Vinblastine versus vinblastine plus oral estramustine phosphate for patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer: A Hoosier Oncology Group and Fox Chase Network Phase III Trial

  • Gary Hudes
  • , Lawrence Einhorn
  • , Eric Ross
  • , Andrew Balsham
  • , Patrick Loehrer
  • , Harry Ramsey
  • , John Sprandio
  • , Michael Entmacher
  • , William Dugan
  • , Rafat Ansari
  • , Frank Monaco
  • , Mark Hanna
  • , Bruce Roth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

211 Scopus citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare vinblastine versus the combination of vinblastine plus estramustine as treatment for patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 201 patients with metastatic prostate cancer, progressive after hormonal therapy and antiandrogen withdrawal (if prior antiandrogen treatment), were randomized to receive vinblastine (V) 4 mg/m(2) by intravenous bolus weekly for 6 weeks followed by 2 weeks off, either alone or together with estramustine phosphate (EM-V) 600 mg/m(2) PO days 1 through 42, repeated every 8 weeks. Of 193 eligible patients, 98 received V, and 95 received EM-V.

RESULTS: Overall survival trended in favor of EM-V but was not significantly different as determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis (P =.08). Median survival was 11.9 months for EM-V and 9.2 months for V. EM-V was superior to V for secondary end points of time to progression (P <. 001, stratified log rank test; median 3.7 v 2.2 months, respectively) and for proportion of patients with >/= 50% prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline sustained for at least 3 monthly measurements (25.2% v 3.2%, respectively; P <.0001). Granulocytopenia was significantly less for EM-V compared with V (grade 2, 3, and 4 = 7%, 7%, and 1% v 27%, 18% and 9%, respectively; P <.0001); however, grade 2 or worse nausea (26% v 7%, respectively; P =.0002) and extremity edema (22% v 8%, respectively; P =.005) were more frequent for EM-V.

CONCLUSION: Although overall survival was not significantly greater for the combination, EM-V was superior to V for time to progression and PSA improvement. These results encourage further study of estramustine-based antimicrotubule drug combinations in HRPC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3160-3166
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume17
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1999

Keywords

  • Administration, Oral
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic/administration & dosage
  • Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use
  • Disease Progression
  • Drug Administration Schedule
  • Estramustine/administration & dosage
  • Humans
  • Injections, Intravenous
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy
  • Prostate-Specific Antigen/analysis
  • Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy
  • Survival Analysis
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Vinblastine/administration & dosage

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Vinblastine versus vinblastine plus oral estramustine phosphate for patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer: A Hoosier Oncology Group and Fox Chase Network Phase III Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this