
Phase II Prostate Trials Use Pre-Prostatectomy Study Design to Identify Promising Prevention Agents and Biomarkers
A short window of opportunity
between the histologic diagnosis of
prostate cancer and definitive treatment
(prostatectomy) is being used
in several phase II prostate cancer
trials to identify promising prevention
agents and biomarker end points.
The goal is to obtain key information
about the effects of novel study agents
on intermediate end point biomarkers
(IEBs) and about the distribution of
the agent in prostate tissue.
Because prostate cancer has a long
natural history, IEBs such as serum
markers (e.g., prostate-specific antigen
[PSA]), histopathological markers,
or tissue-based markers are used to
find preliminary evidence of efficacy
or biologic activity in phase II trials.
Evaluation of these agents may lead to
the next generation of phase III chemoprevention
trials for prostate cancer.
In this "pre-prostatectomy" trial design,
men with early-stage prostate cancer
are randomly assigned to receive the
study agent or placebo for about 3 to
6 weeks between a diagnostic biopsy
and a prostatectomy. Investigators
have direct access to prostatic tissue
from transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies and the entire gland
following surgery, to systematically
assess the biologic activity of agents
in the target organ.
This clinical model has the advantage
of allowing rapid screening of agents
in relatively small, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot trials with 60
subjects or less and that are conducted
within the standard of care of patients
scheduled for radical prostatectomy,
according to Dr. Ronald Lieberman,
program director in NCI's Division
of Cancer Prevention (DCP) Prostate
and Urologic Cancer Research Group.
A variety of agents are being tested
with this phase II trial design, including
androgen receptor antagonists, antiinflammatory
agents (selective COX-2
inhibitors), vitamin D analogs, and
micronutrient antioxidants. (See table.)
"The phase II pre-prostatectomy
cancer prevention trials are a practical
and efficient way to determine
whether the chemopreventive agent
concentrates in a man's prostate and
has a biologic effect there. This is an
important step in selecting agents
for more definitive prostate cancer
prevention trials," said DCP director
Dr. Peter Greenwald.
One of these studies, for example, uses
high-grade prostatic intraepithelial
neoplasia (HGPIN) as a primary end
point for toremifene.
Since
there is growing
evidence
that estrogens
play a role in
the development
of prostate
cancer,
this study is
evaluating the
effects of toremifene,
a selective estrogen receptor
modulator. The trial is comparing
the percent of HGPIN present in the
radical prostatectomy tissue of patients
with stage I or II adenocarcinoma of
the prostate who were treated with
toremifene orally once a day for up to
6 weeks, against the tissue of patients
who received observation alone prior
to prostatectomy.
Toremifene is the lead chemopreventive
agent being developed by GTx,
Inc., a Tennessee-based biotechnology
company that focuses on men's
health issues and is collaborating with
DCP on this phase II study. Dr. Joel
Nelson, principal investigator for the
toremifene study at Hillman Cancer
Center at the University of Pittsburgh
Cancer Institute, noted that studies
using this trial design are examining
human tissues after defined exposure
to a chemopreventive agent. The 4-week to 8-week lag time from diagnosis
of prostate cancer until surgery
provides a "unique window of opportunity
to examine alterations in the
prostate after exposure," he said.
Assuming that a chemopreventive
agent will induce alterations after
short exposure, the strategy is to
identify those alterations and extrapolate
to a longer exposure, according to
Dr. Nelson. This is significantly easier
and more cost effective, particularly
in this case when there are so many
compelling chemopreventive agents.
But the challenges of the model, using
alterations in tissues as evidence for
chemoprevention, remain unproven,
he noted. The studies are clearly
hypothesis generating, yet they must
start somewhere, he stressed.
Dr. Jeri Kim, assistant professor in the
Department of Genitourinary Medical
Oncology at The University of Texas M.
D. Anderson Cancer Center, completed
the first phase II trial using this model
to study selenium and vitamin E, recruiting
48 patients in 18 months. (See "A conversation with….") The trial used
the same regimen currently being used
in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer
Prevention Trial (SELECT) to see if
researchers could identify potential
surrogate end point biomarkers in that
large study. The analysis is still ongoing.
Dr. Lieberman noted that the preprostatectomy
clinical model provides
a way to evaluate both the structure/
anatomy of the epithelial compartments
(i.e., normal, precancer, and
cancer) and the biology/function
(specifically, the interface between the
epithelium and stroma), which in turn
allows investigators to assess the cellular,
molecular, and biochemical effects
of the experimental agent.
"Furthermore, effects on biomarker
modulation can be correlated with
changes in histology, proliferation,
apoptosis, angiogenesis, and specific
molecular targets related to the presumptive
mechanism of action(s) of
the agent," Dr. Lieberman added.
Evaluating agents for prostate cancer
prevention is a major DCP research
focus. For instance, the SELECT
study has been enrolling a record
number of participants to determine
if these two dietary supplements can
protect against the clinical diagnosis
of prostate cancer and the phase III
Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial
(PCPT) has shown that finasteride
can reduce the chances of getting
prostate cancer by nearly 25 percent.
|