Klaus Brasso

Dr. Klaus Brasso

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 October 2020 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CPChristopher C Parker
Christopher C Parker
NCNoel W Clarke
Noel W Clarke
ACAdrian D Cook
Adrian D Cook
HKHoward G Kynaston
Howard G Kynaston
PPPeter Meidahl Petersen
Peter Meidahl Petersen
MSMatthew R Sydes
Matthew R Sydes

5 April 2024 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CPC.C. Parker
C.C. Parker
PPP.M. Petersen
P.M. Petersen
ACA.D. Cook
A.D. Cook
NCN.W. Clarke
N.W. Clarke
CCC. Catton
C. Catton
MSM.R. Sydes
M.R. Sydes
The optimal timing of radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer has been uncertain. RADICALS-RT compared efficacy and safety of adjuvant RT versus an observation policy with salvage RT for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure. RADICALS-RT was a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with ≥1 risk factor (pT3/4, Gleason 7-10, positive margins, preoperative PSA≥10 ng/ml) for recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Patients were randomised 1:1 to adjuvant RT ('Adjuvant-RT') or an observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure ('Salvage-RT') defined as PSA≥0.1 ng/ml or three consecutive rises. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned RT schedule (52.5 Gy/20 fractions or 66 Gy/33 fractions) and treatment centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom-from-distant-metastasis (FFDM), designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with Salvage-RT (control) to 95% at 10 years with Adjuvant-RT. Secondary outcome measures were biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used; hazard ratio (HR)<1 favours Adjuvant-RT. Between October 2007 and December 2016, 1396 participants from UK, Denmark, Canada and Ireland were randomised: 699 Salvage-RT, 697 Adjuvant-RT. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years. Ninety-three percent (649/697) Adjuvant-RT reported RT within 6 months after randomisation; 39% (270/699) Salvage-RT reported RT during follow-up. Median follow-up was 7.8 years. With 80 distant metastasis events, 10-year FFDM was 93% for Adjuvant-RT and 90% for Salvage-RT: HR=0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-1.07, P=0.095]. Of 109 deaths, 17 were due to prostate cancer. Overall survival was not improved (HR=0.980, 95% CI 0.667-1.440, P=0.917). Adjuvant-RT reported worse urinary and faecal incontinence 1 year after randomisation (P=0.001); faecal incontinence remained significant after 10 years (P=0.017). Long-term results from RADICALS-RT confirm adjuvant RT after radical prostatectomy increases the risk of urinary and bowel morbidity, but does not meaningfully improve disease control. An observation policy with salvage RT for PSA failure should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy. RADICALS, RADICALS-RT, ISRCTN40814031, NCT00541047.

2 November 2018 in Scandinavian Journal of Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JSJ. Stranne
J. Stranne
KBKlaus Brasso
Klaus Brasso
BBB. Brennhovd
B. Brennhovd
EJE. Johansson
E. Johansson
FJF. Jäderling
F. Jäderling
OAO. Akre
O. Akre
Objective: To describe study design and procedures for a prospective randomized trial investigating whether radical prostatectomy (RP) ± radiation improves cause-specific survival in comparison with primary radiation treatment (RT) and androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPC). Materials and methods: SPCG-15 is a prospective, multi-centre, open randomized phase III trial. Patients are randomized to either standard (RT + ADT) or experimental (RP with extended pelvic lymph-node dissection and with addition of adjuvant or salvage RT and/or ADT if deemed necessary) treatment. Each centre follows guidelines regarding the timing and dosing of postoperative RT and adjuvant treatment such as ADT The primary endpoint is cause-specific survival. Secondary endpoints include metastasis-free and overall survival, quality-of-life, functional outcomes and health-services requirements. Each subject will be followed up for a minimum of 10 years. Results: Twenty-three centres in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, well established in performing RP and RT for prostate cancer participated. Each country’s sites were coordinated by national coordinating investigators and sub-investigators for urology and oncology. Almost 400 men have been randomized of the stipulated 1200, with an increasing rate of accrual. Conclusions: The SPCG-15 trial aims to compare the two curatively intended techniques supplying new knowledge to support future decisions in treatment strategies for patients with LAPC The Scandinavian healthcare context is well suited for performing multi-centre long-term prospective randomized clinical trials. Similar care protocols and a history of entirely tax-funded healthcare facilitate joint trials.

1 December 2018 in Sports Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EBEik Dybboe Bjerre
Eik Dybboe Bjerre
KBKlaus Brasso
Klaus Brasso
AJAnders Bojer Jørgensen
Anders Bojer Jørgensen
TPThomas Hindborg Petersen
Thomas Hindborg Petersen
AEAlexandra Röthlin Eriksen
Alexandra Röthlin Eriksen
JMJulie Midtgaard
Julie Midtgaard
Background Physical activity has been shown to mitigate the unwanted psychological and physiological side effects of prostate cancer treatments, but sustainable exercise possibilities are limited. Objective Our objective was to examine whether football in a real-world setting (i.e., local football clubs) was safe and feasible in practice and could improve quality of life, mitigate decline in muscle mass and bone density, and increase fat mass in patients with prostate cancer. Methods In this pragmatic, multicentre, parallel randomized controlled trial, men diagnosed with prostate cancer were recruited from five Danish urological departments. Men (N = 214) diagnosed with prostate cancer were randomly allocated, using random generated lists (block size 4–8) stratified for center and androgen-deprivation therapy status, to either 1 h of football twice weekly in a local football club or to usual care, which was a 15- to 30-min telephone session covering their options for physical activity or free-of-charge rehabilitation delivered as standard in Denmark. Allocation was concealed from the trial investigator performing the randomization, but—given the nature of the intervention—this was not possible for personnel and participants. Assessments were performed at baseline, 12 weeks, and 6 months. The primary outcome was mean change difference in prostate cancer-specific quality of life at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were body composition, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) physical and mental health, and safety—reported as fractures, falls, and serious adverse events. Results Attrition was 1 and 3% at 12 weeks, and 5% and 5% at 6 months for the usual care and football groups, respectively. Prostate cancer-specific quality of life was equal between groups at 12 weeks (mean difference + 1.9 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] –1.0–4.8; P = 0.20) and at 6 months (+ 0.5 points, 95% CI –2.8–3.8; P = 0.76). Fractures were equally distributed, with two fractures in the usual care group and one in the football group. Likewise, body composition outcomes were equal. Mental health improved after 6 months of football (mean difference + 2.7 points, 95% CI 0.8–4.6; P = 0.006). Conclusions In this trial, community-based football was a feasible exercise strategy for men with prostate cancer. Football did not improve prostate cancer-specific quality of life but did improve mental health; the clinical significance of this is unclear. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02430792.

14 March 2021 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TLThiago S. Lima
Thiago S. Lima
DIDiego Iglesias-Gato
Diego Iglesias-Gato
LSLuciano Souza
Luciano Souza
Jan StenvangJan Stenvang
Jan Stenvang
DLDiego S. Lima
Diego S. Lima
Jose MoreiraJose Moreira
Jose Moreira
Docetaxel—a taxane-based chemotherapeutic agent—was the first treatment to demonstrate significant improvements in overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, the response to docetaxel is generally short-lived, and relapse eventually occurs due to the development of resistance. To explore the mechanisms of acquired docetaxel resistance in prostate cancer (PCa) and set these in the context of androgen deprivation therapy, we established docetaxel-resistant PCa cell lines, derived from the androgen-dependent LNCaP cell line, and from the LNCaP lineage-derived androgen-independent C4-2B sub-line. We generated two docetaxel-resistant LNCaPR and C4-2BR sub-lines, with IC50 values 77- and 50-fold higher than those of the LNCaP and C4-2B parental cells, respectively. We performed gene expression analysis of the matched sub-lines and found several alterations that may confer docetaxel resistance. In addition to increased expression of ABCB1, an ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter, and a well-known gene associated with development of docetaxel resistance, we identified genes associated with androgen signaling, cell survival, and overexpression of ncRNAs. In conclusion, we identified multiple mechanisms that may be associated with the development of taxane drug resistance in PCa. Actioning these mechanisms could provide a potential approach to re-sensitization of docetaxel-resistant PCa cells to docetaxel treatment and thereby further add to the life-prolonging effects of this drug in men with mCRPC.

1 October 2017 in European Journal of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
John Thomas HelgstrandJohn Thomas Helgstrand
John Thomas Helgstrand
Martin Andreas RøderMartin Andreas Røder
Martin Andreas Røder
NKNina Klemann
Nina Klemann
BTBirgitte Grønkær Toft
Birgitte Grønkær Toft
KBKlaus Brasso
Klaus Brasso
PIPeter Iversen
Peter Iversen