Tony McHale standing in his garden, smiling.

Help every man with prostate cancer

Give the gift of research to help every man with prostate cancer live longer, healthier lives.

Donate now

Tony McHale (pictured above) discovered he had an alteration in the BRCA2 gene at the age of 61, putting him at a much higher risk of developing prostate cancer. Shortly after, Tony joined the IMPACT study at the ICR, which investigated whether regular screening would lead to earlier diagnosis of aggressive forms of the disease. Around 18 months later, the screening revealed Tony had prostate cancer. 

"Being involved in the IMPACT study saved my life. If I hadn't taken part, I'd never have known I had prostate cancer. As far as I was aware, I didn't have any symptoms – and the sooner the disease is detected and treated, the better the chances are of survival." – Tony

Godfrey's prostate cancer story

 

DJ and music promoter, Godfrey Fletcher, found out he had prostate cancer in 2015 at the age of 47, shortly after his father had also been diagnosed.

"I was so lucky that my cancer was picked up at a very early stage. I was young and fit, with no symptoms. A year after my treatment finished, I was told it had been successful. My dad wasn't so fortunate. He was diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer and passed away at 80. His experience, and mine, showed me the importance of early diagnosis."

Why we need more research into prostate cancer

We're proud of the research advances we've made over the last 20 years. Our scientists discovered the drug abiraterone; identified genetic variants that influence risk of developing the disease; and pioneered new, more precise forms of radiotherapy. But despite our research advances, some prostate cancers remain difficult to treat. This includes those diagnosed at a later stage and those more aggressive tumours, which can spread quickly and evolve to resist treatment.

That's why we urgently need better ways to detect prostate cancer earlier, predict drug resistance, and develop smarter, more personalised treatments. Your gift will help our world-leading researchers unravel the complexity of prostate cancer, to give men precise and personalised care with the right treatments at the right time, to live longer and healthier lives.

Professor Eeles's goal is to develop new tests that could be used in prostate cancer screening, helping to identify men at a higher risk. Her team showed that a simple saliva test, carried out at home, was more accurate at identifying future risk of prostate cancer for some men than the current standard blood test. 

Building on this success, they recently launched a major new study to find out whether an improved version of this test – now suitable for more diverse groups, including Black men and younger men – can help detect more cancers earlier in men at higher risk. 

Tackling drug resistance

Our research underpinned the development of olaparib, a drug that revolutionised treatment for people with BRCA-related cancers. In a recent study, Professor Johann de Bono's team showed that changes which can be spotted with a simple blood test can reveal how long a prostate cancer patient will respond to olaparib. 

The ability to predict when – and how – patients will stop responding to olaparib could help doctors personalise treatment, and in the future, guide the development of new drugs to outsmart resistance – keeping us one step ahead of prostate cancer.

Professor Johann de Bono in the laboratory, smiling.

Creating smarter, kinder treatments for every man

Our scientists are at the forefront of precision cancer medicine – developing more effective treatments with fewer side effects.

Laboratory studies co-led by Dr Adam Sharp and Professor Johann de Bono showed that NXP800 – a new drug which targets a ‘master switch’ that cancer cells hijack to support their growth – slowed prostate cancer cell growth. This innovative drug could potentially also benefit men with advanced prostate cancer that has stopped responding to standard hormone therapy.

A study co-led by Professor Emma Hall has found that men with intermediate-risk, localised prostate cancer can be treated just as effectively with five sessions of higher-dose radiation therapy as with several weeks of standard treatment. Using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), which targets tumours with pinpoint accuracy, patients can receive a highly effective treatment with far fewer hospital visits. 

A study co-led by Professor Nick James has shown that a new artificial intelligence (AI) test can select which men with high-risk prostate cancer that has not spread will require the life-extending drug abiraterone. In the STAMPEDE trial, the team found that three out of four men could be spared unnecessary treatment, making the drug – discovered by our scientists – more affordable for the NHS.

Your gift can help every man with prostate cancer live longer, healthier lives

Help someone's dad, grandad, brother, uncle, partner, or friend survive prostate cancer. Your support will help fund life-saving research – so that every man can spend more precious time with their loved ones.

Make a donation

Your gift of research can help transform the lives of every man with prostate cancer.
With GiftAid you'll also be able to add 25% at no extra cost to you

Please choose a donation amount.

Your gift of research can help transform the lives of every man with prostate cancer.
With GiftAid you'll also be able to add 25% at no extra cost to you

Please choose a donation amount.

 Related news and blogs

09/05/17 - by

Dr Navita Somaiah is a Clinician Scientist Fellow at the ICR

Dr Navita Somaiah is a Clinician Scientist Fellow at the ICR

Last year, the ICR awarded funding to a large multidisciplinary research project headed by Head of Data Science Dr Bissan Al-Lazikani and Clinician Scientist Dr Navita Somaiah. They brought together a collaborative team to study risk factors for radiotherapy toxicity in prostate cancer patients using Big Data analysis.

At a recent ICR Future Leaders event, Dr Somaiah spoke about her experiences of leading the project. She shared some practical tips about successfully working on team science projects.

Q: What is the team working on?

NS: Two-thirds of cancer patients are treated with radiotherapy at some point during their treatment, but up to 20% of them can experience side-effects from this treatment, often irreversible and affecting their quality of life. Our project team came together to find a way to predict the patients most likely to experience treatment toxicity so we can adapt treatment for different groups accordingly.

Most studies looking at the causes of toxicity after radiotherapy only look at one type of data at a time, as it’s complicated to combine different data in an analysis. In this project we’re combining the full spectrum of different types of data – including genetic information and radiotherapy dose, as well as information like patient-reported outcomes and notes from clinicians.

Q: What’s your role in the team?

NS: I co-lead the project team with Dr Bissan Al-Lazikani. It’s a large team made up of 16 people including computational biologists, clinicians, statisticians, and physicists. Bissan and I manage the team, set the priorities and timelines, and keep everything on track. But the work is very much a team effort.

Q: What advice would you give others thinking of setting up a multidisciplinary project?

NS: Working as part of a large and diverse team has its challenges but is a hugely rewarding experience. Keep talking to each other openly and freely, and deal with problems as they arise.

Be sure from the start to have a set of ground rules. At our kick-off meeting we agreed that intellectual property rests with the team and major decisions couldn’t be made outside of team meetings. We also set up a mailing list for the group so that nobody misses out on key information.

Work hard to find a common language so that everyone understands what is being discussed. Sometimes one of us might slip into talking in fantastically geeky equations for example, but if anyone gets too technical we just stop them and ask them to explain. We are constantly learning from each other and this is a very rewarding aspect of team science.  

Q: And how are you ensuring that each member of the team is recognised for their contribution?

NS: One of the major challenges for collaborative working is that career progression for researchers is often driven by their track record of publications and their position in the author list. We expect to have multiple publications from the work that we’ve been doing – some more technical and some more clinical – and we agreed right at the outset that all members of the team will be on all the publications arising from this work. There is also scope to have multiple first and senior authors, to reflect our true team science approach.

Q: What’s next for the team?

NS: We’ll be presenting our initial data at the ICR conference later this year. The prize money from the Team Science Competition has acted as a pump-prime allowing us to generate important preliminary data. We’ll now apply for grants to fully fund this project and apply this approach to other radiotherapy data sets for breast and prostate cancer patients. Our focus will remain on predicting side-effects but we will also expand this to look at treatment response and tumour control.

We’re starting to see real advances through applying Big Data analysis to the discovery of drug targets and treatments – I’m excited to see how much we can achieve by applying a Big Data approach to radiotherapy research, allowing us to intelligently tailor treatment to individual patients. If we’re successful, these approaches can be used across other tumour types where radiotherapy forms part of the treatment.