Fairwind said...
Yeah, after dosetaxel failed I did retry Zytiga for a month but got little response..When cyclophosphamide was approved for PC, 48% of patients got a good response along with a quality of life improvement..So it all depends on who's reports and studies you read..
"PATIENTS AND METHODS:
From 2005 to 2010, patients with HRPC who failed at least docetaxel-based chemotherapy were proposed metronomic cyclophosphamide-prednisolone regimen, and were prospectively registered. Twenty-three patients received 50 mg cyclophosphamide and 10 mg prednisolone per os daily until disease progression. Treatment tolerance and efficacy on PSA decrease and pain were studied.
RESULTS:
Metronomic cyclophosphamide prednisolone was safe, well tolerated, and demonstrated interesting clinical activity, yielding a prostate specific antigen decrease by ≥50% in 26% of patients and decrease by ≥30% in 48% of patients, but also favorable palliative effects on pain in 43% of patients. The median progression-free survival was 6 months (95% CI: 4-8 months) and the median overall survival was 11 months (95% CI: 7-19 months).
CONCLUSION:
For this patient population, low dose metronomic cyclophosphamide prednisolone might be a viable alternative. Its convenient oral administration, low cost, and lack of toxicity justify further studies alone, or in combination with other agents in HRPC patients.
As far as trying right after dosetaxel, two onco's both agreed I should try something else first. The chances of success were marginal and the side-effect load was major...Next on the list for me will be carboplatin, a weekly infusion..
Also on the list are a fresh bone scan and MRI...Using that information, perhaps a new biopsy to look for genetic markers that might make immunotherapy worthwhile..
In the OP you said "an older, cheaper, almost forgotten oral chemo (one pill a day along with Prednisone) that has proven very effective in treating advanced prostate cancer..It is well tolerated and carries a low side-effect load."
Sounds worth a try to me! In many cases, a cheaper alternative is not going to be popular, at least with some providers. Unless you have data showing better results with the newer stuff, and hopefully also with at least no worse SEs, I can see why you would want to look into it. There are a lot of older treatments out there for a variety of illnesses, that are often pushed aside by the newest- but not always better- treatments that are still under patent and not generic. So good for you for at least investigating it, and kudo's to your doc for bringing it to your attention.