PCRI News
The Finasteride Controversy
Monday, February 16, 2004
Last summer, a team of 16 researchers reported on the seven-year
Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial study that followed almost 19,000
men. The article, entitled “The Influence of Finasteride on the
Development of Prostate Cancer”, was published in the July 17,
2003 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine.
The report made quite a stir in the prostate cancer community because
of two fundamental findings reported as follows. “Seven years
of finasteride treatment resulted in a 24.8 percent reduction in the
prevalence of prostate cancer [as compared to a placebo group] during
that period. There was a reduction in relative risk among men who underwent
a prostate biopsy before seven years and among men who underwent biopsy
at the end of the study. The risk reductions were similar in subgroups
defined according to age, race or ethnic group, family history of prostate
cancer, and stratum of PSA level at randomization.”
The second finding reported was that “high-grade disease [as
defined by Gleason Scores of 7, 8, 9, or 10] was noted in 6.4 percent
of the men in the finasteride group, as compared with 5.1 percent of
those in the placebo group. A difference in the rate of high-grade
disease was seen within the first year of the study.
One possible explanation for this difference is a grading bias: histologic
changes that mimic those of high-grade disease are caused by androgen-deprivation
therapy.” And five different published papers were cited as sources
for this explanation.
However, in that same issue, Peter D. Scardino, M.D. published an
editorial concerning the PCPT results. Apparently not too impressed
with a 25%
reduction in the prevalence of PC, he concentrated on the apparent
increase in incidence of high-grade cancers to 6.4 percent of the finasteride
group (as compared to 5.1 percent of the placebo group). Ignoring the
possible grading-bias and other explanations offered by the study authors,
he concentrated on the possible dangers of highgrade PC, saying, “Cancers
with a Gleason Score of 7 to 10 contain poorly differentiated components
that are known to behave aggressively.
The risk of death due to prostate cancer within 15 years of diagnosis
among men with such cancers that are managed conservatively ranges
from 42 percent to 87 percent, depending on age and Gleason grade at
diagnosis, according to one study…[t]he study results suggest
that finasteride may accelerate the growth of high-grade cancers, which
may pose a threat to life and health if they are not treated successfully.”
There is little question that high-grade cancer is a serious situation,
pathologists would agree, but pathologists question whether Gleason
grading should be used to assess PC aggressiveness after ADT treatment—and
Gleason himself agrees. According to pathologist David Bostwick, M.D., “treated
cancer has a significantly higher architectural (Gleason) grade, lower
nuclear grade, and smaller nuclear diameter than untreated controls,
thus creating the potential for grading bias. I’m convinced that
this is what occurred in the PCPT study.”
The accompanying article Does
Finasteride Alter the Pathology of the Prostate and Cancer Grading? by
Dr. Bostwick provides the scientific basis for this conviction.
Reproduced
from PCRI Insights vol.7, no. 1