OBJECTIVES: To investigate the safety and efficacy in terms of PSA response of a low-dose oral combination of estramustine phosphate (EMP) and etoposide (VP16) in hormone- refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients. Well-tolerated outpatient chemotherapy regimens for patients unfit and/or unwilling to be admitted to hospital are needed. METHODS:Fifty-six HRPC patients with metastatic disease (median age 75 years) were randomized between arm A (daily oral EMP 10 mg/kg, in 3 doses) and arm B (28-day cycle with low-dose EMP 3 mg/kg once daily plus VP16 25 mg/m(2) once daily on days 1 through 14). Baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar. LHRH therapy was maintained. Anti- androgen was stopped 1 month before entry. RESULTS: The low-dose combination was better tolerated, with a significant advantage in terms of time to treatment interruption for any reason (p = 0.01) or toxicity (6 vs. 12 months, p = 0.02). A trend in favour of arm B was evident in terms of PSA reduction (41.4 vs. 15%), performance status and pain improvement. Hospital admission due to toxicity was never required for arm B patients and there were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose oral combination of EMP and VP16 might represent a treatment option for patients unfit for i.v. chemotherapy. This regimen requires minimal toxicity monitoring when administered at home for prolonged periods. Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the safety and efficacy in terms of PSA response of a low-dose oral combination of estramustine phosphate (EMP) and etoposide (VP16) in hormone- refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients. Well-tolerated outpatient chemotherapy regimens for patients unfit and/or unwilling to be admitted to hospital are needed. METHODS: Fifty-six HRPC patients with metastatic disease (median age 75 years) were randomized between arm A (daily oral EMP 10 mg/kg, in 3 doses) and arm B (28-day cycle with low-dose EMP 3 mg/kg once daily plus VP16 25 mg/m(2) once daily on days 1 through 14). Baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar. LHRH therapy was maintained. Anti- androgen was stopped 1 month before entry. RESULTS: The low-dose combination was better tolerated, with a significant advantage in terms of time to treatment interruption for any reason (p = 0.01) or toxicity (6 vs. 12 months, p = 0.02). A trend in favour of arm B was evident in terms of PSA reduction (41.4 vs. 15%), performance status and pain improvement. Hospital admission due to toxicity was never required for arm B patients and there were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose oral combination of EMP and VP16 might represent a treatment option for patients unfit for i.v. chemotherapy. This regimen requires minimal toxicity monitoring when administered at home for prolonged periods. Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.