Efficacy and safety of bipolar androgen therapy in mCRPC after progression on abiraterone or enzalutamide: A systematic review

Second-line treatment options in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after progression on first-line androgen-receptor targeting therapies: A systematic review and Bayesian network analysis

OBJECTIVE

To summarize and indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of different second-line systematic therapies after first-line androgen-receptor targeting therapies (ARTs) for biomarker-unselected metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients.

METHODS

Studies published in English up to May 2023 were identified in PubMed, Web of Science and ASCO-GU 2023. Studies accessing the efficacy and safety of second-line systematic therapies after first-line ARTs for biomarker-unselected mCRPC patients were eligible for current systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies with 5388 patients and 10 unique treatment modalities met our inclusion criteria. Current evidence suggested that docetaxel (DOC) combined with the same ART as first-line (ART1) (ART1 + DOC) were associated with significantly improved PSA response, PSA progression-free survival (PFS) and clinical or radiographic PFS (rPFS) compared with other reported second-line systematic therapies, including DOC. An increase in toxicity was observed with ART1 + DOC. Our NMA indicated that DOC monotherapy was only inferior to ART1 + DOC in improvement disease outcomes. The incidence of toxicity between patients received second-line DOC and an alternative ART (ART2) was similar.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence reviewed in our work suggested a clinical benefit of DOC nomotherapy and DOC plus ART1 as the second-line systematic therapy for biomarker-unselected mCRPC patients progressed on a first-line ART. More studies and RCTs are needed to evaluate the optimal second-line treatments for mCRPC patients with one prior first-line ART.

Bipolar Androgen Therapy: When Excess Fuel Extinguishes the Fire

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the cornerstone of advanced prostate cancer treatment. However, the progression towards castration-resistant prostate cancer is inevitable, as the cancer cells reactivate androgen receptor signaling and adapt to the castrate state through autoregulation of the androgen receptor. Additionally, the upfront use of novel hormonal agents such as enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate may result in long-term toxicities and may trigger the selection of AR-independent cells through "Darwinian" treatment-induced pressure. Therefore, it is crucial to develop new strategies to overcome these challenges. Bipolar androgen therapy (BAT) is one such approach that has been devised based on studies demonstrating the paradoxical inhibitory effects of supraphysiologic testosterone on prostate cancer growth, achieved through a variety of mechanisms acting in concert. BAT involves rapidly alternating testosterone levels between supraphysiological and near-castrate levels over a period of a month, achieved through monthly intramuscular injections of testosterone plus concurrent ADT. BAT is effective and well-tolerated, improving quality of life and potentially re-sensitizing patients to previous hormonal therapies after progression. By exploring the mechanisms and clinical evidence for BAT, this review seeks to shed light on its potential as a promising new approach to prostate cancer treatment.

Treatments and challenges in advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is designed to highlight recent research examining treatment progress in advanced prostate cancer while identifying ongoing challenges to clinical outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent randomized trials suggest an overall survival advantage to treating some men with newly identified metastatic prostate cancer with a "triplet" of androgen deprivation therapy, docetaxel, and an androgen receptor axis-targeted agent. Questions remain about which men are best served by these combinations. Additional treatment success is being identified with prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA)-radiopharmaceuticals, combinations involving targeted therapies, and novel manipulations of the androgen receptor axis. Challenges remain in selecting between available therapies, harnessing immune therapies, and treating tumors with emergent neuroendocrine differentiation.

SUMMARY

An expanding number of therapeutics are becoming available for men with advanced prostate cancer improving outcomes but at the same time making treatment selection more demanding. Ongoing research will be required to continue to hone treatment paradigms.

Maintenance of androgen deprivation therapy or testosterone supplementation in the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer: that is the question

PURPOSE

Whether or not androgen receptor (AR) axis could still be targetable in castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients with disease progression to next generation hormonal agents (NGHAs) is a controversial issue.

RESULTS

Serum testosterone in CRPC patients has a positive prognostic role and increasing testosterone levels after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) withdrawal or testosterone supplementation, as part of a bipolar androgen therapy (BAT) strategy, has been shown to potentially restore sensitivity to previous lines of NGHAs.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that maintenance of ADT in CRPC patients receiving further lines of treatment, as recommended by current international guidelines, could be questionable. Conversely, testosterone supplementation aimed to re-sensitize CRPC to further hormonal manipulation is a strategy worth to be explored in future clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of bipolar androgen therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer following abiraterone or enzalutamide resistance: A systematic review

Bipolar androgen therapy (BAT) is a new endocrinologic treatment for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) that can restore some patients' sensitivity to drugs such as abiraterone (Abi) and enzalutamide (Enz). We performed a meta-analysis using STATA16. Sensitivity analyses were performed by examining the effects of individual studies using different effect models and detecting any publication bias using the Harbord test. In a total of 108 unique records, ten studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Participants who underwent BAT achieved a PSA50 response rate of 27% (95%CI [0.22,0.31], I2=17.98%), ORR of 34% (95%CI [0.24,0.43], I2=0), and incidence of AEs (grade≥3) of 14% (95%CI [0.09,0.19], I2=0). Patients who completed BAT proceeded to AR-targeted therapy (Abi or Enz) and achieved a PSA50 response rate of 57% (95% CI [0.36,0.78], I2=0). Patients with prior Enz resistance had a stronger impact on the PSA50 of AR-target therapy rechallenge. The results of this meta-analysis indicate that BAT is a safe and effective treatment for patients who have progressed after Abi or Enz. BAT can trigger the resensitization of patients with CRPC to subsequent endocrine therapy and improve the overall survival of patients and their quality of life.

Impacts of androgen deprivation therapy on the risks and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with prostate cancer

Studies have investigated the effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) use on the incidence and clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, the results have been inconsistent. We searched the PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from inception to March 2022; 13 studies covering 84 003 prostate cancer (PCa) patients with or without ADT met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. We calculated the pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to explore the association between ADT use and the infection risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and severity of COVID-19. After synthesizing the evidence, the pooled RR in the SARS-CoV-2 positive group was equal to 1.17, and the SARS-CoV-2 positive risk in PCa patients using ADT was not significantly different from that in those not using ADT (P = 0.544). Moreover, no significant results concerning the beneficial effect of ADT on the rate of intensive care unit admission (RR = 1.04, P = 0.872) or death risk (RR = 1.23, P = 0.53) were found. However, PCa patients with a history of ADT use had a markedly higher COVID-19 hospitalization rate (RR = 1.31, P = 0.015) than those with no history of ADT use. These findings indicate that ADT use by PCa patients is associated with a high risk of hospitalization during infection with SARS-CoV-2. A large number of high quality studies are needed to confirm these results.