Time of metastatic disease presentation and volume of disease are prognostic for metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC)

Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET Response Associates with Metastasis-Free Survival After Stereotactic Ablative Radiation in Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer

Purpose

Emerging data suggest that metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) improves outcomes in patients with oligometastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (omCSPC). Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) can detect occult metastatic disease, and PSMA response has been proposed as a biomarker for treatment response. Herein, we identify and validate a PSMA-PET biomarker for metastasis-free survival (MFS) following MDT in omCSPC.

Methods and Materials

We performed an international multi-institutional retrospective study of patients with omCSPC, defined as ≤3 lesions, treated with metastasis-directed stereotactic ablative radiation who underwent PSMA-PET/computed tomography (CT) before and after (median, 6.2 months; range, 2.4-10.9 months) treatment. Pre- and post-MDT PSMA-PET/CT maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was measured for all lesions, and PSMA response was defined as the percent change in SUVmax of the least responsive lesion. PSMA response was both evaluated as a continuous variable and dichotomized into PSMA responders, with a complete/partial response (at least a 30% reduction in SUVmax), and PSMA nonresponders, with stable/progressive disease (less than a 30% reduction in SUVmax). PSMA response was correlated with conventional imaging-defined metastasis-free survival (MFS) via Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.

Results

A total of 131 patients with 261 treated metastases were included in the analysis, with a median follow-up of 29 months (IQR, 18.5-41.3 months). After stereotactic ablative radiation, 70.2% of patients were classified as PSMA responders. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that PSMA response as a continuous variable was associated with a significantly worse MFS (hazard ratio = 1.003; 95% CI, 1.001-1.006; P = .016). Patients classified as PSMA responders were found to have a significantly improved median MFS of 39.9 versus 12 months (P = .001) compared with PSMA nonresponders. Our study is limited as it is a retrospective review of a heterogenous population.

Conclusions

After stereotactic ablative radiation, PSMA-PET response appears to be a radiographic biomarker that correlates with MFS in omCSPC. This approach holds promise for guiding clinical management of omCSPC and should be validated in a prospective setting.

Prognostic outcomes in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: Comparative assessments between conventional androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and ADT with novel androgen receptor signal inhibitor

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the prognostic outcomes between metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients receiving conventional androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and those receiving ADT plus a novel androgen-receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) in routine clinical practice in Japan.

METHODS

This was conducted as a retrospective multicenter study including 581 mCSPC patients, consisting of 305 receiving ADT alone or in combination with bicalutamide (group 1) and 276 receiving ADT plus one of the following ARSIs: abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, or enzalutamide (group 2). Prognostic outcomes between these 2 groups were comprehensively compared.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, prostate-specific antigen-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS) in group 2 was significantly longer than that in group 1, while no significant difference was noted in overall survival (OS) between the two groups. In patients corresponding to the LATITUDE high-risk group, however, both PSA-PFS and OS in group 2 were significantly longer than those in group 1. Of several factors examined, the following were identified as independent predictors of poor PSA-PFS in the entire cohort as well as the LATITUDE high-risk group: high C-reactive protein, high lactate dehydrogenase, high alkaline phosphatase, high Gleason score, and group 1. Furthermore, it was possible to precisely classify both the entire cohort and LATITUDE high-risk group into 3 risk groups regarding PSA-PFS according to the positive numbers of independent factors: positive for ≤1 factor, favorable; 2 factors, intermediate; and ≥3 factors, poor.

CONCLUSION

Combined use of ARSIs with ADT could improve the prognostic outcomes of mCSPC patients, particularly those in the LATITUDE high-risk group, in real-world clinical practice in Japan.

Optimal systemic therapy in men with low-volume prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Low-volume prostate cancer is an established prognostic category of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. However, the term is often loosely used to reflect the low burden of disease across different prostate cancer states. This review explores the definitions of low-volume prostate cancer, biology, and current evidence for treatment. We also explore future directions, including the impact of advanced imaging modalities, particularly prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) scans, on refining patient subgroups and treatment strategies for patients with low-volume prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent investigations have attempted to redefine low-volume disease, incorporating factors beyond metastatic burden. Advanced imaging, especially PSMA PET, offers enhanced accuracy in detecting metastases, potentially challenging the conventional definition of low volume. The prognosis and treatment of low-volume prostate cancer may vary by the timing of metastatic presentation. Biomarker-directed consolidative therapy, metastases-directed therapy, and de-escalation of systemic therapies will be increasingly important, especially in patients with metachronous low-volume disease.

SUMMARY

In the absence of validated biomarkers, the management of low-volume prostate cancer as defined by CHAARTED criteria may be guided by the timing of metastatic presentation. For metachronous low-volume disease, we recommend novel hormonal therapy (NHT) doublets with or without consolidative metastasis-directed therapy (MDT), and for synchronous low-volume disease, NHT doublets with or without consolidative MDT and prostate-directed radiation. Docetaxel triplets may be a reasonable alternative in some patients with synchronous presentation. There is no clear role of docetaxel doublets in patients with low-volume disease. In the future, a small subset of low-volume diseases with oligometastases selected by genomics and advanced imaging like PSMA PET may achieve long-term remission with MDT with no systemic therapy.

Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy in metastatic prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The evolving role of stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) as metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) for oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPCa) will be discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Oligometastatic disease (OMD) is an intermediate state between localized and wide-spread malignant disease. OMD has recently been spotlighted given the increasing demonstration of clinical benefit from local therapies despite presence of metastatic disease and allure of the curative potential of MDT in select cases. Among the different forms of MDT, SABR has rapidly become a widely adopted treatment modality. Significant efforts in this space have focused on omPCa, owing to its relatively indolent biology, presence of a sensitive and specific serum biomarker and recent advances in molecular imaging. While most studies have evaluated the role of SABR MDT in hormone sensitive omPCa, new emerging clinical data also suggests benefits of SABR MDT for even castration-resistant disease.

SUMMARY

Treating omPCa with SABR MDT appears to generate an efficacy signal with minimal morbidity across both hormone-sensitive and castration-resistant disease. However, additional definitive omPCa trial data are needed. Future research efforts should investigate biomarkers for this heterogeneous disease space and the role of SABR MDT in combination with systemic agents to improve upon standard of care treatments.

Impact of presentation timing in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: Characterization of patients and identification of prognostic factors

BACKGROUND

The treatment and surveillance of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has evolved since the introduction of several treatment intensification options associated with hormonal blockade and classifications based on the timing of metastatic disease presentation and disease volume. Using a hospital-based registry, we aimed to assess whether these new classifications are applicable to our population, as few studies have demonstrated their prognostic value for overall survival (OS) and time to development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and to establish prognostic factors in our population.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of mHSPC patients who were attended at an oncology referral hospital in Bogota between 2017 and 2021 were included in this study. The primary and secondary endpoints were OS and time to CRPC. The distribution of outcome measures was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Proportional hazard models were constructed using the Cox regression approach and stratified according to risk factors.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 373 patients. The median castration resistance-free survival was 48 months (CI: 32-73 months), and OS was 43 months (CI: 37-48 months). In multivariate analysis, nodal staging, ECOG status, and surgical castration were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

In our hospital-based registry, the independent impact of the time of presentation on castration-resistant-free survival or OS could not be demonstrated, nor could the grouping of prognostic categories based on metastatic presentation temporality and volume. Other independent prognostic factors have been proposed.

Current Systemic Therapy in Men with Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to explore the evolving landscape of treatments available for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

In less than a decade, evidence was chronologically provided that (1) systemic treatment intensification with docetaxel improves outcomes, including survival, in men with mCSPC, (2) then that these outcomes are also improved when a second-generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) is combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), and (3) using a "triplet systemic therapy," which consists in the combination of ADT, an ARPI and docetaxel, further improves outcomes, including survival. Radiotherapy to the prostate combined with ADT alone is now recommended in men with low-volume mCSPC. Combining prostate radiotherapy and intensified systemic treatment including abiraterone may be synergistic as suggested in the PEACE-1 trial. Also, the role of metastases-directed local therapies (mostly stereotactic radiotherapy) is currently being assessed in phase 3 trials. Finally, the integration of biomarkers (e.g. BRCA2 gene alterations, PTEN loss, PSMA expression) for decision making is not currently established, though trials are also currently underway. Importantly, most evidence currently available was obtained in men with de novo metastases, while for those with metastatic relapse after definitive local treatment, the role of treatment intensification is less well established. Treatment intensification is nowadays the standard of care for patients with de novo mCSPC as it leads to outcomes improvement, including survival, and the standard of care is evolving almost on a yearly basis.

Patient-reported Quality of Life and Survival Outcomes in Prostate Cancer: Analysis of the ECOG-ACRIN E3805 Chemohormonal Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial (CHAARTED)

BACKGROUND

Chemohormonal therapy with androgen deprivation therapy and docetaxel (ADT + D) improves overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QOL) at 12 mo versus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the prognostic role of QOL is unknown in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To study the relationship between QOL, disease characteristics, and OS in men with mHSPC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this exploratory post hoc analysis, 790 patients with mHSPC completed the QOL instruments Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard models tested the association between QOL and OS by clinical and disease characteristics.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Baseline higher FACT-P trended toward improved survival after accounting for clinical variables (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80 [0.62, 1.04], p = 0.09), while higher 3-mo FACT-P was independently associated with better survival (HR 0.76 [0.58, 1.0], p = 0.05). Patients with the poorest QOL (bottom quartile) at baseline and 3 mo had longer survival if they received ADT + D rather than ADT alone (median OS 45.2 vs 34.4 mo, HR 0.75 [0.53, 1.05], p = 0.09, and 48.3 vs 29.3 mo, HR 0.69 [0.48, 0.99], p = 0.05 respectively). In contrast, patients with the best QOL (top quartile) at baseline and 3 mo had comparable survival irrespective of whether or not docetaxel was added (median OS 72.1 vs 51.7 mo, HR 0.92 [0.63, 1.36], p = 0.69, and 69.9 vs 68.9 mo, HR 1.11 [0.73, 1.67], p = 0.63, respectively). Survival was linked with baseline FACIT-F (HR 0.76 [0.57, 1.0], p = 0.05), but not BPI (HR 0.98 [0.75, 1.28], p = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Three-month QOL had a stronger independent association with survival. The most symptomatic patients had longer survival with the addition of docetaxel; conversely, the least symptomatic patients did not appear to benefit. Consideration of QOL may enhance decision-making and patient selection when choosing chemohormonal treatment in mHSPC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Quality of life independently forecasted the survival of men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in the CHAARTED study. Close tracking of quality of life could help patients and clinicians make decisions about the appropriate treatment in this setting.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II-2024 Update: Treatment of Relapsing and Metastatic Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) have been updated. Here we provide a summary of the 2024 guidelines.

METHODS

The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Risk stratification for relapsing PCa after primary therapy may guide salvage therapy decisions. New treatment options, such as androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs), ARTA + chemotherapy combinations, PARP inhibitors and their combinations, and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based therapy have become available for men with metastatic PCa.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Evidence for relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant PCa is evolving rapidly. These guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. The full version is available online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/ prostate-cancer/).

PATIENT SUMMARY

This article summarises the 2024 guidelines for the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. These guidelines are based on evidence and guide doctors in discussing treatment decisions with their patients. The guidelines are updated every year.

Identification of functional and diverse circulating cancer-associated fibroblasts in metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer patients

In prostate cancer (PCa), cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) promote tumor progression, drug resistance, and metastasis. Although circulating tumor cells are studied as prognostic and diagnostic markers, little is known about other circulating cells and their association with PCa metastasis. Here, we explored the presence of circulating CAFs (cCAFs) in metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer (mCNPC) patients. cCAFs were stained with fibroblast activation protein (FAP), epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), and receptor-type tyrosine-protein phosphatase C (CD45), then FAP+EpCAM- cCAFs were enumerated and sorted using fluorescence-activated cell sorting. FAP+EpCAM- cCAFs ranged from 60 to 776 (389 mean ± 229 SD) per 2 × 108 mononuclear cells, whereas, in healthy donors, FAP+ EpCAM- cCAFs ranged from 0 to 71 (28 mean ± 22 SD). The mCNPC-derived cCAFs showed positivity for vimentin and intracellular collagen-I. They were viable and functional after sorting, as confirmed by single-cell collagen-I secretion after 48 h of culturing. Two cCAF subpopulations, FAP+CD45- and FAP+CD45+, were identified, both expressing collagen-I and vimentin, but with distinctly different morphologies. Collectively, this study demonstrates the presence of functional and viable circulating CAFs in mCNPC patients, suggesting the role of these cells in prostate cancer.

Real-world prostate-specific antigen reduction and survival outcomes of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients treated with apalutamide: An observational, retrospective, and multicentre study

Background

Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) treatment has changed drastically during the last years with the emergence of androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs). ARTA combined with androgen deprivation therapy has demonstrated better oncological and survival outcomes in these patients. However, the optimal choice among different ARTAs remains uncertain due to their analogous efficacy.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to describe prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and oncological outcomes of patients with mHSPC treated with apalutamide.

Material and methods

Medical records from three different hospitals in Spain were used to conduct this study. Patients diagnosed with mHSPC and under apalutamide treatment were included between March 2021 and January 2023. Data regarding PSA response, overall survival (OS), and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) were collected and stratified by metastasis volume, timing, and stating.

Results

193 patients were included; 34.2% of patients were de novo mHSPC, and the majority was classified as m1b. The 18-month OS and rPFS were 92.5% and 88.9%, respectively. Patients with PSA levels ≤0.2 ng/ml showcased an 18-month OS rate of 98.7%, contrasting with 65.3% for those with PSA >0.2 ng/ml. Similar trends emerged for rPFS (97.4% and 53.7%, respectively). When differentiating between low-volume and high-volume metastasis, the OS rate stood at 98.4% and 80.7%, respectively, while the rPFS rates were 93% and 81.6%, respectively. No significant differences were found between groups stratified by metastasis timing.

Conclusion

This real-world study on patients with mHSPC treated with apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy revealed robust oncological outcomes, aligning with the emerging evidence. The study's hallmark finding highlights the significance of rapid and deep PSA response as a predictor of improved oncological and survival outcomes.

Real-world progression in the survival of de novo Metastatic prostate cancer over the past decade

BACKGROUND

The impact of evolving treatment strategies for metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) on real-world survival is not well understood. We analyzed changes in mPCa survival over the past decade and discussed the potential driving factors behind these changes.

METHODS

Our study involved 43,228 mPCa patients (2004-2020) from the SEER database, divided into 4 diagnostic periods. We used a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate diagnostic periods' influence on overall mortality (OM) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PSM), and calculated relative median survival improvements between adjacent periods. Subgroup analyses based on age and distant metastasis sites were conducted.

RESULTS

Patients diagnosed in 2016 to 2020 experienced significantly reduced mortality risk compared to those in 2004 to 2007 (HR 0.64 for OM, HR 0.62 for CSM, both P < 0.001). The study period witnessed an absolute improvement in median overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), 17 months (54.8%) and 25 months (67.6%) respectively. The most rapid relative survival improvement occurred post-2016, with a 29.7% increase in median OS and a 37.8% increase in PCSS compared to 2012 to 2015. There was a significant reduction in mortality risk throughout the study period in both age groups (age <75 and ≥75), but absolute survival gains were smaller in the older group (24 months [68.6%] vs. 8 months [32%] for OS, 36 months [90.0%] vs. 11 months [33.3%] for PCSS), with lower relative survival improvements after 2016 (37.2% vs. 17.9% for OS, 49% vs. 22.2% for PCSS). All metastasis site subgroups (except M1a) exhibited a significant reduction in mortality risk (all P < 0.001). Absolute survival improvements were 58 months (134.9%) for M1a, 16 months (50.0%) for M1b, and 17 months (54.8%) for M1c.

CONCLUSION

The survival of mPCa have significantly improved over the past decade, although the progress is slower in elderly patients. Investigating the underlying reasons for survival differences among various patient profiles can further refine mPCa treatment strategies.

Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer in the Era of Doublet and Triplet Therapy

OPINION STATEMENT

Treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer has undergone significant evolution in recent years, leading to substantial improvements in overall survival. Men are living longer than ever before with a median survival now which is almost 6 years. The timing and extent of metastatic disease combined with individual patient factors helps treatment recommendation of doublet therapy including androgen deprivation (ADT) plus either chemotherapy or androgen receptor signaling inhibition (ARSI) or triplet therapy with ADT+ARSI+chemotherapy. New treatments must continue to be developed to enhance survival with goals of cure. Better biomarkers that allow for more effective treatments will enhance disease control, quality of life, and survival.

Docetaxel Provides Oncological Benefits in the Era of New-Generation Androgen Receptor Inhibitors - or Is Three a Crowd?

In recent years, several systemic therapies have been introduced for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, including androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with docetaxel (Doc) and/or new-generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI). Trials evaluating ADT + ARSI have consistently demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit for doublet therapy over ADT alone. Similarly, the STOPCaP meta-analysis showed an OS benefit in favor of ADT + Doc versus ADT alone. ARSI, Doc, and ADT have different antitumor mechanisms, thus potentiating the effect of combination therapy. Two randomized trials showed that the addition of ARSI to ADT + Doc improves OS, especially for synchronous high-volume disease. However, the real question about triplet therapy remains unanswered: whether combining Doc with ARSI improves outcomes compared to ADT + ARSI. As there are no head-to-head comparisons, this narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding triplet therapy versus doublet therapy including ADT+ ARSI.

PSMA Radioligand Therapy in Prostate Cancer: Where Are We and Where Are We Heading?

ABSTRACT

Diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer are complex and very challenging, being a major health care burden. The efficacy of radioligand therapy with prostate-specific membrane antigen agents has been proven beneficial in certain clinical indications. In this review, we describe management of prostate cancer patients according to current guidelines, especially focusing on the available clinical evidence for prostate-specific membrane antigen radioligand therapy.

Extended nodal radiotherapy for prostate cancer relapse guided with [11C]-choline PET/CT: ten-year results in patients enrolled in a prospective trial

AIMS

To report long-term outcomes of relapsed prostate cancer (PC) patients treated in a prospective single-arm study with extended-nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) and [11C]-choline positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT)-guided simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to positive lymph nodes (LNs).

METHODS

From 12/2009 to 04/2015, 60 PC patients with biochemical relapse and positive LNs only were treated in this study. ENRT at a median total dose (TD) = 51.8 Gy/28 fr and PET/CT-guided SIB to positive LNs at a median TD = 65.5 Gy was prescribed. Median PSA at relapse was 2.3 (interquartile range, IQR:1.3-4.0) ng/ml. Median number of positive LNs: 2 (range: 1-18). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was prescribed for 48 patients for a median of 30.7 (IQR: 18.5-43.1) months.

RESULTS

Median follow-up from the end of salvage treatment was 121.8 (IQR: 116.1, 130.9) months; 3-, 5-, and 10-year BRFS were 45.0%, 36.0%, and 24.0%, respectively; DMFS: 67.9%, 57.2%, and 45.2%; CRFS: 62.9%, 53.9%, and 42.0%; and OS: 88.2%, 76.3%, and 47.9%, respectively. Castration resistance (p < 0.0001) and ≥ 6 positive LN (p = 0.0024) significantly influenced OS at multivariate analysis. Castration resistance (p < 0.0001 for both) influenced DMFS and CRFS in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In PC relapsed patients treated with ENRT and [11C]-choline-PET/CT-guided SIB for positive LNs, with 10-year follow-up, a median Kaplan-Meier estimate CRFS of 67 months and OS of 110 months were obtained. These highly favorable results should be confirmed in a prospective, randomized trial.

European Association of Nuclear Medicine Focus 5: Consensus on Molecular Imaging and Theranostics in Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

In prostate cancer (PCa), questions remain on indications for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and PSMA radioligand therapy, integration of advanced imaging in nomogram-based decision-making, dosimetry, and development of new theranostic applications.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to critically review developments in molecular hybrid imaging and systemic radioligand therapy, to reach a multidisciplinary consensus on the current state of the art in PCa.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The results of a systematic literature search informed a two-round Delphi process with a panel of 28 PCa experts in medical or radiation oncology, urology, radiology, medical physics, and nuclear medicine. The results were discussed and ratified in a consensus meeting.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Forty-eight statements were scored on a Likert agreement scale and six as ranking options. Agreement statements were analysed using the RAND appropriateness method. Ranking statements were analysed using weighted summed scores.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

After two Delphi rounds, there was consensus on 42/48 (87.5%) of the statements. The expert panel recommends PSMA PET to be used for staging the majority of patients with unfavourable intermediate and high risk, and for restaging of suspected recurrent PCa. There was consensus that oligometastatic disease should be defined as up to five metastases, even using advanced imaging modalities. The group agreed that [177Lu]Lu-PSMA should not be administered only after progression to cabazitaxel and that [223Ra]RaCl2 remains a valid therapeutic option in bone-only metastatic castration-resistant PCa. Uncertainty remains on various topics, including the need for concordant findings on both [18F]FDG and PSMA PET prior to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high proportion of agreement among a panel of experts on the use of molecular imaging and theranostics in PCa. Although consensus statements cannot replace high-certainty evidence, these can aid in the interpretation and dissemination of best practice from centres of excellence to the wider clinical community.

PATIENT SUMMARY

There are situations when dealing with prostate cancer (PCa) where both the doctors who diagnose and track the disease development and response to treatment, and those who give treatments are unsure about what the best course of action is. Examples include what methods they should use to obtain images of the cancer and what to do when the cancer has returned or spread. We reviewed published research studies and provided a summary to a panel of experts in imaging and treating PCa. We also used the research summary to develop a questionnaire whereby we asked the experts to state whether or not they agreed with a list of statements. We used these results to provide guidance to other health care professionals on how best to image men with PCa and what treatments to give, when, and in what order, based on the information the images provide.

Role of apalutamide in the treatment landscape for patients with advanced prostate cancer: an expert opinion statement of European clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced prostate cancer have a poor prognosis, and well-tolerated new treatment strategies are required to improve survival outcomes. Apalutamide is a novel androgen signalling inhibitor developed to be used in combination with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Based on evidence from two phase 3 pivotal clinical trials in non-metastatic castration-resistant (nmCRPC; SPARTAN) and metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC; TITAN), ADT plus apalutamide significantly extends overall survival compared with the standard of care.

AIMS

To provide practical recommendations to guide optimal use in the real-world setting as the use of apalutamide in clinical practice increases.

METHODS

Expert opinion from a group of European physicians is presented here to educate on the use of apalutamide in combination with ADT in patients with mHSPC and patients with nmCRPC who are at risk of developing metastatic disease, focusing on practical considerations such as patient selection, monitoring, and management of side effects.

RESULTS

In clinical practice, apalutamide in combination with ADT can be used in a broad patient population including patients with high and low volume/risk mHSPC, patients with de novo metastatic disease or metastases following treatment for localised disease, as well as older patients. Apalutamide in combination with ADT is well tolerated, with manageable side effects which do not impact health-related quality of life compared to ADT alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world experience with apalutamide supports the efficacy and safety findings reported by the SPARTAN and TITAN clinical trials.

Research protocol to identify progression and death amongst patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with available treatments: PIONEER IMI's "big data for better outcomes" program

Androgen deprivation therapy-based with or without first-generation anti-androgens, was the standard of care for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) for decades. However, the development of docetaxel chemotherapy and new androgen receptor-targeted agents, abiraterone acetate and prednisolone, apalutamide , enzalutamide and darolutamide (in combination with docetaxel chemotherapy) has proven that combination of treatments is more effective. Recently, intensification therapy, so-called "triplets", have emerged in the armamentarium of mHSPC treatment. Metastatic disease is a clinical state that remains poorly understood. The optimal diagnostic and management of patients with mHSPC are changing thanks to the development of new imaging techniques and therapies. The primary objective of this study is to develop and validate a predictive model for the occurrence of symptomatic progression, initiation of new treatments and death amongst patients with mHSPC treated with one of the approved treatment plans, on characteristics present at admission.

Apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy in clinical subgroups of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: A subgroup analysis of the randomised clinical TITAN study

BACKGROUND

Whether disease burden in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) predicts treatment outcomes is unknown. We assessed apalutamide treatment effect in TITAN patients with mCSPC by disease volume, metastasis number and timing of metastasis presentation.

METHODS

These protocol-defined and post hoc analyses of the phase III randomised TITAN study evaluated clinical outcomes in patients receiving 240 mg/day apalutamide (n = 525) or placebo (n = 527) plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Subgroups were defined by volume (high: visceral and ≥1 bone metastases or ≥4 bone lesions with ≥1 beyond vertebral column/pelvis), development of metastases per conventional imaging (synchronous: at initial diagnosis; metachronous: after localised disease) and oligometastases (≤5 bone-only metastases) or polymetastases (>5 in bone ± other locations or ≤5 in bone plus other locations). Overall survival (OS), radiographic or second progression-free survival, and time to prostate-specific antigen progression or castration resistance were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Of 1052 patients, 63%, 81%, 54%, 27%, 5.7%, and 8.0% had high-volume, synchronous, synchronous/high-volume, synchronous/low-volume, metachronous/high-volume, and metachronous/low-volume disease, respectively. The OS benefit favoured apalutamide plus ADT versus ADT alone in synchronous/high-volume (hazard ratio = 0.68 [95% confidence interval: 0.53-0.87]; p = 0.002), synchronous/low-volume (0.65 [0.40-1.05]; p = 0.08), metachronous/high-volume (0.69 [0.33-1.44]; p = 0.32) and metachronous/low-volume (0.22 [0.09-0.55]; p = 0.001) subgroups. Apalutamide improved other clinical outcomes regardless of subgroup, with similar safety profiles. Most favourable outcomes were observed in oligometastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

TITAN patients derived a robust benefit with apalutamide plus ADT regardless of disease volume and timing of metastasis presentation without differences in safety, supporting early apalutamide intensification in mCSPC.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02489318.

Healthcare Costs in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: An Analysis of US Medicare Fee-For-Service Claims

INTRODUCTION

To analyze healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and healthcare costs in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the US Medicare population.

METHODS

A published claims-based algorithm was used to identify men with mCRPC in the fee-for-service Medicare population between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Unadjusted all-cause HRU (days) and healthcare costs paid by Medicare (medical and pharmacy) per patient per year (PPPY) are described for the periods before mCRPC diagnosis, after diagnosis, and from the start of first-line (1L), second-line (2L), and third-line (3L) therapy with mCRPC life-prolonging treatments to the start of subsequent therapy or end of follow-up/death.

RESULTS

A total of 14,780 men with mCRPC were identified. After mCRPC diagnosis, 11,528 men initiated 1L mCRPC therapy, 6275 initiated 2L, and 2945 initiated 3L. All-cause medical HRU (days PPPY) increased after mCRPC diagnosis and from 1L through 3L treatment, particularly for outpatient care (pre-diagnosis, 10.4; 1L, 16.2; 2L, 18.9; 3L, 22.0) and physician/other visits (pre-diagnosis, 30.1; 1L, 46.5; 2L, 50.2; 3L, 56.9). Similarly, mean all-cause healthcare costs PPPY were $27,468 in the year before mCRPC diagnosis and increased over four fold to $124,379 after mCRPC diagnosis and continued to rise from start of 1L ($148,325) to 2L ($160,118) to 3L ($165,186) therapy.

CONCLUSION

HRU and healthcare costs increased substantially following mCRPC diagnosis, and continued to increase even further through progression from 1L through 3L mCRPC therapy. These findings help to quantify the economic burden of mCRPC and to contextualize the economic value of treatments that delay disease progression.

The Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI): A New Biomarker for Determining Prognosis in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Carcinoma

Prognostic nutritional index (PNI), which is calculated using the albumin level reflecting nutritional status and lymphocyte count reflecting immune status, is useful in showing nutritional and immunological status related to survival and prognosis in many cancers. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the biomarker potential and effect of PNI in determining the prognosis of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). This retrospective observational study included the complete data of 108 patients with mCPSC who were treated for at least three months between 1 January 2010, and 1 June 2021. The relationships between cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and PNI were evaluated. The Kaplan-Meier method for OS, PFS, and CSS, as well as univariate and multivariate Cox regression models, were used for the statistical analyses. The median age of 108 patients included in the study was 68.54 (61.05-74.19) years. A value of 49.75 was determined to be the best cut-off point for the PNI. OS (months) was found to be significantly lower in patients with low PNI (median: 34.93, 95% CI: 21.52-48.34) than in patients with high PNI (median: 65.60, 95% CI: 39.36-91.83) (p = 0.016). Patients with high PNI (median: 48.20, 95% CI: 34.66-61.73) had significantly better CSS (months) than patients with low PNI (median: 27.86, 95% CI: 24.16-31.57) (p = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in PFS between patients with high PNI values (median: 24.60, 95% CI: 10.15-39.05) and patients with low PNI values (median: 20.03, 95% CI: 11.06-29.03) (p = 0.092). The PNI is a good predictor of OS and CSS in patients with mCSPC. The prediction of PFS, albeit showing a trend towards significance, was not statistically significant, probably due to the small number of cases.

[Systemic therapy for mHSPC: doublet or triplet therapy - who, when and how?]

At present, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as monotherapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) should be an exception. The new standard of care is a doublet combination consisting of ADT + a new hormonal agent (NHA) or ADT + chemotherapy. Contemporary investigations even recommend a triplet therapy consisting of ADT + NHA + chemotherapy for selected mHSPC patients. The current evolution of mHSPC therapy demands a pretherapeutic classification of mHSPC: "low" vs. "high risk", "low" vs. "high volume" and synchronous vs. metachronous mHSPC. Additionally, attention should be paid to the drug specific side effects and especially whether the patient is fit for chemotherapy. This article gives a concise overview of the key clinical trials, current guideline recommendations and drug approvals for Germany.

Conditional Survival in Prostate Cancer in the Nordic Countries Elucidates the Timing of Improvements

BACKGROUND

The incidence of prostate cancer (PC) increased vastly as a result of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Survival in PC improved in the PSA-testing era, but changes in clinical presentation have hampered the interpretation of the underlying causes.

DESIGN

We analyzed survival trends in PC using data from the NORDCAN database for Denmark (DK), Finland (FI), Norway (NO) and Sweden (SE) by analyzing 1-, 5- and 10-year relative survival and conditional relative survival over the course of 50 years (1971-2020).

RESULTS

In the pre-PSA era, survival improved in FI and SE and improved marginally in NO but not in DK. PSA testing began toward the end of the 1980s; 5-year survival increased by approximately 30%, and 10-year survival improved even more. Conditional survival from years 6 to 10 (5 years) was better than conditional survival from years 2 to 5 (4 years), but by 2010, this difference disappeared in countries other than DK. Survival in the first year after diagnosis approached 100%; by year 5, it was 95%; and by year 10, it was 90% in the best countries, NO and SE.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of advances in diagnostics and treatment, further attention is required to improve PC survival.

Interdisciplinary Swiss consensus recommendations on staging and treatment of advanced prostate cancer

The management of prostate cancer is undergoing rapid changes in all disease settings. Novel imaging tools for diagnosis have been introduced, and the treatment of high-risk localized, locally advanced and metastatic disease has changed considerably in recent years. From clinical and health-economic perspectives, a rational and optimal use of the available options is of the utmost importance. While international guidelines list relevant pivotal trials and give recommendations for a variety of clinical scenarios, there is much room for interpretation, and several important questions remain highly debated. The goal of developing a national consensus on the use of these novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in order to improve disease management and eventually patient outcomes has prompted a Swiss consensus meeting. Experts from several specialties, including urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology and nuclear medicine, discussed and voted on questions of the current most important areas of uncertainty, including the staging and treatment of high-risk localized disease, treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and use of new options to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

What is the ideal combination therapy in de novo, oligometastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer?

PURPOSE

To review current evidence regarding the management of de novo, oligometastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on PubMed/Medline and a narrative synthesis of the evidence was performed in August 2022.

RESULTS

Oligometastatic disease is an intermediate state between localized and aggressive metastatic PCa defined by ≤ 3-5 metastatic lesions, although this definition remains controversial. Conventional imaging has limited accuracy in detecting metastatic lesions, and the implementation of molecular imaging could pave the way for a more personalized treatment strategy. However, oncological data supporting this strategy are needed. Radiotherapy to the primary tumor should be considered standard treatment for oligometastatic PCa (omPCa). However, it remains to be seen whether local therapy still has an additional survival benefit in patients with de novo omPCa when treated with the most modern systemic therapy combinations. There is insufficient evidence to recommend cytoreductive radical prostatectomy as local therapy; or stereotactic body radiotherapy as metastasis-directed therapy in patients with omPCa. Current data support the use of intensified systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and next-generation hormone therapies (NHT) for patients with de novo omPCa. Docetaxel has not demonstrated benefit in low volume disease. There are insufficient data to support the use of triple therapy (i.e., ADT + NHT + Docetaxel) in low volume disease.

CONCLUSION

The present review discusses current data in de novo, omPCa regarding its definition, the increasing role of molecular imaging, the place of local and metastasis-directed therapies, and the intensification of systemic therapies.

Darolutamide Plus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer by Disease Volume and Risk Subgroups in the Phase III ARASENS Trial

PURPOSE

For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, metastatic burden affects outcome. We examined efficacy and safety from the ARASENS trial for subgroups by disease volume and risk.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were randomly assigned to darolutamide or placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel. High-volume disease was defined as visceral metastases and/or ≥ 4 bone metastases with ≥ 1 beyond the vertebral column/pelvis. High-risk disease was defined as ≥ 2 risk factors: Gleason score ≥ 8, ≥ 3 bone lesions, and presence of measurable visceral metastases.

RESULTS

Of 1,305 patients, 1,005 (77%) had high-volume disease and 912 (70%) had high-risk disease. Darolutamide increased overall survival (OS) versus placebo in patients with high-volume (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.82), high-risk (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86), and low-risk disease (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.90), and in the smaller low-volume subgroup, the results were also suggestive of survival benefit (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.13). Darolutamide improved clinically relevant secondary end points of time to castration-resistant prostate cancer and subsequent systemic antineoplastic therapy versus placebo in all disease volume and risk subgroups. Adverse events (AEs) were similar between treatment groups across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 64.9% of darolutamide patients versus 64.2% of placebo patients in the high-volume subgroup and 70.1% versus 61.1% in the low-volume subgroup. Among the most common AEs, many were known toxicities related to docetaxel.

CONCLUSION

In patients with high-volume and high-risk/low-risk metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, treatment intensification with darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel increased OS with a similar AE profile in the subgroups, consistent with the overall population.[Media: see text].

Transcriptomic and clinical heterogeneity of metastatic disease timing within metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) is commonly classified into high- and low-volume subgroups which have demonstrated differential biology, prognosis, and response to therapy. Timing of metastasis has similarly demonstrated differences in clinical outcomes; however, less is known about any underlying biologic differences between these disease states. Herein, we aim to compare transcriptomic differences between synchronous and metachronous mCSPC and identify any differential responses to therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed an international multi-institutional retrospective review of men with mCSPC who completed RNA expression profiling evaluation of their primary tumor. Patients were stratified according to disease timing (synchronous versus metachronous). The primary endpoint was to identify differences in transcriptomic profiles between disease timing. The median transcriptomic scores between groups were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Secondary analyses included determining clinical and transcriptomic variables associated with overall survival (OS) from the time of metastasis. Survival analysis was carried out with the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

A total of 252 patients were included with a median follow-up of 39.6 months. Patients with synchronous disease experienced worse 5-year OS (39% versus 79%; P < 0.01) and demonstrated lower median androgen receptor (AR) activity (11.78 versus 12.64; P < 0.01) and hallmark androgen response (HAR; 3.15 versus 3.32; P < 0.01). Multivariable Cox regression identified only high-volume disease [hazard ratio (HR) = 4.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.71-9.10; P < 0.01] and HAR score (HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.28-0.88; P = 0.02) significantly associated with OS. Finally, patients with synchronous (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.72; P < 0.01) but not metachronous (HR = 1.37, 95% CI 0.50-3.92; P = 0.56) disease were found to have better OS with AR and non-AR combination therapy as compared with monotherapy (P value for interaction = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated a potential biologic difference between metastatic timing of mCSPC. Specifically, for patients with low-volume disease, those with metachronous low-volume disease have a more hormone-dependent transcriptional profile and exhibit a better prognosis than synchronous low-volume disease.

Management of bone metastasis in prostate cancer

Progression of bone metastases is the primary cause of death in prostate cancer, and skeletal-related events (SREs), including pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, radiation, or surgery to bone can impair patients' quality of life. Over the past decade, the development of cytotoxic agents, androgen-receptor-axis-targeted therapies (ARATs), and radioligand therapies has prolonged overall survival of prostate cancer patients with bone metastases and reduced the risk of SREs. The use of bone-modifying agents has also contributed to the reduced risk of SREs. Initial use of a cytotoxic agent, docetaxel, or an ARAT agent with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the current approach to metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. However, there is no consensus on the optimal medication for upfront use in combination with ADT, or on specific patient selection. Recently, next-generation imaging modalities, such as whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography have been utilized to detect bone metastases at an early stage. In addition, metastasis-directed therapy, such as stereotactic body radiation therapy, has been attempted. In the future, patients with bone metastatic prostate cancer will be divided into subgroups and their treatment options will be tailored to their specific characteristics.

Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Toward an Era of Adaptive and Personalized Treatment

The advent of more effective treatment combinations for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has been built on successes in therapy development for metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Both disease phases hold similar challenges and questions. Is there an optimal therapy sequence to maximize disease control and balance treatment burden? Are there clinical and biologically based subgroups that inform personalized and/or adaptive strategies? How can clinicians interpret data from clinical trials in the context of rapidly evolving technologies? Herein, we review the contemporary landscape of treatment for mHSPC, including disease subgroups informing both intensification and potential deintensification strategies. Furthermore, we provide current insights into the complex biology of mHSPC and discuss the potential clinical application of biomarkers to guide therapy selection and the development of novel personalized approaches.

Implications of metastatic stage at presentation in docetaxel naïve metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

We performed a secondary analysis of ACIS study to determine if synchronous versus metachronous metastatic presentation has any association with survival and treatment response to dual androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) in docetaxel naïve metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

METHODOLOGY

In this phase III randomized controlled trial, docetaxel naïve mCRPC patients were randomized to either apalutamide or placebo combined with abiraterone and prednisone. Multivariable Cox regression models were applied to determine the adjusted association of M-stage with radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). To determine the heterogeneity of treatment effect based on metastatic stage (M-stage) at presentation, Cox regression was applied with interaction terms between M-stage and treatment.

RESULTS

Among 972 patients, 432 had M0, 334 had M1, while M-stage at presentation was unknown in 206. There was no association of M-stage at presentation with rPFS in patients with prior local therapy (LT) (hazard ratio for M1-stage: 1.22 [95% confidence interval: 0.82-1.82]; unknown: 1.03 [0.77-1.38]) or without prior LT (M1-stage: 0.87 [0.64-1.19]; unknown: 1.15 [0.77-1.72]) with no significant heterogeneity. Similarly, there was no association of M-stage with OS in patients with prior LT (M1-stage: 1.04 [0.81-1.33]; unknown: 0.98 [0.79-1.21]) or without prior LT (M1-stage: 0.95 [0.70-1.29]; unknown: 1.17 [0.80-1.71]) with no significant heterogeneity. Based on M-stage at presentation, we did not find any significant heterogeneity in treatment effect on rPFS (interaction p = 0.13), and OS (interaction p = 0.87).

CONCLUSION

M-stage at presentation had no association with survival in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. We did not find any statistically significant heterogeneity in efficacy of dual ARAT based on synchronous versus metachronous presentation.

Testosterone suppression plus enzalutamide versus testosterone suppression plus standard antiandrogen therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (ENZAMET): an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The interim analysis of the ENZAMET trial of testosterone suppression plus either enzalutamide or standard nonsteroidal antiandrogen therapy showed an early overall survival benefit with enzalutamide. Here, we report the planned primary overall survival analysis, with the aim of defining the benefit of enzalutamide treatment in different prognostic subgroups (synchronous and metachronous high-volume or low-volume disease) and in those who received concurrent docetaxel.

METHODS

ENZAMET is an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial conducted at 83 sites (including clinics, hospitals, and university centres) in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the USA. Eligible participants were males aged 18 years or older with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate adenocarcinoma evident on CT or bone scanning with ^99mTc and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a centralised web-based system and stratified by volume of disease, planned use of concurrent docetaxel and bone antiresorptive therapy, comorbidities, and study site, to receive testosterone suppression plus oral enzalutamide (160 mg once per day) or a weaker standard oral non-steroidal antiandrogen (bicalutamide, nilutamide, or flutamide; control group) until clinical disease progression or prohibitive toxicity. Testosterone suppression was allowed up to 12 weeks before randomisation and for up to 24 months as adjuvant therapy. Concurrent docetaxel (75 mg/m² intravenously) was allowed for up to six cycles once every 3 weeks, at the discretion of participants and physicians. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This planned analysis was triggered by reaching 470 deaths. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02446405, ANZCTR, ACTRN12614000110684, and EudraCT, 2014-003190-42.

FINDINGS

Between March 31, 2014, and March 24, 2017, 1125 participants were randomly assigned to receive non-steroidal antiandrogen (n=562; control group) or enzalutamide (n=563). The median age was 69 years (IQR 63-74). This analysis was triggered on Jan 19, 2022, and an updated survival status identified a total of 476 (42%) deaths. After a median follow-up of 68 months (IQR 67-69), the median overall survival was not reached (hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·58-0·84]; p<0·0001), with 5-year overall survival of 57% (0·53-0·61) in the control group and 67% (0·63-0·70) in the enzalutamide group. Overall survival benefits with enzalutamide were consistent across predefined prognostic subgroups and planned use of concurrent docetaxel. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia associated with docetaxel use (33 [6%] of 558 in the control group vs 37 [6%] of 563 in the enzalutamide group), fatigue (four [1%] vs 33 [6%]), and hypertension (31 [6%] vs 59 [10%]). The incidence of grade 1-3 memory impairment was 25 (4%) versus 75 (13%). No deaths were attributed to study treatment.

INTERPRETATION

The addition of enzalutamide to standard of care showed sustained improvement in overall survival for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and should be considered as a treatment option for eligible patients.

FUNDING

Astellas Pharma.

The presence of lymph node metastases and time to castration resistance predict the therapeutic effect of enzalutamide for castration-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Enzalutamide is effective against castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). However, it is unclear which patients would benefit more from enzalutamide treatment. Here, we analyzed patients who received enzalutamide as first-line therapy for CRPC and evaluated the factors that predict treatment response and prognosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 101 patients treated with enzalutamide for CRPC at our institution. As primary endpoints we regarded the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate and PSA-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS) from the start of enzalutamide treatment. Laboratory and imaging data were analyzed to predict treatment efficacy.

RESULTS

PSA reductions of ≥ 50% and ≥ 90% were observed in 78 (77%) and 47 (47%) patients, respectively, compared with the baseline. During the follow-up period, 67 (66%) patients showed PSA progression, with a median PSA-PFS of 11 months. Moreover, 31 patients (31%) died, with a median overall survival of 64 months. On multivariate analysis, lymph node metastases at the start of enzalutamide treatment [odds ratio (OR) 0.0575, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0105-0.316, p = 0.0010] and time to CRPC (OR 0.177, 95% CI 0.0428-0.731, p = 0.0167] were associated with ≥ 90% PSA response. Lymph node metastases (hazard ratio [HR] 3.00, 95% CI 1.48-6.09, p = 0.0023) and time to CRPC (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.02-3.30, p = 0.0419) were also predictors of PSA-PFS on a multivariate model.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to CRPC and lymph node metastasis were predictors of the PSA response rate and PSA-PFS.

A multidisciplinary consensus statement on the optimal pharmacological treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the mainstay treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). The addition of docetaxel or new hormone therapies (abiraterone, apalutamide, or enzalutamide) improves overall survival and is currently the standard of care. However, the decision on the specific regimen to accompany ADT should be discussed with the patient, considering factors such as possible associated toxicities, duration of treatment, comorbidities, patient preferences, as there is no sufficient evidence to recommend one regimen over the other in most cases. This paper summarizes the evidence on the management of mHSPC and provides consensus recommendations on the optimal treatment in combination with ADT in mHSPC patients, with special attention to the patient's clinical profile.

[Diagnosis and staging of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has undergone significant changes in recent years in light of new therapies and innovative imaging.

OBJECTIVES

Established and innovative methods for detection of metastasis, risk group stratification, and treatment of mHSPC are outlined and compared.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Background knowledge and treatment-relevant guideline recommendations on mHSPC are presented and complemented by recent study results.

RESULTS

Integration of modern imaging techniques, especially prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT, into the diagnostic algorithm has the potential to significantly improve risk stratification and treatment of mHSPC. By using PSMA PET/CT, metastases are detected early and sensitively. This leads to the definition of new subgroups amenable to modern therapeutic strategies. The prognostic value of using PSMA PET/CT with regard to established risk categories in mHSPC is currently being evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

Modern imaging, especially PSMA PET/CT, has significant added value for the diagnosis and treatment of mHSPC in almost all subgroups. In particular, it helps to select patients who will benefit from intensification or de-escalation of systemic therapy.

Prostate and metastasis-directed focal therapy in prostate cancer: hype or hope?

INTRODUCTION

The paradigm of focal therapy's role in metastatic patients is being challenged by evolving attitudes and emerging data. At the current time, specifically regarding prostate cancer, does the evidence indicate this is more hype or hope?

AREAS COVERED

We searched the literature via PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase for studies from 2014 to the present addressing focal therapy with non-palliative intent in metastatic prostate cancer patients, emphasizing prospective trials when available. We sought to address all common clinical scenarios: de novo synchronous diagnosis, oligorecurrence, oligoprogression, and mCRPC disease.

EXPERT OPINION

Current evidence is strongest, and in our opinion practice-changing, for prostate-directed RT in de novo metastatic patients with low metastatic burden. Metastasis-directed therapy with SBRT is consistently shown to have low rates of toxicity, and promising rates of ADT-free survival and progression-free survival. These can be utilized on a patient-by-patient basis with these endpoints in mind, but do not yet show sufficient benefit to be standard of care. This is a rich area of ongoing research, and many trials should publish in the coming years to shed light on many unanswered questions, including the role of cytoreductive prostatectomy, systemic therapy combined with MDT, and the integration of modern PET imaging.

Metastatic Prostate Cancer-A Review of Current Treatment Options and Promising New Approaches

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone has been the standard of care for many years in men with metastatic prostate cancer. Due to the limited survival under this monotherapy, many new treatment options have been developed in the last few years. Regarding hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, combination therapies of two or three agents of ADT, androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI) and chemotherapy have been established and led to a significant benefit in overall survival. Additionally, in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, there are many new therapeutic approaches. Chemotherapy alone has been the standard of care in this situation. In the last years, some new therapeutic options have been developed, which led to an improved survival after progression under chemotherapy. These therapies include ARSI, PARP inhibitors and Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy. The use of a bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE) in this setting is a new promising therapeutic approach, which has not been established as standard of care yet. The role of immunotherapy in prostate cancer is still under investigation. Overall, many new treatment options make prostate cancer therapy a challenging and promising field.

Chromosomal Instability in Cell-free DNA as a Prognostic Biomarker of Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer Treated with Androgen Deprivation Therapy

BACKGROUND

Although patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) undergo androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), the disease can progress to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). There are no reliable biomarkers for predicting this progression. Chromosomal instability resulting in copy number alterations (CNAs) is characteristically observed in patients with various cancers.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of chromosomal instability in patients with mHSPC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This prospective study analyzed cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in pretreatment plasma samples from 75 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen. Low-depth whole-genome sequencing of cfDNA was performed to identify CNAs.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The I score (sum of the product of the absolute Z score and the corresponding chromosome length) was used as a measure of chromosomal instability. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazard regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between the I score and time to progression (TTP) and the prognostic value of chromosomal instability in predicting castration resistance, respectively.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 22 patients with a positive I score, 86.4% (19/22) had metastatic prostate cancer. Of these 19 cases, 94.7% (18/19) were mHSPC, which was high-volume mHSPC in 83.3% (15/18). None of the patients with localized prostate cancer had a positive I score. TTP in patients with mHSPC was significantly shorter in the positive than in the negative I-score group (16.4 vs 36.9 mo; p = 0.001). Only the I score could independently predict mCRPC development (hazard ratio 10.315, 95% confidence interval 1.141-93.208; p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

The I score could be a biomarker for ADT response and progression to mCRPC in patients with mHSPC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We investigated whether genetic changes in cell-free DNA can predict outcomes for patients with metastatic prostate cancer that still responds to hormone therapy. We found that chromosomal instability could be a potential predictor of the development of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Management of Patients with Recurrent and Metachronous Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer in the Era of PSMA PET

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) scans have higher sensitivity and specificity for detecting lymph nodes or metastatic disease relative to conventional imaging in prostate cancer staging. Since its FDA approval and incorporation into treatment guidelines, the use of PSMA PET has increased in patients undergoing initial staging, those with recurrence after initial definitive treatment, and patients with metastatic disease. Although the early detection of metastatic lesions is changing disease management, it is unclear whether this impact on management translates into clinical benefit. This review will summarize evidence pertaining to the change in patient management due to PSMA PET use and will discuss the implications of PSMA PET on treatment decisions in prostate cancer, particularly in the settings of biochemical recurrence and metachronous oligometastatic disease.

Emergence of triplet therapy for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: An updated systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There have been a growing number of treatment options available for men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Not only have newer agents entered the clinical landscape, there is a trend toward treatment intensification by combining multiple agents simultaneously. We aim to assess the best contemporary treatment option for men with mCSPC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We perform an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized control trials that evaluated systemic therapies in men with castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We searched multiple databases up to April 2022. We included all randomized trials assessing the effect of systemic agents. We performed subgroup analyses based on disease volume and timing of presentation. Statistical analysis was performed with Bayesian methods.

RESULTS

We found 10 eligible trials with 10,065 patients who were included in this analysis. Triplet therapy with darolutamide or abiraterone with docetaxel and ADT improved overall survival. In the sensitivity analysis, the respective hazard ratios for triplet therapy was HR 0.70 (95%CI 0.61-0.80) compared to docetaxel+ADT and 0.77 (95%CI 0.65-0.91) compared to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors+ADT combinations. It was estimated that there was 96% chance that one of the triplet therapy combinations were the best treatment option from an OS perspective. Triplet therapy also improved progression-free survival. These benefits were pronounced in men with high-volume disease burden and those with de novo metastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

The finding suggest that triplet therapy is likely the most efficacious available option in men with metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer, especially in those with high-volume disease burden.

Clinical Trial Protocol for ProBio: An Outcome-adaptive and Randomised Multiarm Biomarker-driven Study in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer

ProBio is an outcome-adaptive, multiarm, multiple-assignment randomised, biomarker-driven platform trial in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Here we describe the amended clinical protocol, focusing on expansion of the trial to include patients with de novo metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

The current role of precision surgery in oligometastatic prostate cancer

Oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPCa) is a novel intermediate disease state characterized by a limited volume of metastatic cells and specific locations. Accurate staging is paramount to unmask oligometastatic disease, as provided by prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography. Driven by the results of prospective trials employing conventional and/or modern staging modalities, the treatment landscape of omPCa has rapidly evolved over the last years. Several treatment-related questions comprising the concept of precision strikes are under development. For example, beyond systemic therapy, cohort studies have found that cytoreductive radical prostatectomy (CRP) can confer a survival benefit in select patients with omPCa. More importantly, CRP has been consistently shown to improve long-term local symptoms when the tumor progresses across disease states due to resistance to systemic therapies. Metastasis-directed treatments have also emerged as a promising treatment option due to the visibility of oligometastatic disease and new technologies as well as treatment strategies to target the novel PCa colonies. Whether metastases are present at primary cancer diagnosis or detected upon biochemical recurrence after treatment with curative intent, targeted yet decisive elimination of disseminated tumor cell hotspots is thought to improve survival outcomes. One such strategy is salvage lymph node dissection in oligorecurrent PCa which can alter the natural history of progressive PCa. In this review, we will highlight how refinements in modern staging modalities change the classification and treatment of (oligo-)metastatic PCa. Further, we will also discuss the current role and future directions of precision surgery in omPCa.

Treatment Landscape for Patients with Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Patient Selection and Unmet Clinical Needs

Metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is an inevitably fatal disease. However, in recent years, several treatments have been shown to improve the outcome of CRPC patients both in the non-metastatic (nmCRPC) as well as the metastatic setting (mCRPC). In nmCRPC patients with a PSA doubling time <10 months, the addition of enzalutamide, apalutamide and darolutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) compared to ADT alone resulted in improved metastases free (MFS) and overall survival (OS). For mCRPC patients, several treatment options have been shown to be effective: two taxane based chemotherapies (docetaxel and cabazitaxel), two androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) (abiraterone and enzalutamide), two radiopharmaceutical agents (radium 223 and 177Lutetium-PSMA-617), one immunotherapy treatment (sipuleucel-T) and two poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (olaparib and rucaparib). Pembrolizumab is US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved in all MSI high solid tumors, although a very small proportion of prostate cancer patients harboring this characteristic will benefit. Despite having a broad variety of treatments available, there are still several unmet clinical needs for CRPC. The objective of this review was to describe the therapeutic landscape in CRPC patients, to identify criteria for selecting patients for specific treatments currently available, and to address the current challenges in this setting.

Addition of androgen receptor targeted agents to androgen deprivation therapy and docetaxel in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) historically represented the milestone for the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Recently, combining androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTA) or docetaxel with ADT significantly improved clinical outcomes in this setting. The efficacy of the combined use of an ARTA with docetaxel and ADT (triplet), however, was unknown, and often conflicting data derived from subgroup analysis of randomized phase III trials. In order to better define the benefits and risks of the triplet in mHSPC, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of available clinical trials.

Methods

A literature search with no data restriction using Medline/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and American Society of Clinical Oncology/European Society for Medical Oncology (ASCO/ESMO) Meeting abstracts was carried out up to April 2022. The meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statements. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint; progression-free survival (PFS) and safety were secondary endpoints. For OS and PFS, summary hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated; for safety, risk ratio (RR) was assessed. Random- or fixed-effects models were used, depending on studies heterogeneity.

Results

Five randomized clinical trials fulfilled the prespecified inclusion criteria. The triplet significantly improved OS (fixed-effect, HR = 0.74; P < 0.00001) and PFS (fixed-effect; HR = 0.50 for clinical PFS, HR = 0.49 for radiological PFS; P < 0.0001) compared with docetaxel plus ADT. We did not show heterogeneity between treatment efficacy and the disease burden, metachronous versus synchronous presentation, concomitant versus sequential strategy. Compared with docetaxel + ADT, the triplet did not increase the risk of adverse events (AEs) (RR = 1.00, P = 0.27 for any-grade AEs; RR = 1.13, P = 0.14 for severe AEs), except for severe hypertension (RR = 1.73, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Emerging evidence supports the combination of an ARTA plus docetaxel and ADT in mHSPC patients. Given the availability of several strategies in this setting, clinical characteristics and drug safety profile may help clinicians select the appropriate treatment for mHSPC patients who are more likely to benefit from treatment intensification.

•

The addition of ARTA or docetaxel to ADT improved survival in mHSPC.

•

Recently, the combination of ARTA plus docetaxel and ADT (triplet) versus docetaxel plus ADT has been investigated.

•

The triplet prolonged OS and PFS compared with docetaxel plus ADT and represents a potential practice-changing treatment.

•

Clinical characteristics and drug safety profile may help clinicians to select the appropriate treatment for mHSPC.

Triplet therapy with androgen deprivation, docetaxel, and androgen receptor signalling inhibitors in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The addition of either docetaxel or an androgen receptor signalling pathway inhibitor (ARSi) to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the standard of care for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients. Recent phase III data support even greater survival impact of a triplet regimen with ADT plus docetaxel plus an ARSi (abiraterone or darolutamide) compared to ADT plus docetaxel.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the addition of an ARSi to ADT improves outcomes of mCSPC patients treated with docetaxel.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ASCO Meeting abstracts for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of ARSi + ADT in mCSPC men who received docetaxel. Data extraction was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Summary hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using random- or fixed-effects models. The statistical analyses were performed with RevMan software (v.5.2.3).

RESULTS

Five RCTs were selected. Triplet therapy improved overall survival (OS) compared to ADT + docetaxel in mCSPC patients (HR = 0.73; p < 0.00001). This intensified strategy maintained the OS benefit when the ARSi was administered concomitant to chemotherapy (HR = 0.72; p < 0.00001), but no statistical effect was detected if the ARSi was sequential to docetaxel (p = 0.44). Moreover, in the subgroup of men with de novo mCSPC, triplets significantly improved OS (HR = 0.72, p < 0.0001). The lack of access to raw data was the main limit of our analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our results support a clear survival advantage of adding an ARSi to ADT in mCSPC patients treated with docetaxel, mainly when the ARSi was administered concomitantly to chemotherapy and in the subgroup of de novo mCSPC.

[De novo or secondary metastatic prostate cancer management in France: Observational study from "sentinel multidisciplinary meeting" of the French Association of Urology]

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is an heterogeneous disease. Metachronous mPCa (MM) seems to have a better prognosis than synchronous mPCa (SM). However, it is difficult to analyze their specificities from national registries. Data from the so-called "sentinel multidisciplinary meeting" (SMDM) would represent a "real life" data collection. The objective of this national pilot study was to evaluate the concept of SMDM through the description and comparison of the diagnosis, management and follow-up of patients with synchronous or metachronous mPCa in 2018.

METHODS

A survey covering clinical, biological, radiological data as well as treatment initiated and follow-up at 3 and 6 months was sent to the SMDM. All patients diagnosed with metastatic disease (SM or MM) between 01/01/2018 and 11/30/2018 were included.

RESULTS

In total, 780 patients from 39 centers were included, 408 SM and 372 MM. SM were more symptomatic and had a higher metastatic burden than MM. PET were mostly performed in MM without a prior standard staging. SM patients received more chemotherapy than MM patients whereas new generation androgen deprivation therapy was mostly given to MM patients. At 6 months, there were no more significant difference in clinical presentation between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Specificities of SM and MM patients in terms of clinical presentation, metastatic burden and management were described, validating the concept of SMDM as a source of reliable informations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

The role of chemotherapy in metastatic prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the role of chemotherapy and offer some guidance regarding the selection of chemotherapy in mPC.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with mHSPC have varied prognoses with testosterone suppression alone (androgen deprivation therapy, ADT) and differential responses to docetaxel with ADT. Patients with de novo and metachronous high-volume disease have a robust survival benefit with the addition of docetaxel to hormonal therapies. Patients with synchronous low-volume disease have a more modest survival benefit from docetaxel and there is no evidence of survival benefit with docetaxel in patients with metachronous low-volume disease. Integration of biomarkers may refine treatment selection regardless of volume of disease. Docetaxel and cabazitaxel also impart an OS benefit in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The choice of chemotherapy in mCRPC depends on treatment received in mHSPC setting. Docetaxel remains the first line chemotherapy in castration-resistant patients who have not received it in mHSPC followed by cabazitaxel, otherwise cabazitaxel can be deployed without docetaxel retreatment.

SUMMARY

Chemotherapy is a key class of therapy for selected patients with mHSPC and mCRPC.