J, Pintilie M, Tannock IF . Quality of life and/or symptom control in randomized clinical trials for patients with advanced cancer. Ann Oncol 2007; 18: 1935–1942.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Saad F, Gleason DM, Murray R, Tchekmedyian S, Venner P, Lacombe L et al. Long-term efficacy of zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal complications in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96: 879–882.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Danila DC, Heller G, Gignac GA, Gonzalez-Espinoza R, Anand A, Tanaka E et al. Circulating tumor cell number and prognosis in progressive castration-resistant prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 7053–7058.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Moreno JG, Miller MC, Gross S, Allard WJ, Gomella LG, Terstappen LW . Circulating tumor cells predict survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Urology 2005; 65: 713–718.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. de Bono JS, Scher HI, Montgomery RB, Parker C, Miller MC, Tissing H et al. Circulating tumor cells predict survival benefit from treatment in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 6302–6309.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ang JE, Olmos D, de Bono JS . CYP17 blockade by abiraterone: further evidence for frequent continued hormone-dependence in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 2009; 100: 671–675.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Kirby RS, Fitzpatrick JM, Irani J . Prostate cancer diagnosis in the new millennium: strengths and weaknesses of prostate-specific antigen and the discovery and clinical evaluation of prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3). BJU Int 2009; 103: 441–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sreekumar A, Poisson LM, Rajendiran TM, Khan AP, Cao Q, Yu J et al. Metabolomic profiles delineate potential role for sarcosine in prostate cancer progression. Nature 2009; 457: 910–914.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Phillips J, Eaton CL, Proctor L, Sokhi D, Cronin A, Vickers A et al. Total human kallikrein 2—a potentially useful serum marker of bone metastasis and biochemical failure in prostate cancer. Eur Urol Supp 2009; 8: 295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Foley R, Hollywood D, Lawler M . Molecular pathology of prostate cancer: the key to identifying new biomarkers of disease. Endocr Relat Cancer 2004; 11: 477–488.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tomlins SA, Rhodes DR, Perner S, Dhanasekaran SM, Mehra R, Sun XW et al. Recurrent fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer. Science 2005; 310: 644–648.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Barry M, Perner S, Demichelis F, Rubin MA . TMPRSS2-ERG fusion heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer: clinical and biologic implications. Urology 2007; 70: 630–633.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Postbus, Nijmegen, The Netherlands,

    P F Mulders & J A Schalken

Authors
  1. P F Mulders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J A Schalken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P F Mulders.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mulders, P., Schalken, J. Measuring therapeutic efficacy in the changing paradigm of castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 12, 241–246 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2009.25

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2009.25

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links