Showing posts with label casodex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label casodex. Show all posts

Thursday, February 6, 2020

Using Darwin's Theory Of Evolution To Design Cancer Treatment








No photo description available.

The recent finding that early signs of cancer can appear years or even decades before diagnosis, bears directly on the types of treatment to deal with it.  This revelation  according to the most comprehensive investigation to date of the genetic mutations that cause healthy cells to turn malignant.  (These findings, based on samples from more than 2,500 tumors and 38 cancer types, reveal a longer-than-expected window of opportunity in which patients could potentially be tested and treated at the earliest stages of the disease.) The study revealed that about half of the earliest mutations occurred in just nine genes, meaning there is a relatively small pool of common genes that serve as triggers for cells to diverge from healthy development to a path towards cancer.

In the words of one co-author of the research (Peter Van Loo)  based at the Francis Crick Institute in London:

"Unlocking these patterns means it should now be possible to develop new diagnostic tests that pick up signs of cancer much earlier."

The work was carried out as part of the Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes project, the most comprehensive study of cancer genetics to date.  The import and significance of this finding coincides with the push toward a different sort of treatment modality - based on the principles of Darwinian evolution.  This  novel approach to cancer treatment has now come on stream and is using lessons from Darwin’s theory of evolution.  (WSJ, Jan. 9, p. A12)

The unique approach is called adaptive therapy,  and stems from the recognition that cancerous cells, just like other forms of life, mutate and evolve in response to a changing environment. Traditional cancer treatments— such as I've had with high dose radiation for prostate cancer- continuously bombard cancer cells - but can encourage drug-resistant cells to multiply, eventually creating an untreatable tumor.

Well, I didn't develop an "untreatable tumor" but a resistant one, with resistant cells, which then had to be subjected to focal cryotherapy (freezing them to nearly 90 below zero) for a secondary treatment, e.g.
Fighting Prostate Cancer At -90 C: My Cryo-thera...

By contrast, adaptive therapy doesn’t try to eradicate the entire cancer like my brachytherapy treatment did (using Ir 192) . Instead, it seeks to reduce the treatable cells, stop treatment, the wait for those cells to grow back before treating them again.   Well, interestingly, in a way that's what I did, what happened to me. I had the original adenocarcinoma bombarded by high dose radiation in September, 2012.  The tumor then grew back as diagnosed from rising PSA and an MRA scan  e.g.

It was then re-treated with the cryotherapy but now five years after the original therapy.

It is possible then that presence of the treatable cells kept the resistant cells at bay, as they competed against each other for resources. The idea, for now (for me) is to keep the size of the tumor in check  (disclosed by PSA and MRI if needed) and manage the cancer as a chronic condition.  In fact, most oncology now is changing to accepting prostate cancer as a chronic condition and not a "one off" anomaly to be cured.   (And if you've read the stories of all those whose cancers have returned after radical prostatectomy you'd see why)
In the larger, more generic sense, adaptive therapy as a concept is still largely experimental, and experts caution that it needs more trials with larger groups of patients. A few doctors are starting to bring the idea into practice—primarily for late-stage, incurable cancers. But a  growing number of researchers are paying attention and looking at cancer through an "evolutionary, survival-of-the-fittest perspective."  (WSJ, ibid.)
Robert Gatenby, the co-founder of Florida-based Moffitt Cancer Center’s new Center of Excellence for Evolutionary Therapy, is a pioneer in the field and driving the bulk of the work in the U.S. on adaptive therapy. He is also a co-author on a small, pilot study, with initial results published in 2017 in Nature Communications, that showed that patients lasted at least 27 months on average without their tumors growing, compared with the usual 16.5 months, while receiving less of the same drug. 
Dr. Gatenby, who had a background in physics before going into medicine, often points to pest control to describe therapy, and others in the field have picked up the analogy as well. In pest management, managers often don’t try to eliminate all of the insects but instead reduce their numbers, keeping the spray-sensitive bugs around to compete against the resistant bugs. Pest management developed the technique after overusing insecticides, which eliminated most of the insects. But some resistant bugs came crawling back.

Quoted in the WSJ piece, one oncologist opined:
I think pest managers are about 30 years ahead of the oncologists,” 
To be sure, evolutionary oncology, is decades old but it has gained more clinical traction in recent years as mathematical modeling has better enabled researchers and mathematicians to predict how tumors will change in response to specific treatments.  According to Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue, director of the David M. Rubenstein Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, who researches cancer genetics:
The field is small but it’s growing.  Right now, people hear evolution and cancer and it’s intellectually stimulating, but we want to get past intellectually stimulating and save lives.”
Nonetheless,  the idea of not completely destroying a cancer isn’t always easy to sell, especially since cancer research and treatment has focused firmly on a cure for decades.  A misplaced emphasis in my opinion, given how many patients are devastated - especially after having a radical surgery that destroys their sex lives (as in RP) and then learn the prostate cancer has returned.   Certainly, if many cancers are now found to originate earlier than believed it makes sense to keep treatment "powder" dry, until really needed, in line with the Darwinian adaptive solution.
Although the mathematical modeling predicted that the optimal time to halt treatment would be after the tumor had shrunk by 25%, the researchers decided to wait until the tumor had shrunk in half to make the concept more palatable, said Alexander Anderson, the chair of the Integrated Mathematical Oncology department at Moffitt, who works closely with Dr. Gatenby
The Moffitt pilot study originally enlisted 11 patients with late-stage, metastatic prostate cancer that was resistant to earlier treatments. The patients were put on the drug abiraterone, or Zytiga, and researchers tracked the tumors by monitoring the  PSA  (prostate specific antigen) in  their blood.  Once the PSA levels drop by half, the doctors halted all treatment until they rose again.    This is a smart approach that directly reflects the adaptive method. (See top graphic)   As we learn in the piece:
"The treatment length was patient-specific: Some patients cycled through the treatment regimen every few months, while others took longer. At least one patient was able to go without the treatment for over a year. Patients, on average, lasted 27 months without tumor progression by the time the initial results were released. Dr. Gatenby says that the continued treatment has extended that average to 33 months, and the project expanded to 20 patients.
The patients also cumulatively reduced the use of the drug to roughly 40% of standard dosing, Dr. Gatenby says, meaning they spend less time dealing with side effects. One month of the drug can cost upward of $6,000, according to the paper, so a pause in treatment can also save a patient thousands of dollars."

This is also the plan I intend to use if and when the currently contained PSA roars back and I may need hormone treatments, or androgen deprivation therapy. So, as I informed my primary care doc, I plan to postpone beginning ADT  until I become symptomatic and then cut it off after 6- 12 months, by which time the most grievous side effects (such as enlarged breasts, cardiac issues, weight gain, cognitive decline etc.) should subside.

It will also provide an adaptive attack plan, such as described in the graphic shown at top, where the drug (e.g. Casodex) eliminates some of the sensitive cells but not all.   The remnants to be cleared out or contained in subsequent administrations.  Interrupting- limiting  Casodex therapy is a good idea in any case, to spare metastatic prostate cancer victims some of the worst side effects, including being reduced to mental vegetables!

See also:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/17/america-is-about-to-get-a-powerful-tool-in-the-war-against-cancer.html

Sunday, July 17, 2016

Why Do So Many Men Opt For Castration To Treat Prostate Cancer?

No photo description available.
A PET-scan showing extent of bone metastases in a prostate cancer patient. Each dark area represents an agglomeration of actual prostate cancer cells, i.e. in the spine, pelvis, neck etc. If the spread and growth isn't stopped, bones will fracture, spinal discs compress and pain will be constant and excruciating.


Let's concede that once one joins a cancer support group, say for prostate cancer, there is a high probability he will learn about more horrors and fallout from the disease (and its treatments) than he'd normally care to process. Or accept! That also goes for one's wife, who may have to face the consequences of the disease and its treatments along with the patient.

In the support group to which I belong, I recently came across a post by a 68 -year old who bragged he'd added "15 years or so" to his life by resort to an orchiectomy.  On googling the term I learned it meant none other than surgical castration, i.e. the surgical removal of one's testicles leaving the scrotum full of mainly empty space. (Though we are informed "artificial plastic balls can be inserted if the patient desires to give a more natural sensation.")  When I read the guy's post I thought he had lost it: who would rather live life as a half-man, a eunuch basically, just to gain some extra time from prostate cancer? It turns out a lot of guys!

The relevant University of California At San Francisco  (UCSF) document on hormone therapy has billed  the orchiectomy "as the least expensive form of hormone treatment".  It effectively reduces testosterone - the main fuel for prostate cancer- by removing the testes a prime source. Specifically, the effect is almost immediate with testosterone levels plummeting to what is known as "castrate level" within 12 hours.

 The other alternative is chemical castration, which is used when a patient doesn't want to end up physically de-balled,, given it can have "devastating emotional consequences".  (Well, I will say it has to be enormously difficult walking around with an empty ball sack.)  Anyway, in chemical castration one is given one or more medications including casodex, flutamide and finestride.

The medical castration route takes advantage of the chemical-hormone pathways which begin in the hypothalamus with the secretion of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone  (LHRH) which in turn stimulates the pituitary gland  to produce luteinizing hormone (LH) as well as follicle -stimulating hormone (FSH) . Then LH signals specialized cells in the testicles to secrete testosterone into the bloodstream. When testosterone reaches the prostrate it is converted into di-hydrotestosterone (DHT) a much more potent form of testosterone, via the action of an enzyme:5 -alpha reductase. The objective of medical castration then is to break this cycle, usually in one of two ways: 1) via  LHRH agonists or 2) LHRH antagonists.

In (1) the medication stops the testicles from making testosterone. This is achieved by inducing a continuous message from the brain to produce testosterone which over-stimulates the testes. They respond by being "overworked" so switch off.

In (2) the medication also induces the testes to stop producing testosterone but not by over stimulation (which can trigger a testosterone "flare"(or spike, including uncomfortable side effects) before the level subsides.

The differences between the assorted chemical castration agents and their effects are discussed here for those interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtIfsvQh2qI

In thirty percent or more of these administrations, one of the primary side effects is a condition called gynecomastia which is briefly outlined via one case in this issue of The New England Journal of Medicine. I warn all males, especially those now taking 'high T' supplements or shots, this may well be your future as I will show below!

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMicm1209166#t=article


Of course, there are sundry other side effects from either surgical or chemical castration, but this one stands out because....well....it's fucking humiliating to be walking around with a pair of man boobs! Also, that they may have to be treated at regular intervals using drugs like tamoxifen or procedures including liposuction (to extract extra glandular tissue) or partial mastectomy.  If you think I am kidding about this, do some googling on your own, starting with the phrase "gynecomastia and prostate cancer" or "gynecomastia and anti-androgen therapy".

The pain and/or sensitivity can be so pronounced that some medical centers which offer castration - surgical and chemical  - say like UCSF, advise patients to get "prophylactic" treatment before commencing hormone treatment. According to a UCSF document:

"This condition arises from a hormone imbalance resulting for a more dominant role for estrogen in a man's body once treatment begins. It occurs more commonly with anti-androgen drugs than with LHRH (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone )  medications.

We recommend a single dose of radiation to both breasts at the start of treatment."

The dose of radiation is usually 8 Gy delivered by external beam to each nipple. Most guys complain about a "burned" sensation, and needless to say are in no mood for sex afterwards or anyone getting near their nipples or tweaking them. (Of course, the other general side effect of such therapies is to lower libido until when you're shown a Hustler honey in the nude, you have about as much reaction as to an old rocking chair.)

The latest take on hormone treatment is to recommend postponing it until prostate cancer metastases or "mets" appear in the bones. (See e.g.  Paller and Antonarakis: ' Management of Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Local Therapy: Evolving Standards of Care and New Directions' ) 

 The reasons for such delay  take into account emergence of  "comorbidities" or hugely negative treatment outcomes, including not only gynecomastia but also a 50 percent higher risk of developing Type II diabetes because the therapy generates weight gain and with it, insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome. You can learn more from this youtube video about the need to treat especially once bone mets appear::

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFHUCnwox7o

It is important to note from this how prostate cancer cells actually grow and develop inside bones and can lead to "skeletal events" that are catastrophic including fractures, and compression of the spinal cord..  The doctor here is referring to radio-pharmaceutical options but this is usually given in late advanced prostate cancer. For early AD treatment, i.e. after "mets" have first appeared, one would go with hormone therapy, anti-androgen therapy etc. See e.g.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aN0wrjS7_c

And:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGeFM9ofliA&list=PLu6CZL-_j8BbnvufjBIkBb2TH8f2QbZY4

Given that one absolutely doesn't want to become crippled or saddled with multiple fractures in his last days, i.e. via spread of bone mets, it looks as though I will have to choose some type of hormone therapy. This is assuming my MRI fusion biopsy shows Gleason scores and undifferentiation associated with the lesions detected in the MRI. This would likely not be commenced until bone mets appear, such as on a pet scan, CT-scan or MRI.

This choice would allow at least 10 years,  maybe longer,  for a relative quality of life until the end phase begins with castration resistance, meaning the testosterone plummets but the PSA continues to increase. In other words, hormone treatment ceases to be effective.  As Dr. Charles Ryan points out in the superb UCSF lecture which follows, the prostate cancer cells are capable of making their own testosterone, and hence driving the prostate specific antigens higher.. This "will to survive" marks the challenge of confronting all types of cancer.

To see the detailed UCSF lecture on treating prostate cancer with androgen deprivation and other hormone treatments go to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ4im2WQ75E


See also this basic discussion of how prostate cancer occurs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_5MnsdQeQs

I do hope this blog post will be helpful for other guys facing this disease.