UPDATE ON BENIGN ENLARGEMENT OF THE PROSTATE
As men age, their prostate glands gradually enlarge under the year-to-year
influence of the male sex hormones. The prostate gland is a walnut-sized
organ that is situated at the base of the bladder. Since the urethra
passes through the prostate gland, significant enlargement of the
prostate gland can prevent the bladder from emptying properly. When
benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) is sufficiently advanced, urinating
can become very difficult. The bladder then becomes distended with
urine, causing discomfort, as well as an increased risk of infection,
bladder stones and kidney damage.
Based upon previous autopsy studies, BPH occurs in about 50% of men
in their 60s, rising to more than 90% among men 85 years of age and
older. Symptoms of BPH occur in approximately 14% of men in their
40s, 24% of men in their 50s, and in more than 40% of men in their
60s. In the US, an estimated 15 million men experience symptoms of
BPH. At the present time, most experts believe that there is no significant
link between BPH and prostate cancer, although both diseases arise
due to, at least in part, the lifelong effects of exposure to male
sex hormones.
There are several medications that have been shown to improve the
urinary symptoms of BPH. In general, two classes of medications have
been used most frequently: alpha-adrenergic blockers and 5-alpha reductase
inhibitors. The former class of medications relax the muscle fibers
at the base of the bladder, and within the urethra, to improve urine
flow. The latter class of BPH medications inhibit the actions of male
sex hormones in the prostate gland, as well as in other cells of the
body that respond to testosterone and related androgenic hormones.
This androgen hormone blockade results in gradual shrinkage of the
enlarged prostate gland. Various other non-prescribed remedies have
also been touted for BPH, most of them herbal in origin. These include
saw palmetto fruit, South African star grass roots, African plum tree
bark, stinging nettle roots, rye pollen and pumpkin seeds. Among these,
saw palmetto has, arguably, the largest following. Unfortunately,
there has been little scientific evidence to support the use of these
alternative therapies for the treatment of BPH.
Two interesting studies that were reported this week may be helpful
to men with symptomatic BPH. The first, in the New England Journal
of Medicine, looked at the effects of combining the alpha-adrenergic
blocker doxazosin with the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor finasteride
as combined therapy for symptomatic BPH. This was a double-blind placebo-controlled
study, where neither patients nor their doctors knew if the study
volunteers were receiving one of the BPH drugs, both of them, or just
sugar pills. A total of 3,047 men were followed for an average of
almost 5 years during this study. The study found that the men who
took doxazosin alone experienced a 39% reduction in the severity of
their BPH symptoms, while those who took finasteride alone experienced
a 34% reduction in symptoms (both results were relative to the symptom
severity reported by the men who received only placebo pills). The
men who received both BPH medications during the study reported a
rather dramatic 66% reduction in the severity of their symptoms, however.
This is a rather unusual case where the combination of two different
classes of drug therapy prove to be completely additive in their benefit
when compared to each drug given alone. In most cases, combined therapies
for virtually all human diseases may be somewhat more effective than
each individual drug given by itself, but the additive effect of the
two drugs are rarely on the order of the sum of their individual beneficial
effects. An interesting side note from this study: patients who received
doxazosin alone experienced fewer symptoms of BPH, but did not experience
a lower risk of acute episodes of urinary tract obstruction or the
need for surgical intervention when compared to placebo. However,
finasteride, whether given alone or in combination with doxazosin,
did significantly reduce the incidence of these events.
This study, therefore, strongly supports the combined use of both
5-alpha reductase inhibitors and alpha-adrenergic blockers to treat
symptomatic BPH, and may offer a non-surgical alternative to many
men now contemplating surgery to relieve their BPH symptoms.
The second study, as reported in the Journal of Urology, compared
saw palmetto and finasteride as individual therapies for BPH in men
with symptomatic prostate gland enlargement. Study volunteers were
randomized to receive either saw palmetto (325 mg per day) or finasteride
(5 mg per day) for a period of 1 year. The patients then had their
BPH-related symptoms reassessed at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months.
At 12 months, 56 of the original 64 patients continued to participate
in this study. The results of this study were consistent with other
similar recent studies. The group assigned to take saw palmetto experienced
no improvement in their BPH symptoms when compared to placebo pills,
while the group of men who received finasteride did experience considerable
improvement in symptoms. This is a rather small study, but it adds
to other studies that call into question the use of saw palmetto as
a treatment for BPH.
EFFECTS OF DISCONTINUATION OF HRT FOLLOWING THE DIAGNOSIS
OF BREAST CANCER
Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) following menopause has declined
precipitously since last summer’s release of the interim results
from the huge Womens’ Health Initiative Study (WHIS), The study
found a significantly increased risk of breast cancer, colon cancer,
heart disease and dementia in women who had chronically taken combined
HRT with estrogen and progesterone tablets. These adverse effects
were so significant that this portion of the WHIS was prematurely
terminated so that the women who were taking combination HRT could
be warned about the worrisome findings. (Another subgroup of women
who took only estrogen pills are still being followed by the study.)
While many women without a personal history of breast cancer have
subsequently opted to go back on their Prempro tablets following the
initial WHIS scare, another subgroup of women, women with breast cancer,
tend to be more ambivalent. Even so, many women who have been diagnosed
with breast cancer ultimately choose to resume HRT, although usually
against the recommendations of their doctors.
A new study reported in the journal Cancer looked at the impact on
their breast cancer tumors of discontinuing HRT after they were diagnosed
with breast cancer. A total of 140 women, all of whom had been taking
HRT, participated in the study after they were diagnosed with breast
cancer with a needle biopsy. Following an average subsequent duration
of 17 days, the women all underwent surgical removal of their breast
tumors. Twenty-five of the 140 women elected to continue HRT during
the interval between their core needle biopsies and the surgical removal
of their breast cancers. An additional 55 women who were not taking
HRT at the time of their diagnosis of breast cancer (also by core
needle biopsy) were included in this study as “controls.”
In the 125 women who discontinued HRT following their needle biopsy,
there was a significant decrease in their breast tumors’ expression
of a protein, Ki-67, that reflects how fast the cancer cells are dividing
and growing. This decrease in the so-called proliferation of breast
cancer cells was identified by comparing the levels of Ki-67 in tumor
cells recovered from the needle biopsy with the tumor cells subsequently
removed by definitive surgery. Further evidence that HRT was stimulating
breast tumor cell growth was the finding that the reduction in Ki-67
expression seen in the surgically removed breast tumors taken from
women who stopped HRT occurred only in cancers that were chemically
sensitive to the female hormone estrogen. The estrogen receptor-negative
tumor cells did not appreciably differ in their expression of Ki-67
protein between the needle biopsy specimens and the surgical excision
specimens, even among the women who stopped taking HRT after their
initial needle biopsy. In addition to a reduction in the levels of
Ki-67 protein expressed in estrogen-sensitive tumors following withdrawal
of HRT, the scientists found that other proteins linked with more
aggressive growth of breast cancer cells declined after discontinuing
HRT in the women with estrogen-sensitive tumors. This result is exactly
what the majority of oncologists would have predicted, but this innovative
little study is the first to actually show a correlation between HRT
withdrawal and a subsequent biochemical improvement in the aggressiveness
of estrogen-sensitive breast cancers in living human beings. The results
of this study, while not proving or disproving that HRT cessation
reduces the risk of recurrent or second breast cancers, does add powerful
evidence to the growing awareness (among both patients and physicians)
that estrogen-sensitive breast cancers are likely to respond to continued
HRT by behaving more aggressively.
Dr.
Robert A. Wascher