Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24755958›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2014

Circulating endothelial progenitor cells in castration resistant prostate cancer: a randomized, controlled, biomarker study.

Thorsten Fuereder, Volker Wacheck, Sabine Strommer, Peter Horak, Marion Gerschpacher, Wolfgang Lamm, Danijel Kivaranovic, Michael Krainer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Thorsten FuerederDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Volker WacheckDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Sabine StrommerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Peter HorakDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Marion GerschpacherDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Wolfgang LammDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Danijel KivaranovicSection for Medical Statistics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Michael KrainerDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndothelial progenitor cells (CEPs) and circulating endothelial cells (CECs) are potential biomarkers of response to anti-angiogenic treatment regimens. In the current study, we investigated the effect of docetaxel and sunitinib on CEP/CEC kinetics and clinical response in castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients. PATIENTS AND

methodsChemonaive patients with CRPC were enrolled in this study to receive either sunitinib (37.5 mg/d), in combination with docetaxel (75 mg/m2) or docetaxel alone. CEP and CEC kinetics were analyzed for every cycle. The primary objective was to compare CEP/CEC pharmacodynamics between both treatment arms. We also investigated if CEC/CEP spikes, induced by MTD docetaxel, are suppressed by sunitinib in patients treated with docetaxel/sunitinib relative to docetaxel monotherapy.

resultsA total of 27 patients were enrolled. We observed a significant increase of CEP/CEC (total/viable) counts over time within each cycle (coefficients 0.29233, 0.22092 and 0.26089, respectively; p<0.001). However, no differences between the treatment groups, in terms of CEP and CEC kinetics, were detected. In the docetaxel monotherapy arm 4 (30%) patients responded to therapy with a 50% PSA decline, while 9 (64%) patients showed a PSA decline in the combination group (n.s.). The median PFS in the docetaxel monotherapy group was 3.1 months (2.6-3.6 months, 95% CI) and 6.2 months (4.9-7.4 months, 95% CI; p = 0.062) in the combination arm. Sunitinib/docetaxel was reasonably well tolerated and toxicity manageable.

conclusionIn summary, no significant differences in CEC and CEP kinetics between the treatment arms were observed, although a highly significant increase of CEPs/CECs within each cycle over time was detected. These results mirror the challenge we have to face when employing anti-angiogenic strategies in CRPC. Additional preclinical research is needed to elucidate the underlying molecular mechanisms. However, docetaxel/sunitinib therapy resulted in a better response in terms of PSA decline and a trend towards improved PFS. TRIAL REGISTERY: clinicaltrialsregister.eu EudraCT 2007-003705-27.

Indexed as

Cell MovementAgedBiomarkers, TumorBone and BonesDisease-Free SurvivalDocetaxelEndothelial Progenitor CellsHumansKineticsMaleMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic Neoplasms, Castration-ResistantRadiographyTaxoidsBiomarkers, TumorDocetaxelProstate-Specific AntigenTaxoids

Identifiers

PMID24755958
PMCPMC3995874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.