This material may be protected by Copyright law (Title 17 u.s. Cattle)
`
`High-Dose Ketoconazole in Advanced Hormone-Refractory
`Prostate Cancer: Endocrinologic and Clinical Effects
`
`By Donald l. Trump, Kathleen H. Havlin, Edward M. Messing, Kenneth B. Cummings.
`Paul H. Lange, and V. Craig Jordan
`
`High-dose ketoconaxole (400 mg orally three times a
`day) and physiologic replacement closes at glucocorti-
`caids (hydrocortisane, 20 mg 3 AM, 10 mg 4 PM, and 3
`PM) were administered to 38 patients with advanced
`prostatic cancer, refractory to at least initial testicular
`androgen deprivation. Thirty patients were com-
`pletely evaluable; six were withdrawn due to possible
`lretoconazole-related toxicity and were considered
`drug failures. Two patients were unevaluable due to
`intercurrent therapy or inability to maintain follow-
`up. Ketoconazole was generally well tolerated. Mild
`or moderate nausea and vomiting occurred in 37% of
`patients, but required dose modification or discontinu-
`ation in only three patients; no hepatic damage was
`seen. Five of 36 patients (14%) responded to l(etocon-
`azole as determined by palpable or radiographic
`
`HE IMPORTANCE of extratesticular an-
`drogens in supporting the growth of pros-
`tatic carcinoma is uncertain. Labrie et al' have
`
`presented data suggesting that antagonism of
`extratesticular androgcns and suppression of tes-
`ticular androgens substantially improves the re-
`spouse and survival of individuals with meta-
`static prostatic cancer compared with individuals
`who undergo suppression of testicular androgens
`only. Preliminary analysis of a randomized trial
`suggests a small
`improvement
`in disease-frcc
`survival for patients treated with total androgen
`deprivation} ln men whose prostatic cancer is
`progressing despite testicular androgen ablation,
`antagonism of adrenal secretion of “minor" an-
`clrogens (dehydrocpiandrosterone [DHEAS] and
`androstenedione [A2]) occasionally appears to be
`beneficial. Improvement in approximately 20%
`of these men is seen with adrenalectorny. hy-
`pophysectomy, anti-androgens, or drugs that di-
`rectly antagonize adrenal stcroidogencsis.3""
`Kctoconazole is a substituted imidazolc. origi-
`nally developed as an antifungal antibiotic. Ketc-
`conazole inhibits ergosterol synthesis in fungi
`and cholesterol synthesis in mammalian cells."
`Shortly after its introduction into clinical prac-
`tice,
`it was recognized that ketoconazolc also
`suppresses testicular and adrenal steroidogcnc-
`sis.” Disruption of P-4-50~depcndent enzymes,
`
`tumor mass reduction of 50% or greater and normal-
`ization of acid phosphatase or bone scan. Fifty percent
`of patients entered were stable at 90 days. Plasma
`ondrostenedione and dehydroepianclrosterone sulfate
`I[DHEAS) were reduced markedly in almost all pa-
`tients. Plasrno testosterone (T) levels were low and
`remained unchanged, while ganadatropins were per-
`sistently elevated. Mean plasma lcetoconazole content
`was 6.6 rig/ml. after 28 days of
`therapy. While
`ketoconazole with hydrocortisone does suppress plasma
`androgens in advanced prostatic cancer patients, this
`infrequently causes regression of cancer that has
`progressed despite adequate testicular androgen ab-
`latian.
`
`J Clin Oncal 7:iO93- I098. © I989 by American Soci-
`ety of Clinical Oncology.
`
`particularly C112,, lyase is the major mechanism
`for the disruption of androgen synthesis in pa-
`tients treatcd with large doses of l<etocona-
`zolc.”"‘l Soon after the recognition of this ellect.
`etlicacy of ketoconazole in advanced prostatic
`cancer patients was described.” Most experience
`with ketoconazole in prostatic cancer has been in
`previously untreated patients.”''3 Because of our
`interest in the role of adrenal androgen suppres-
`sion in “endocrine-refractory” prostatic cancer.
`we conducted this phase II trial of kctoconazole
`in patients whose cancer had ceased to respond to
`testicular androgen deprivation. Detailed clinical
`and endocrinologic monitoring of these patients
`was performed.
`
`From the Um'ver.rir_v of l‘I"r’.rr‘on.ri'n Clirrical Cancer Center.
`and the William S. Midrlleton Memorial Veterans Hospital,
`Madrlrori. ll/l.'oncl the University oflllinnesota and Minneap-
`oh‘: Veterans Admini.rrrm'ion Hospital.
`Snbrnirred Jonuzrry 27, l 989;ocL‘epred March 37. l 989.
`Supported in part by the Paul B. Cohen Memorial Fmid.
`Dr Trirmp'.r -’.'t1J"fE?ll address is Duke University Medical
`Center. Durliam. NC.‘ Dr Hovlirfs current odclress is Divi-
`riorr o_l'Mec:lir:oz' Orrcologlt. Uriiversit}-' of Texas San Antonio;
`Dr
`l.o.age's current address is Deporlnianr of Urology.
`Um‘rer.rr‘ry of Washirtgroir. Seattle.
`.-tddress reprint requests to Donald L. Trump, MD, Dulce
`Llnr'ver.rit_t' Medical Center. Box 33.08. Dttrlwm. NC 277 H9.
`'13‘ i989 by American Society of Clinical Oncologv.
`0132-l S3.\’/80/t)7flS-Of]l853.00/0
`
`Journal of Climcal Oncology, Vol 7, No 3 (August), 1989: pp 1093-1098
`
`i093
`WCK1013
`Page1
`
`WCK1013
`Page 1
`
`

`
`METHODS
`
`E Iigibiii ty
`this trial were required to have
`Patients eligible for
`symptomatic, progressive, disseminated prostatic cancer. de-
`spite primary endocrine management (orehiectomy,
`I mg fd
`or more of diethylstilbestrol [DES], or gonadotropin hormone-
`releasing hormone analogues |GnRHa]} and were treated
`only at the University of Wisconsin. At least one evaluable or
`measurable parameter of disease was
`required. Lesions
`deemed evaluable included soft tissue masses evaluated by
`radiographic or physical exam or abnormal bone scan.
`Patients were required to have a WBC of 2,{)0El,f,ttL platelet
`count of 5D,0OD;’.uL. creatinirte -: 3.] mg_.’dL and bilirubin,
`lactic debydrogenase (LDH), and SGOT less than twice
`normal. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG)
`performance status (PS) of O. l. or 2 was required.” Patients
`must not have had major surgery or cytotoxic chemotherapy
`within 2 weeks. and those with a history of active liver
`disease. neurologie deficit secondary to spinal cord compres-
`sion. or a coexisting second primary malignancy were ineligi-
`ble. There were no restrictions in the extent of prior systemic
`therapy patients may have received. All patients gave in-
`formed consent according to the Department of Health,
`Education and Welfare (DH EW) and University of Wiscon-
`sin guidelines.
`
`Treatment
`
`Ketooonazole, 400 mg, was administered orally every eight
`hours. All patients received physiologic gluco-cortieoid replace-
`ment therapy with 20 mg of hydrocortisone in the morning,
`10 mg at 4 PM. and 10 mg at 3 PM.
`
`Study Parameters
`Patients were evaluated by history. physical examination,
`serum electrolytes. crcatinine, liver function tests. and acid
`phosphatase before therapy. 2 weeks al'ter beginning therapy,
`and then at monthly intervals. Chest
`racliographs were
`repeated monthly it’ initially abnormal or every 3 months if
`initially normal: bone scans and pelvic computerized tomog-
`raphy (CT) scans were done before therapy and every 3
`months. if initially abnormal, to assess response.
`
`Endocrinoiogic Assessntent
`Plasma testosterone (T).
`follicle-stimulating hormone
`{FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), DI-IEAS, A2, and estra-
`diol
`(E2) were measured before therapy and at monthly
`intervals using standard radioirnmunoassay procedures. Ketc-
`eonazole plasma levels were also assessed monthly using a
`described mierobiologic assay.‘ Plasma prostate-specific anti-
`gen (PSA) was assessed before therapy and monthly by
`radioimmunoassay (Hybritech). All blood samples were
`drawn between 3 AM and 10 AM.
`
`Response Criteria
`Responses were assessed using the prostate cancer response
`criteria of the ECOG. Measurable disease: partial response
`was defined as :1 50% or greater reduction in the sum of the
`products of the perpendicular diameters of measurable tumor
`
`TRUMP ET AL
`
`masses persisting for more than I month in the absence of the
`appearance of new lesions. Evaluablc bone scan response was
`defined as a return to normal in 50% or more of the abnormal
`areas noted on pretreatment scan without the appearance of
`new lesions. Progression was defined as (l) a 25% or greater
`increase in the product of the perpendicular diameters of
`measurable tumor masses or, (2) development of new areas of
`metastatic disease as assessed by plain radiograph, bone scan.
`CT scan, or physical examination or deterioration by 2 levels
`in PS.
`
`RESULTS
`
`Thirty-eight patients were entered in this trial.
`Patient characteristics are listed in Table 1.
`
`These patients had good PS and were not heavily
`pretreated with systemic therapies. Twenty-one
`of 38 patients had received only a single systemic
`hormonal therapy for prostate cancer (13. or-
`chicctomy; five. DES; and three GnRH,). While
`45% of the patients had received two or more
`systemic therapies, only three had received cyto-
`toxic chemothcrapy (one, carboplatin; one, dose-
`rubicin; and one, estramustinc phosphate). Of 38
`patients entered. two were declared uncvaluablct
`one due to the initiation of radiation on day 3 of
`ketoconazole therapy, and the other due to inabil-
`ity to maintain follow—up. Six ofthc remaining 36
`patients (16%) discontinued ketoconazole due to
`possible or definite d rug-related toxicity. Unman-
`ageable nausea and vomiting prompted discontin-
`uation of ketoconazole in three patients (8%). In
`two of these three patients, nausea and vomiting
`developed after W3 and 2 months of therapy, was
`accompanied by evidence of progressive disease.
`
`Table 1. Clturueteristirs of Patients Treated {N = 38)
`
`Ace (rr)
`50-59
`sods
`3'0-3'9
`30-89'
`Interval from initial diagnosis of prostate cancer
`to stvdr entry (rd
`1 or less
`1-2
`2-5
`5-10
`10 or more
`Prior systemic therapy
`Single hormonal therapy
`Two or more prior systemic tracrlmerlfs
`Prior cytotoxic therapy
`
`PS
`
`5 (13%)
`21 (55%)
`11 (28%)
`1 (2%)
`
`.5 (13%)
`B (21%)
`15 {39‘’}{:)
`B (21 96)
`2 (5%)
`
`21
`1?’
`3
`
`4 (10%)
`24 (63%)
`10 (26%)
`
`WCK1013
`Page 2
`
`WCK1013
`Page 2
`
`

`
`KETACONAZOLE IN ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER
`
`I 095
`
`and did not resolve with discontinuation of ketc-
`
`conazole: in the third patient, nausea and vomit-
`ing began immediately on initiation of ketocona-
`zole, persisted despite dose reduction, and
`prompted drug discontinuation on day 15 of
`treatment. The other events leading to termina-
`tion of therapy were (I ) acute myocardial infarc-
`tion, cardiogenic shock, and death on day 7 in a
`man with known coronary artery disease; (2)
`reversible mild renal dysfunction (creatinine 2.3
`mg/dL), which resolved with discontinuation of
`ketoconazole and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory
`agents; and (3) itchy teeth and hair loss without
`physical signs of toxicity or other toxic symptoms
`in this patient. Thirty patients were able to
`continue therapy without undue toxicity until
`clear cut response or progression occurred, and
`are evaluable for response.
`
`Clinical Response to Keroconazole
`
`Of 30 patients completely evaluable for re-
`sponse. 24 developed progressive disease. The
`median time to progression was 82 days (range,
`nine to 347 days). One patient remains stable
`without objective evidence of response or progres-
`sion at 455 days. This patient stopped ltetocona-
`zole after 300 days, and continues to be stable on
`no treatment. Eighteen of 36 patients (50%) had
`either stable disease or had responded 90 days
`after beginning ltetoconazole. Patients stopping
`therapy due to toxicity were considered treat-
`ment failures. In live patients, objective evidence
`of tumor reduction was seen during ketoconazole
`
`therapy. Characteristics of the responding pa-
`tients are noted in Table 2. The objective re-
`sponse rate following ketoconazole was low: 17%
`of evaluable patients and 13% of all patients
`entered. All five responding patients had under-
`gone orchiectorny prior to treatment with ketocon-
`azole. Disease-free interval. age, PS, disease
`distribution, and initial endocrinologic data were
`not remarkably different
`in these five patients
`compared with nonresponding patients.
`
`Endocrine Effects of
`Keroeonazole/Hydroeortisone Therapy
`
`Total plasma T was low at entry in these
`patients (mean, 24.4 ng/dI.; range, 0 to 261
`ng/dL). Thirty of 3| patients, in whom pretreat-
`ment data were available. had plasma T < 100
`ng/dL. Nineteen patients with low plasma T had
`previously undergone orchiectomy;
`in ll pa-
`tients,
`low T was associated with hormonal
`
`therapy other than orchiectomy. One patient
`entered this study with a low normal T (261
`ng/dL), though purportedly having received 3
`mg/d DES within 1 week before study entry.
`Plasma T was not Further diminished in patients
`during ketoconazole/hydrocortisone therapy. In
`two nonorchiectomized patients, plasma T in the
`low normal range (I2? ng/dL and I52 ng/dIL)
`was measured during ketoconazole/hydrocorti-
`sone therapy. In one of these patients, concomi-
`tant ketoconazole plasma concentration was 9.6
`pg/dL, while in the second patient. ketoconazole
`was undetectable in the plasma. In the patient
`
`Table 2. Patients Responding to Ketooonotole
`Bone Scan
`Aieid Ptlocphotoso
`Normalized
`
`Norlnolized
`
`Improved
`No ch unge
`
`;- 50% Reduction
`
`No ch unge
`
`Norrnol on study
`
`No change
`
`Normal on study
`
`No change
`
`Improved {resolution of
`cough)
`
`Turn-or Masses
`
`NE
`
`> 50% reduction pelvic‘
`soft tissue masses
`:- 50% racIucl'ion* retro-
`peritonoul, rotrocrurol
`odenoparhy
`> 50% reduction‘ retro-
`peritoneal. pelvic aden-
`opcrtliy
`> 50% reduction‘ retro-
`poritoneol odonopnthy
`complete regression of
`palpable inguinal aden-
`optzrlhy; ilnprovemertt,
`hiopsyprovon pulmo-
`nary infiltrate
`
`Abbreviations; NE, not evaluable; PS, performonoe rtotus;1TF. time to treatment failure.
`‘Criteria met tor obieelive tumor response.
`
`WCK1013
`Page 3
`
`WCK1013
`Page 3
`
`

`
`I 096
`
`TRUMP ET Al
`
`who entered the trial with plasma T of 261
`ng/dI.,. T decreased on ketoconazole/hydrocorti-
`sone to < 50 ng/dL on day 28.
`Plasma A; content varied among patients at
`entry; it ranged from 6.9 to 202 ng/dL (normal,
`80 to 200 ng/dL). In 32 patients, data after
`initiation oftherapy were available; in 28, A; was
`well below the lower limit of normal. In these 28
`
`patients. A; was <. 30 ng/dL, and in 22 A;
`content was undetectable (Fig 1). In four pa-
`tients. A; levels were not reduced by l<etocona-
`zole/hydrocortisone therapy. However,
`in each
`of these, ketoconazole was not measurable in
`
`plasma samples obtained when A3 was still detect-
`able.
`
`DHEAS plasma content was variable at the
`time of study entry (0 to 242 cg/mL) and was
`less completely reduced by this regimen.
`In 29
`patients. serial data were available and measur-
`able plasma levels of ketoconazole were present
`(Fig 2).
`In I? of these 29, a 50% or greater
`decrease in plasma DHEAS content occurred
`with kctoconazole/hydrocortisone therapy.
`Among the "five patients who responded to
`therapy. A3 fell to undetectable levels in all live.
`and DHEAS was reduced by more than 50% in
`three of the four patients in whom serial data
`were available. However, the frequency of these
`endocrinologic effects are not strikingly different
`among responders and nonresponders.
`Estrogens were low at entry (mean. 7.0 pg/
`mL; normal. 40 to 115 pg/mL). Total estrogens
`remained at this low level throughout the study
`in all patients.
`Mean plasma ketoconazole concentration on
`I50
`
`I25 _'
`
`I00-
`
`75
`
`!tt:tfi-"D.t§:ttD-HID-lit)
`
`56
`
`84
`
`112 no 165
`
`196
`
`Day
`
`of Therapy
`
`Fig I. Mean plasma A, concentrations before and during
`therapy with high-dose hetoconozole. Error bars represent
`upper portion of standard error for each mean value.
`
`I)
`
`28
`
`56
`
`84
`
`I12
`
`140
`
`I63
`
`196
`
`Day
`
`of Therapy
`
`Fig 2. Mean plasma DI-IEAS concentrations before and
`during therapy with high-dose ltetocorlozole. Error bars
`represent upper portion of standard error tor each mean
`value.
`
`day 23 of therapy was 6 #3/tnL (range, 1.33 to
`15.5 pg/mL). No significant relationship be-
`tween response or
`toxicity and ketoconazole
`plasma levels was evident. It is of interest that
`approximately I0% of patients at each monthly
`interval had plasma ketoconazole concentrations
`below the lower limit of detection. This indicates
`
`that appreciable levels of ketoconazole were not
`maintained in approximately 10% of patients.
`either because of rapid drug clearance or poor
`patient compliance.
`
`PSI}! and Acid Phosphatase
`
`Among the five responders, acid phosphatase
`returned to normal in two. decreased by more
`than 50% in one. and was always normal in the
`remaining two patients. PSA decreased by more
`than 80% in four of five patients; in the fifth, the
`PSA was slightly increased and did not change
`during therapy, despite a reduction in retroperito-
`neal lymph nodes. In the small number of re-
`sponding patients. PSA seemed to reflect re-
`sponse better than acid phosphatase. Among 30
`nonresponders, serial acid phosphatase and PSA
`data were available in 26. In 12 patients (46%).
`PSA and acid phosphatase increased by more
`than 25%, coincident with clinical evidence of
`
`progressive disease. In 13 patients. one or both
`markers either were stable or diminished when
`
`clinical progression was evident. In one patient
`with stable disease, PSA diminished and the acid
`phosphatase remained normal. Overall. PSA anal-
`ysis did not appear to substantially change the
`
`WCK1013
`Page 4
`
`WCK1013
`Page 4
`
`

`
`KETACONAZOLE IN ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER
`
`1 097
`
`judgement regarding response or progression in
`these patients with advanced prostatic cancer.
`
`Tux ."('1'l‘y
`
`The major toxicity of this regimen was nausea
`and vomiting. Thirty-seven percent of patients
`experienced at least grade 2 nausea and vomiting:
`one patient required dose reduction to control
`nausea and vomiting.
`In three patients, emcsis
`was uncontrollable and prompted discontinua-
`tion of ketoconazole. Hepatic toxicity was not an
`important problem. Three patients experienced
`increase in plasma alkaline phosphatase without
`change in transaminases or bilirubin.
`In these
`three patients. progressive bone disease was
`present. in a fourth patient. hyperbilirubinemia
`occurred during ketoconazole therapy at a time
`when progressive hepatic metastases were evi-
`dent. Dose modification was not required for
`hepatic toxicity. No other serious or important
`drug-related toxicity was encountered. A com-
`mon complaint among patients in this trial was
`dryness of the skin. No objective findings were
`noted coincident with this complaint.
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`Treatment of men with prostatic cancer pro-
`gression despite antagonism of testicular andro-
`gens is unsatisfactory. For many years, attempts
`to further deprive these cancer cells of remaining
`androgens have been employed. A2 and DHEAS
`are the main androgens of adrenal origins. These
`compounds are weak androgerts in their own
`right and may additionally be converted by a
`variety of peripheral body tissues to‘ T and
`clihydrotestosterone.3"’Z' Adrenalectomy. hy-
`pophysectomy. antiandrogens. progestational
`agents. and an-tinoglutethimide have been used to
`either inhibit secretion of adrenal androgens or
`to antagonize androgen action on the tumor
`cells."'" While response rates as high as 40% to
`50% have been reported with these measures.
`clear-cut. objective tumor mass reduction is infre-
`quently seen. No improvement
`in survival
`is
`associated with the use of adrenal androgen
`antagonists as secondary hormonal therapy. Lab-
`rie et al' have proposed the use of adrenal and
`testicular androgen antagonists as part of total
`androgen deprivation in the initial treatment of
`advanced prostatic cancer} Preliminary analysis
`
`of a randomized trial comparing GnRHa with
`GnRHa plus antiartdrogens suggests a small, but
`significant,
`improvement
`in time to systemic
`progression for the combined treatment group}
`Ketoconazole plus hydrocortisone as employed
`in our trial consistently reduces adrenal steroid
`production. Plasma DHEAS and A2 levels were
`substantially reduced in all patients in whom
`detectable ltetoconazole levels could be mea-
`sured. This finding differs from the report of
`Ahmartn et a1.“ who found that
`the adrenal
`steroid synthesis inhibitors aminoglutethimide
`and hydrocortisone were not eflective in reducing
`plasma A, levels. In the study of aminoglutethi-
`mide. DHEAS level fell in a manner similar to
`the changes we noted with ketoconazole plus
`hydrocortisone.
`From studies in which hydrocortisone has been
`used in conjunction with an adrenal antagonist, it
`is not clear what the relative roles of the antago-
`nist and the glucocorticoid are in reducing plasma
`androgens.
`In the present study, a physiologic
`replacement close of hydrocortisone was em-
`ployed. It is unlikely that direct antiproliferative
`effects or nonspecific constitutional eFl"ects of
`hydrocortisone contributed to the responses that
`were seen.
`
`If one were to use stable disease at 90 days
`after initiation of therapy, a response criterion
`employed in other studies. 50% of patients would
`be considered responders. Overall, ketoconazole
`plus hydrocortisone would have to be judged
`generally inefiective as secondary hormone ther-
`apy for most patients with advanced prostatic
`cancer. However, it is provocative that definite
`tumor mass reduction was documented in five
`patients.
`It appears that a small subset of previously
`hormone-treated patients with prostatic cancer
`may respond to ketoconazole plus hydrocorti-
`sone. Responses were limited to patients who had
`undergone orchiectomy. This regimen was reason-
`ably well tolerated in prostatic cancer patients.
`The results of this study.
`the responses seen
`following aminoglutethimide. and the prelimi-
`nary data from the leuprolide plus or minus
`flutamide trial, all suggest a small. but poten-
`tially important. role for antagonism of adrenal
`androgens in individuals with prostate cancer. In
`addition. Rochlitz et al have recently reported
`
`WCK1013
`Page 5
`
`WCK1013
`Page 5
`
`

`
`1098
`
`TRUMP ET Al.
`
`direct antiproliferative effects of ketoconazole, as
`well as the enhancement of the antiproliferative
`effects of
`fluorodeoxyuridine and etoposide
`(VPI 6).”'" This latter effect appears to be asso-
`
`ciated with enhanced intracellular retention of
`
`cytotoxic drug. Further exploration of ketocona-
`zole-cytotoxic drug interaction may be war-
`ranted.
`
`REFERENCES
`
`I. Labrie F, Dupont A. Belanger A: Complete androgen
`blockade for the treatment of prostate cancer. in Important
`Advances in Oncology—l 985. Philadelphia, Lippincott. 1985.
`pp 193-217
`2. Crawford E. McLeod D. Dorr A. et al: Treatment of
`newly diagnosed stage D, prostate cancer with leuprolide and
`flutamidc or Ieuprolide alone. phase III intergroup study
`0036. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol ?':l 19. 1988 (abstr)
`3. Bhanalaph T. Varkarakis MJ. Murphy GP: Current
`status of bilateral adrenalectomy or advanced prostatic
`carcinoma. Bilal Adrenalect 179:1”!-23. 1974
`4. Fitzpatrick JM. Gardiner RA. Williams JP. ct al:
`Pituitary ablation in the relief of pain in advanced prostatic
`carcinoma. Br J Urol 52:301-304. 1980
`5. Tindall GT. Payne NS. Nixon DW: Transsplienoidal
`hypophysectomy for disseminated carcinoma of the prostate
`gland. J Neurosurg 50:275-282. I979
`6. Robinson MRG. Shearer RJ, Fergusson JD: Adrenal
`suppression in the treatment of carcinoma of the prostate. Br
`J Urol 46:555-559. I97‘-1
`‘I. Worgul TJ. Santen RJ, Samojlik E‘.. et al: Clinical and
`biochemical effect of aminoglutethirnide in the treatment of
`advanced prostatic carcinoma. J Urol l29:5l~5S. I983
`8. Sanford EJ, Drago JR. Rohner TJ Jr. et al: Aminogltr
`tethimide medical adrenaloctomy for advanced prnstatic
`carcinoma. J Urol 1 I5: [T0-174. 1976
`9. Block M. Trump D. Rose DP. et al: Evaluation of
`aminoglutethimide in stage D prostate cancer: An assessment
`of efficacy and toxicity in patients with tumors refractory to
`hormonal therapy. Cancer Treat Rep 681719-?22, I 984
`I0. Baker WJ: Bilateral adrenalectomy for carcinoma of
`the prostate gland: Preliminary report. J Urol 70:275-281.
`I953
`ll. Sonino N: The use of ketoconazole as an inhibitor of
`steroid production. N Engl J Med 3l'i':8l2—8l8. 1987
`12. Tucker WS Jr. Snell BB, Island DP. et al: Reversible
`adrenal insufliciency induced by ltetoconazole. JAMA 253:
`2413-2-ll4, I985
`
`13. Loose DS. Kan PB. Hirst MA. et al: Ketoconazole
`blocks adrenal steroidogenesis by inhibiting cytochrome P450-
`dependent enzymes. J Clin Invest 7 l :l495-1499, I983
`14. Santen RJ. Bossche I-IV. Symoens .1. el al: Site of
`action of low dose ketoconazole on androgen biosynthesis in
`men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 57:732-736. 1933
`15. Traclitenberg J. Halpern N. Pom A: Ketoconazolez A
`novel and rapid treatment for advanced prostatic cancer. J
`Urol 1301152453. 1983
`
`l6. Trachtenherg J. Pont A: Ketoconazole therapy for
`advanced prostate cancer. Lancet 2:433-435, 1984
`17. Tapétzoglou E. Subrarnauian MG. Al-Sarraf M. et al:
`High-dose ketoconazole therapy in patients with metastatic
`prostate cancer. Am J Clin Onool 9:369-315. 1986
`18. Williams G. Kerle DJ. Ware H. et al: Objective
`responses to ketoconazole therapy in patients with relapsed
`progressive prostatie cancer. Brit J Urol 58:45-51 . I986
`19. Olcen MM. Creech RI-I, Tormey DC. et al: Toxicity
`and response criteria of the Bastem Cooperative Oncology
`Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5:649-655. 1982
`20. Sornmerville IF. Flttmigni C. Collins WP. el al:
`Androgen metabolism in human skin. Proc Res Soc Med
`s4:a4s-34?. 191:
`‘
`2|. Sciarra F. Sorcini G. Di Silverio F. et al: Plasma
`testosterone and anclrostenedione after orchiectomy in pros-
`tatic adenocarcinoma. Clin Endocrinol 2210] -109, I973
`22. Ahrnann FR, Crawford ED, Kreis W, et al: The
`Amiiroglutetliimide Study Group. Adrenal steroid levels in
`castrated men with prostatic carcinoma treated with amino-
`glutethimide plus hydrooortisone. Cane Res -1?::t'I36-4‘l39.
`1987
`
`23. Rochlitz CF. Damon LE, Russi MB. et al: Cytotoxic-
`ity of ltetoconazole in malignant cell lines. Cancer Chemother
`Pharmacol 2| :3 I9-322. I933
`24. Rochlitz CF, Rnssi MB. Damon LE. et al: The
`cytotoxicity and interaction of ketoconazole and VPI6 in
`malignant cells. Clin Res 35:52'lA. I987
`
`WCK1013
`Page 6