Prostatepedia

Conversations With Prostate Cancer Experts


Leave a comment

Cancer and Finances Don’t Mix, but There is Hope: Jamie Bearse

Mr. Jamie Bearse is the President and CEO of ZERO — The End of Prostate Cancer (www.zerocancer. org). ZERO is a United States-based nonprofit with a mission to end prostate cancer.

Mr. Bearse talks to us about prostate cancer and finances.

It’s frightening to hear that you have cancer. A prostate cancer diagnosis can be devastating physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. Coping with a shocking diagnosis is only made more complicated by having to make important decisions and coping with the costs that come with those decisions.

Stress and anxiety over fighting prostate cancer and choosing the best treatment pathway are complicated enough. Many patients also struggle to meet the financial burden that comes with cancer. Out-of-pocket costs to fight cancer are a significant barrier to survival as studies show that cancer patients are two-and-a-half-times more likely to declare bankruptcy than those without cancer. In addition, one out of three patients turns to family and friends for financial support during their cancer journey. These economic struggles can cause treatment nonadherence and lifestyle changes that can worsen a patient’s outcome.

I frequently hear from patients about their financial struggles in their prostate cancer journey. There are countless stories about men dropping off treatment to keep their family’s financial future secure or families moving into campgrounds because they lost a home to the financial burden of fighting cancer. But enough is enough. We’re taking action.

We created ZERO360 a free, one-on-one comprehensive patient support program designed to help men find financial aid and other resources that best fit their individual needs. ZERO360 is a patient navigation program that connects patients with trained case managers who can help them find copay and other financial assistance to address medical debt and other costs incurred during treatment. This can include free or reduced treatment access, financial support for treatments through copayment, coinsurance, premium or deductible assistance programs, insurance navigation and benefit help, as well as resources for cost-of-living support among other assistance on a case-by-case basis.

ZERO360 helps the men who need it the most. Over the last 18 months, more than 830 men have benefited from the program, with more than $570,000 in financial relief secured for patients. From the newly diagnosed to men who have been battling their disease for years—many are Stage IV patients on a combination of expensive therapies—this is the type of comprehensive support that men need. Whether they need help understanding coverage options, finding sources of financial aid, or resolving issues with private insurance, ZERO360 case managers are trained professionals who are experts in addressing needs and identifying resources for men.

In addition to ZERO’s comprehensive program, additional resources are available to help men access their prescribed treatment as well as pay for any ancillary expenses. Programs that help with prescribed medications include patient assistance (free drug) programs that provide free product for uninsured and underinsured patients; charitable copay assistance program that provide assistance to federally and commercially-insured patients; and manufacturer copay cards that provide assistance to commercially insured patients. There are also organizations that often have funds available for copay assistance, treatment, transportation, and other ancillary expenses. You can find a full list of available resources on our website at http://www.zerocancer.org/ financial-resources.

When considering treatment and the cost of care, it’s important to learn as much as possible about treatment costs, insurance options, and other treatment-related expenses. No matter where a man is on his prostate cancer journey, there are resources available to help. Call 844- 244-1309 (toll-free) to get started with ZERO360.

You never have to fight prostate cancer alone; we’re here for you, every step of the way.

Not a member? Join us.

 


Leave a comment

Dr. Arthur Burnett On Erectile Dysfunction + Cancer Treatment

Dr. Arthur Burnett is the Director of both the Basic Science Laboratory in Neurourology and the Sexual Medicine Fellowship Program at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.

Prostatepedia spoke with him about erectile dysfunction (ED) and prostate cancer treatments.

PHOTOJan18 copy

Not a member? Join us.

Why did you become a doctor?

Dr. Arthur Burnett: I was inspired by seeing other individuals through either the media or just personal contacts who were physicians at the time. I was a young man, perhaps in my teenage years, when I was inspired by the impact the profession allowed a physician to have on people’s lives. I sensed that I had a talent for that sort of thing and certainly had an aptitude for science and medicine as the years went on. That was the groundwork for my continuing on to do the appropriate academic training to become a physician.

Have you ever had any particular patients whose cases changed how you see yourself as a doctor or how you approach the art of medicine?

Dr. Burnett: I think patients, in general, have been reinforcing in many respects. There are certainly patients whose case stories inspire you by their humanness and just by the fact that they connect with you as a person and show compassion and caring themselves. That is what has been inspirational about being a physician.

How common is ED after prostate cancer?

Dr. Burnett: Prostate cancer in and of itself is not necessarily connected with ED; it’s more the treatments unless the cancer really is at a more advanced stage. Advanced prostate cancer can have either local effects because of cancer progression on structures of the pelvis or systemic effects—that is, it progresses and then weakens the person’s body.

Treatments that reflect either local treatments or more systemic, or body-wide, treatments can have a negative impact on one’s sexual function, including erectile physiology or erectile functions. Local treatments include surgery and radiation as conventional interventions. More systemic therapies include various kinds of hormone suppressive agents, or even chemotherapies, that can adversely affect the physiology of the erection and impact how nerves, blood vessels, and hormones interact to bring about an erection response.

Are there any steps a man can take before he starts treatment that might help prevent problems after?

Dr. Burnett: I certainly believe that’s so. I think patients need to be informed about the factors that can adversely affect erectile function. I think patients assume all too often that the physician is responsible for their best health. But patients also need to recognize that their best health status is also key to retaining function in the face of any treatments we can bring.

Being healthier and physically fit— not out of shape, not overweight, not a cigarette smoker—can increase your likelihood of preserving better health in the face of our treatments. Those patients who do not observe these kinds of health habits are setting themselves up to have less reserve function in the face of our treatments.

Not just in terms of ED, but in terms of general recovery?

Dr. Burnett: Absolutely. Even more specifically, because we’re talking about erectile function, those patients who are out of shape, who are smokers, who have adverse health conditions that they may not have control over, are not helping themselves with regard to their erection function as well as to their overall body health.

What could you say to a man who brings up the subject of ED with his doctor and finds that the conversation isn’t as in-depth as he would like? What do you suggest he do? See another doctor? See a specialist in ED?

Dr. Burnett: I think that’s an all-too-often scenario, that sometimes the care provider is neglectful about some of the basic aspects of a person’s health status. As the care provider himself is certainly attentive to his own sexual function, he should be aware of that for the patient. All too often, that’s not done. My advice would be to tell the patient that he should go ahead and be assertive or proactive about asking about these sorts of things and really inquire.

An informed patient, perhaps with this kind of communication I’m sharing, will be empowered to communicate that this is important to him. While he is seeking the best intervention for his cancer management, all aspects need to be put on the table for discussion. Ask that care provider to help address these things. If that care provider is not able to address it, ask him who else can be of service, as part of the care team perhaps, to address these problems or potential problems as they may arise expectedly with interventions.

What treatments are available for men suffering from ED after prostate cancer treatment? Are there some treatments that are more effective after surgery or radiation or hormonal therapy?

Dr. Burnett: We have a host of treatments that are available and can be offered for managing ED in this scenario, as much as for any presentation of ED in our modern times. We’re certainly much better in terms of what we can offer medically than where we were a generation ago, but we still have interventions that largely are addressing the symptom presentation of erection dysfunction; they don’t necessarily correct the erection disorders. They treat the symptomatic presentation of a man saying, “I cannot get an erection, and what do you have to offer?” These interventions, more or less, are used on demand to help him achieve an erection response when needed.

These therapies range from the oral medications that are very effective and are FDA approved, to semi-intrusive interventions brought to the genital area in the form of penile injection therapy or vacuum erection device therapy. We also have penile prosthesis surgery, which obviously is much more invasive. Some patients either prefer this approach or they find that the other options are just ineffective or contraindicated.

We have to understand the patient’s case, his preferences, and the severity of his ED. Certain men who’ve had prostate cancer treatments may have more severe erection dysfunction and may not respond well to oral therapies such as Viagra (sildenafil) and Cialis (tadalafil). That patient may be inclined to move forward with some of these somewhat more intrusive, or even invasive, surgical options if needed.

Do you have any advice for men who either are worried about ED before treatment or who are already suffering from ED after treatment?

Dr. Burnett: The sobering truth is that some of the interventions for managing prostate cancer can have adverse effects on your sexual function. At the same time, understand that we have interventions to address ED. Fear of losing one’s erections hopefully should not lead one to avoid proper treatment.

As one patient quipped to me once in the past: “The ultimate form of ED is death.” Not addressing your cancer and not being around for your loved ones is certainly not the best option to pursue. You have to be attentive to addressing your disease but also recognize that we can address your ED or other sexual dysfunctions. Know that these interventions can be sought amidst the treatment for the prostate cancer.

Subscribe to read the rest of this month’s conversations on erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer.


Leave a comment

Dr. Snuffy Myers On ED After Treatment

In September, we’re talking about erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer treatment.

Dr. Charles Snuffy Myers frames this month’s conversations.

Not a member? Join us.

Pp_Sept_2018_V4_N1_Thumb

Most men with prostate cancer have concerns about sexual function because diminished erectile dysfunction is a frequent side effect of the most widely used treatments. Additionally, as men get older they often have issues with erectile dysfunction even if they do not have prostate cancer. In fact, prostate cancer and its treatments are not the major cause of male sexual dysfunction. The two most common causes are diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

One of the more common mistakes physicians make is to attribute all medical problems to the cancer and its treatment. Men with prostate cancer often suffer from undiagnosed or under-treated diabetes or cardiovascular disease. For this reason, newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients should be evaluated for these two diseases. This is especially true if you are likely to need hormonal therapy, as this treatment can exacerbate both diseases.

Several drugs used to treat cardiovascular disease and diabetes may well have a favorable impact on the clinical course of prostate cancer, including the statins used to lower cholesterol, ARBs used to treat hypertension, and metformin used to treat diabetes. With this in mind, there should be no hesitation to treat diabetes and cardiovascular disease appropriately in men with prostate cancer.

Standard treatment of erectile function often centers on the use of Viagra (sildenafil), Levitra (vardenafil), Cialis (tadalafil), or related drugs. Erections are normally triggered by dilation of the arteries that supply the penis. This is caused by the release of nitric oxide, a powerful vasodilator. Viagra (sildenafil) and related drugs make the arteries to the penis more sensitive to the action of nitric oxide. However, this effect is not limited to arteries in the penis but also develop in arteries elsewhere. As a result, some patients experience symptoms of low blood pressure and facial flushing. Drugs that release nitric oxide, such as nitroglycerine, can cause severe hypotension when co-administered with Viagra (sildenafil) or related drugs.

These drugs can be administered in a single dose shortly before sex or at much lower doses chronically. There is some evidence that chronic low dose administration is more effective for penile rehabilitation after surgery or radiation. There is a biochemical rationale for this. Arterial health appears to be at least partially supported by chronic release of nitric oxide and these drugs may augment that effect.

There are men who do not adequately respond to oral drugs, the vacuum pump, or penile injections. In this situation, the penile implant offers a reasonable option. In skilled hands, this procedure is usually very effective. Unfortunately, too few patients select this path.

Treatment for erectile dysfunction has improved dramatically over the past two decades. Most men with erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer treatment can recover sufficient function to have a sex life, but treatment needs to be initiated in a timely fashion. It is also important to not ignore aggressive options like penile injection or penile implant.

Join us to read this month’s conversations about erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer treatment.


Leave a comment

Switching from One Chemo Drug to Another

Dr. Emmanuel Antonarakis is an Associate Professor of Oncology and Urology at the Johns Hopkins University Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Prostatepedia spoke with him recently about his work on the benefit of switching men from Taxotere (docetaxel) to Jevtana (cabazitaxel)— or vice versa—if his PSA doesn’t go down by 30% in the first twelve weeks of treatment.

You’ve published a paper on switching patients from Taxotere (docetaxel) to Jevtana (cabazitaxel) and vice versa. What is the thinking behind switching chemotherapeutic agents? Why would you want to switch agents earlier as opposed to when the first chemotherapy drug stops working?

Dr. Emmanuel Antonarakis: The motivation behind this paper was that the FDA-approved recommended dosing schedule for both Taxotere (docetaxel) and Jevtana (cabazitaxel) is a course of ten doses, given three weeks apart. When patients begin FDA-approved Taxotere (docetaxel) or FDA approved Jevtana (cabazitaxel), they’re often told by their oncologists that they should expect to receive this chemotherapy once every three weeks for up to ten doses. A patient may not receive ten doses or might stop the therapy before he reaches ten doses because he cannot tolerate the therapy and has unmanageable side effects, or his cancer begins to progress before he ever get to dose number ten. If his PSA begins to increase again at dose six or seven or the tumors begin to grow again, his oncologist might ask him to stop chemotherapy.

We then wondered whether the ten doses was a reasonable time to wait or whether there could be an early indicator, or an early sign, of therapy resistance or therapy futility without having to go through six, seven, eight, nine or ten doses.

The idea that we had was to test an early intermediate marker of sensitivity or resistance to the chemotherapy. The best marker of early sensitivity or resistance that we could think of was whether or not a patient had a 30% PSA drop within the first four cycles of therapy. As you recall, if the therapy is given once every three weeks, four cycles basically means 12 weeks, which roughly equates to about three months.

The decision to use this intermediate endpoint was not arbitrary; it was based on some large retrospective meta-analyses that have shown that the strongest predictor of overall survival in patients receiving both Taxotere (docetaxel) and also separately Jevtana (cabazitaxel) was whether or not patients had a 30% PSA reduction after 12 weeks.

Patients who do achieve at least a 30% or greater reduction in the first 12 weeks have a survival that’s longer than patients who don’t achieve that endpoint. We thought, well if this endpoint is strongly correlated to survival, perhaps we can use it as a decision point. If after four doses of therapy or 12 weeks of therapy a patient don’t achieve a 30% reduction in PSA perhaps we should switch him to the other chemotherapy, rather than sticking with it and just waiting for either the toxicity to develop or the PSA or the radiographic disease to progress. That was the hypothesis.

We designed a relatively small study of about 63 patients. We used a 2:1 randomization so they were twice as likely to get Taxotere (docetaxel) compared to Jevtana (cabazitaxel). Approximately 41 patients got Taxotere (docetaxel) first. The other 22 patients, got Jevtana (cabazitaxel) first. Irrespective of which arm they were randomized to, they received the first four doses of chemotherapy in 12 weeks. We checked their PSA every three weeks.

At the end of the fourth dose, if the PSA level had dropped by 30% or more, the patients would continue on the same therapy on which they started. However, if patients did not achieve a 30% reduction or more, they would be switched to the other chemotherapeutic agent.

If a patient had a 25% reduction, we would switch him to the other agent because we thought that was not good enough. If someone received Taxotere (docetaxel), and their PSA dropped by 25%, even though it dropped by 25%, it did not meet that 30% threshold so they would then switch for the fifth dose to receive Jevtana (cabazitaxel) for the remainder of their chemotherapy. The inverse was also true. If the patient received Jevtana (cabazitaxel) first and also did not get a 30% reduction by week 12, in other words four doses, they would also switch to receive Taxotere (docetaxel). The interesting thing that we found in both treatment arms was that the chance that a patient had a favorable PSA response, which was defined as a 50% or more decrease, was higher than we had seen in historical trials using each drug by itself without switching. To put some numbers on that, we found that there was about a 54% chance that patients would have a 50% reduction in PSA if they had to the opportunity to switch from one chemotherapy to the other, compared to about a 45% chance of PSA reduction in the historical data where patients did not switch.

Did it matter if they got Jevtana (cabazitaxel) first or Taxotere (docetaxel) first?

Dr. Antonarakis: What we found out is a bit of a paradox: people could benefit from the switch in both down over time and the availability of non-chemotherapy agents is going up. A lot of these patients who may not have a 30% PSA reduction with one chemotherapy, might choose to do another hormone therapy, a radiopharmaceutical drug like Xofigo (radium-223), immunotherapy like Provenge (sipuleucel-T), or even a PD-1 inhibitor, or potentially a PARP inhibitor.

It might be difficult to convince a patient who has just failed one chemotherapy after four doses to go immediately to a second chemotherapy. I’m not 100% sure what the future will hold. I also don’t think this is a trial that we could have conducted today.

What would you say to a man reading it? That this is worth talking to his oncologist about or is this just something interesting for him to know about?

Dr. Antonarakis: Patients who are beginning their first chemotherapy should discuss this trial with their oncologist, and together with the oncologist decide in a joint fashion whether switching from one chemotherapy agent to another after four doses might be right for him, especially if he’s tolerating the chemotherapy well. If he tolerates the drug and his PSA has not dropped by 30% or is continuing to increase, then in my opinion rather than continue with the potentially futile therapy, a patient and his oncologist may wish to consider using this trial to guide or justify their choice of switching drugs earlier rather than later. directions. That was fascinating to us because, as we all know

Jevtana (cabazitaxel) was specifically approved by the FDA as a second-line curative therapy only indicated in men who have failed Taxotere (docetaxel) first. Based on that reasoning, one might expect Jevtana (cabazitaxel) to work better after Taxotere (docetaxel) but not Taxotere (docetaxel) after Jevtana (cabazitaxel).

This is not what we found.

We found that in both directions, both from the Taxotere (docetaxel) to Jevtana (cabazitaxel) switch, but also in the Jevtana (cabazitaxel) to Taxotere (docetaxel) switch, there was a significant amount of patients, approximately half, who were salvaged by the crossover therapy. By salvaged, I mean those who did not achieve a 30% PSA reduction with the first drug but did achieve a PSA reduction of 50% or more after crossing over to the second drug.

As I mentioned before, this occurred in both directions, both in patients receiving Jevtana (cabazitaxel) after Taxotere (docetaxel) and Taxotere (docetaxel) after Jevtana (cabazitaxel).

Are the side effects of Jevtana (cabazitaxel) a little bit easier to take than the side effects of Taxotere (docetaxel)?

Dr. Antonarakis: Interestingly, the side effects of Jevtana (cabazitaxel) in the published literature indeed appear to be slightly better. In this particular trial, which was very small obviously, they seemed comparable. In other words, we did not see any appreciable difference between the Taxotere (docetaxel) and the Jevtana (cabazitaxel) overall in terms of side effects. Taxotere (docetaxel) had a little bit more neuropathy nerve damage, which Jevtana (cabazitaxel) did not do. On the other hand, Jevtana (cabazitaxel) had a little bit more neutropenia, while the Taxotere (docetaxel) did not.

I would say that when patients receive these agents in a first-line setting, in other words, when they had not received another chemotherapy previously, their side effects were fairly comparable. I don’t think there was a clear signal in terms of one drug being clearly safer than the other.

Does it matter which you get first?

Dr. Antonarakis: From a side effect perspective, they’re both fairly equivalent in terms of tolerability, with slight differences in neutropenia, which is worse with Jevtana (cabazitaxel) and neuropathy, which is worse with Taxotere (docetaxel).

What is the next step? Are you going to run a similar trial with more patients?

Dr. Antonarakis: One question that arises is if this small randomized trial is enough to change practice. Should a community oncologist or urologist give Taxotere (docetaxel) for four doses and wait to see if the patient’s PSA drops by 30% or more? If it doesn’t drop to 30% or more, should he to switch to Jevtana (cabazitaxel)?

I have to admit that this is something that I have done in my practice a few times, but I really don’t believe that this is ready for clinical practice yet. Yes, in this trial, we showed that the PSA response rates could potentially be improved by this switch strategy. What we did not demonstrate was whether this improves overall survival.

The ultimate question is does switching chemotherapy agents after four doses improve survival, compared to just waiting until we see radiographic or clinical progression to switch agents. That would, as you mentioned, require a larger Phase III randomized study. The idea of study design would be to randomize patients to the switch strategy versus no-switch. We would randomize one group of patients to receive chemotherapy and switch if their PSA did not drop by 30%. The second group of patients would start chemotherapy but would not be given the opportunity to switch, even if their PSA did not drop by 30% or more. The randomization would not necessarily be the randomization to the chemotherapy, but would be randomization to a switch strategy versus a stick-with the first-chemotherapy strategy.

Sanofi, which makes both Jevtana (cabazitaxel) and Taxotere (docetaxel), have not been eager eager to respond to such a study because of financial considerations and also because the patent life of Taxotere (docetaxel) is over and the patent life of Jevtana (cabazitaxel) will be expiring soon.

Unfortunately, we might be left with a Phase II study that may, potentially, not translate into a Phase III study. I think individual patients and individual oncologists may look at these data and might be convinced that some patients might potentially benefit from a switch strategy, especially those who did not have any degree of PSA reduction after four cycles.

An added complexity is that the popularity of chemotherapy is going down over time and the availability of non-chemotherapy agents is going up. A lot of these patients who may not have a 30% PSA reduction with one chemotherapy, might choose to do another hormone therapy, a radiopharmaceutical drug like Xofigo (radium-223), immunotherapy like Provenge (sipuleucel-T), or even a PD-1 inhibitor, or potentially a PARP inhibitor.

It might be difficult to convince a patient who has just failed one chemotherapy after four doses to go immediately to a second chemotherapy. I’m not 100% sure what the future will hold. I also don’t think this is a trial that we could have conducted today.

What would you say to a man reading it? That this is worth talking to his oncologist about or is this just something interesting for him to know about?

Dr. Antonarakis: Patients who are beginning their first chemotherapy should discuss this trial with their oncologist, and together with the oncologist decide in a joint fashion whether switching from one chemotherapy agent to another after four doses might be right for him, especially if he’s tolerating the chemotherapy well. If he tolerates the drug and his PSA has not dropped by 30% or is continuing to increase, then in my opinion rather than continue with the potentially futile therapy, a patient and his oncologist may wish to consider using this trial to guide or justify their choice of switching drugs earlier rather than later.

Join us to read more conversations about chemotherapy for prostate cancer.


Leave a comment

Clinical Trial: Intravenous Vitamin C + Taxotere (Docetaxel)

Dr. Channing Paller, an Assistant Professor of Oncology at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, focuses on translational research and clinical trials of developmental therapeutics in prostate and other solid tumors.

She is keenly interested in the rigorous evaluation of natural products in cancer treatment.

Prostatepedia spoke to her about her Prostate Cancer Foundation instigated and Marcus Foundation funded clinical trial on combining intravenous Vitamin C with Taxotere (docetaxel).

Paller-20537-111ret

Dr. Channing Paller: One of my interests is studying natural products that people take as dietary supplements. We don’t know whether they work or whether they cause harm, so I test them. Several of my clinical trials study these compounds rigorously in a placebo-controlled fashion, as we would with any cancer treatment.

I knew about a recent randomized study of high dose intravenous ascorbic acid (vitamin C) in ovarian cancer patients, which showed that ascorbic acid treatment combined with standard chemotherapy reduced toxicities from the chemotherapy and also trended towards improved overall survival. Vitamin C enabled the patients to receive more cycles of chemotherapy, and that was associated with longer overall survival.

In response to the findings in ovarian cancer, the Prostate Cancer Foundation sent out a request for proposals for early stage research on vitamin C’s role in treating prostate cancer. We decided to initiate a large (60 patient) placebo-controlled trial with co-primary endpoints of quality of life and cancer response to the combination of intravenous (IV) vitamin C and chemotherapy. We are extremely grateful to the Marcus Foundation for supporting the trial.

We chose Taxotere (docetaxel) because it was first line and an easy place to start to answer the question. Jevtana (cabazitaxel) would have worked just as well.

What can patients expect to happen during the trial?

Dr. Paller: We are conducting a randomized placebo-controlled Phase II trial of standard-of-care Taxotere (docetaxel) for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer with either ascorbic acid or placebo, which is electrolytes and hydration, given twice a week in between the cycles of chemotherapy every three weeks. Some people say that this is too big a commitment, so they get to take breaks if needed. They can miss a session or two here or there. They can even take two weeks’ break, if needed. We’re trying to help people live better, not chain them to the clinic.

Join us to read more about Dr. Paller’s trial.


Leave a comment

Chemotherapy For Prostate Cancer

Pp_Aug_2018_V3_N12_Thumb

This month we’re talking about chemotherapy for prostate cancer.

Dr. Snuffy Myers offers his thoughts about this month’s conversations:

Patients are often under the impression that chemotherapy drugs like Taxotere (docetaxel) and Jevtana (carbazitaxel) won’t significantly improve survival and will only dramatically impair quality of life. A patient once said to me, “That sounds like a bad deal.” I hope this issue of Prostapedia changes your view of chemotherapy.

The potential benefit of chemotherapy depends on where you are in the natural history of metastatic prostate cancer. If you have just been diagnosed with widespread metastatic prostate cancer, Lupron (leuprolide) plus Taxotere (docetaxel) can have a major benefit in terms of your survival. At this point, you are likely to tolerate chemotherapy better than you would if you had already been through multiple other treatments. However, even in patients who have been extensively treated before chemotherapy, this treatment can often provide significant relief of bone pain that outweighs the drug side effects.

The major alternatives to Taxotere (docetaxel) in this setting are the new androgen blocking agents, such as Zytiga (abiraterone), Xtandi (enzalutamide) or Erleada (apalutimide). Each of these drugs can cause side effects more severe than Taxotere (docetaxel) in some patients. Also, Taxotere (docetaxel) treatment extends for just six treatments done every 3 weeks. In contrast, the androgen blocking agents are typically given continuously until they fail to control your cancer.

In many other cancers, patients benefit greatly when we combine drugs. While the search for effective Taxotere (docetaxel)-based combinations has been going on for decades, no combination has survived rigorous Phase III testing. I, and many others in the field, think that this may be because prostate cancer is a very heterogeneous disease. The path to success requires that we understand at a molecular level the various forms of this disease and the key vulnerabilities of each variation.

One example is the sensitivity of prostate cancers with a BRCA2 mutation to Paraplatin (carboplatin). Another example is the activity of Jevtana (carbazitaxel) + Paraplatin (carboplatin) in anaplastic prostate cancer.

There are several reasons to be optimistic about progress. First, research into the molecular heterogeneity of prostate cancer and the clinical implications thereof is proceeding rapidly. Second, leads that emerge from this research are being tested more rapidly and with greater sophistication than at any time in the past.

Download the issue.


Leave a comment

Dr. Daniel Spratt: On Becoming A Doctor

Dr. Daniel Spratt is a radiation oncologist and the Chair of the Genitourinary Division of Clinical Research at the University of Michigan Health System.

Dr. Spratt talks to Prostatepedia about why he became a doctor.

Not a member? Join us!

Why did you become a doctor?

Dr. Daniel Spratt: There are no physicians or healthcare workers in my family. I took an unconventional path to becoming a doctor. I started working as a personal trainer when I turned 18. I was always involved in fitness and exercise. I took some time off from going to college and worked one-on-one with clients.

At that time, I noticed that I liked being able to help change people’s lives and have that unique interaction. But there are limitations to what a personal trainer can do for a person. That inspired me to go back to college, focus on the research, and go to medical school to become a radiation oncologist.

How did you make your way to radiation oncology versus urology?

Dr. Spratt: In medical school, we rotate through a bunch of different specialties. All along, I thought I was going to be a neurosurgeon; that was my focus and my research. But I started to realize that I love to connect, to have the time and flexibility to discuss how patients are doing. I care more than just about the technical treatment. I enjoy emotionally connecting with patients.

The radiation oncology industry is a unique specialty in that a machine delivers our treatments, and then we get to see the patient. I almost do two things at once. If a surgeon is operating all day, they can’t see anyone other than the one patient in front of them. I get to see and treat dozens of patients a day.

Are you still involved in the exercise world?

Dr. Spratt: Definitely. It is not as strong, but if you spoke to any of my patients, they’d tell you that I prescribe exercise to all of them. The side effect profile for my patients who are inactive versus the ones who are active is like night and day. It’s amazing how patients undergoing prostate cancer treatment, including radiation and especially hormone therapy, are improved by exercise. It doesn’t need to be joining a gym—just being active in some way.

The guys who are active have much fewer side effects during treatment. I jokingly prescribe exercise while

I prescribe radiation to them.

Maybe you shouldn’t joke and really do it!

Dr. Spratt: Exactly. I don’t think a pharmacy can fill that.

Subscribe to read the rest of Dr. Spratt’s comments.