4.4 Review

Randomized phase II study of ixabepilone (Ix) or mitoxantrone and prednisone (MP) in patients with taxane resistant (TR) hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC)

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 61, Issue 12, Pages 2064-2070

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01551.x

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: This review aims at analysing the published literature on chemotherapy for hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) to provide recommendations for the treatment of this important patient group. Methods: The information for this review was compiled using the PubMed and Medline databases and the Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meetings to search for articles, abstracts and presentations up to 1 March 2007. Electronic early-release publications were also included. Only articles published in English were considered. The search terms included hormone-refractory prostate cancer, docetaxel, mitoxantrone, satraplatin, ixabepilone, cyclophosphamide, vinorelbine, atrasentan, calcitriol, bevacizumab and targeted therapies. Priority was given to studies in high impact factor journals when available. Results and conclusion: Two recent trials (TAX 327 and SWOG 9916) have shown that docetaxel chemotherapy can significantly improve survival for HRPC. Docetaxel has become the standard of care for first-line chemotherapy for HRPC and has been approved for use in the United States and Europe. Many patients with HRPC will require second- and even third-line treatment upon progression and more data are required in this setting. It is likely that the future management of patients with HRPC will build on the success of docetaxel using a sequence of chemotherapy and targeted therapies to reduce the risk of death, prevent or improve disease-related symptoms and improve quality of life for this important condition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available