First Head-to-Head of Chemo for Prostate Cancer First Head-to-Head of Chemo for Prostate Cancer
The first head-to-head comparison of two chemotherapies for prostate cancer finds similar survival gains but different toxicity profiles.Medscape Medical News
Conclusions The SEER-CAHPS data resources allows assessment of factors influencing experience of cancer among U.S. cancer survivors. Higher self-reported health status was associated with better experiences of care; other survivors' characteristics also predicted care experience. Interventions to improve cancer survivors' health status, such as increased access to supportive care services, may improve experience of care.
Conclusion Our results show that PPI inhibits growth of CRPC cells through inhibition of HOTAIR expression, subsequently; this results in the repression of DNMT1 and EZH2 expressions. The interactions among HOTAIR, DNMT1 and EZH2, and reciprocal regulation of DNMT1 and EZH2 contribute to the overall responses of PPI. This study reveals a novel mechanism for HOTAIR-mediated regulating DNMT1 and EZH2 in response to PPI in inhibition of the growth of CRPC cells.
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of PCa are complex issues, worthy of intensive study. Further studies are needed to improve the management of PCa. PMID: 29237932 [PubMed - in process]
ConclusionsOur studies provide strong rationale for the near‐term development of specific HDAC3 inhibitors for the treatment of CRPC.
Nerve sparing (NS) contributes to recovery of sexual and urinary function after radical prostatectomy (RP) but may be ineffective in some patients or risk positive surgical margin. We evaluated sexual and urinary function outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with RP, according to degree of NS.
Accurate grading and staging are essential to ensure that men with prostate cancer are risk stratified correctly and thereby treated appropriately. In particular, high grade cancers are aggressively treated with surgery, high dose radiation therapy and years of androgen deprivation.1 These treatments are fortunately associated with higher cure rates but they may unfortunately negatively impact quality of life.
Publication date: January–March 2018 Source:Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research, Volume 775 Author(s): J.M. Cozar, I. Robles-Fernandez, L.J. Martinez-Gonzalez, M. Pascual-Geler, Alba Rodriguez-Martinez, M.J. Serrano, J.A. Lorente, M.J. Alvarez-Cubero Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. The observed variability in progression and responses to the same treatment between patients underlie the genetic heterogeneity of the disease. Nowadays, screening and follow-up biomarkers in PC are still having a deep lack of information, which makes difficult the cancer diagnosis, prognosis a...
We happened to read this paper entitled, “Patient performance-based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy.” The authors here have made efforts to identify an optimized treatment plan based on different patient performance by analyzing dose volume histogram and dosimetric indices along with planning and treatmen t delivery time. A total of 81 treatment plans (27 for each patient [n = 3]) were generated and analyzed for their effects on 3 different planning parameters, namely field width (FW), pitch factor (PF), and modulation factor (MF).
In this study we aimed to explore the potential role of simvastatin in enhancing irinotecan-induced apoptosis in prostate cancer cells. In addition, the underlying molecular mechanisms driving this potential effect of simvastatin were also explored. PC3 cells were treated with simvastatin, irinotecan or combination. Cell viability was assessed by 3-(4,5-dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2,5-diphenyl-2H-tetrazolium bromide (MTT) colorimetric assay. Flow cytometry technique was used to analyze apoptosis and cell cycle progression. Western blot was used for detection of protein expression. Results showed that simvastatin has a significan...
Radiation therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has historically been one of the mainstays of treatment for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. The benefit of ADT likely derives from both enhancing local control and inhibiting micrometastatic disease. While level 1 evidence has demonstrated the benefits of 4 –6 months of ADT for all men with intermediate-risk disease, further stratification of intermediate-risk prostate cancer into favorable and unfavorable subgroups indicates that ADT may not be necessary for favorable intermediate-risk disease but likely still provides a survival advantage for un...