Relugolix: A new kid on the block among gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists

Relugolix for the treatment of prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Androgen deprivation therapy consists of the cornerstone of prostate cancer medical treatment. Until recently, castration of hypothalamus-hypophysis-gonadal axial was based on injectable medical agents. A few years ago, a novel per os administered GnRH antagonist was approved leading testosterone to castration level. Relugolix was approved by FDA in 2020, and it is the first per os administered GnRH antagonist. The present study is a literature review of the efficacy, safety and clinical perspectives of relugolix.

AREAS COVERED

A literature narrative review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane library. Studies written in English language, considering efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of relugolix compared with other androgen deprivation therapies were included in the review.

EXPERT OPINION

Recent studies have examined efficacy of relugolix revealing a testosterone suppression percentage of 78.4% after 48 weeks from treatment initiation. Moreover, relugolix has been associated with less major cardiovascular events as well as better rate of testosterone recovery after treatment completion compared with the GnRH agonists. However, there is no head-to-head trial comparing relugolix with injectable GnRH antagonists, so far. As a result, a trial comparing the methods of antagonists' administration should be performed in the future.

Patient preference on once-daily oral versus injectable androgen deprivation therapy for Asian patients with advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The study aimed at investigating prostate cancer patients' choice of androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) and possible factors that would affect their preferences of ADT.

METHODS

This was a single-centre cross-sectional study investigating the usage and preferences of ADT. Consecutives prostate cancer patients who were receiving injectable luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist or antagonist were recruited from the prostate cancer clinic in a tertiary academic hospital. Patients who received bilateral orchidectomy or those who could not consent to the study were excluded. Disease characteristics, treatment information and patient background were documented. The survey collected information related to their change in ADT regimen, preferences on drug usage (routes and frequency of administration) and their reasons. A hypothetical set of three drug formularies was designed. Questions regarding patient preference and the contributing reasons raised in the format of questionnaire.

RESULTS

100 patients completed the survey. Most patients started with more frequent injections (3-monthly, 54%; 1-monthly, 38%) and switched to 6-monthly injections (89%) at the time of the survey. Primary reasons for the change were healthcare opinion (72%) and less frequent treatment (51%). Three options of ADT (oral daily, 1-monthly and 6-monthly injection) with the same efficacies and side effect profile were offered: 61% preferred 6-monthly injection, 1% preferred 1-monthly injection and 38% preferred oral regimen. When patients were informed of lower cardiovascular side effects in 1-monthly injection or daily oral drug, patients' preference was 56% (6-monthly), 6% (1-monthly), and 39% (oral). Patients with polypharmacy (more than 5 regular medications) were more inclined to choose injections (p = 0.025). Patient age, educational background, employment status, marriage status and disease status were not found to be statistically significant contributing factors to patient preference.

CONCLUSION

6-monthly ADT injection was the preferred ADT despite greater cardiovascular risks. Among 1-monthly or daily oral LHRH antagonist, more patients prefer oral option. Convenience factor was highly valued.

A review: FDA-approved fluorine-containing small molecules from 2015 to 2022

Fluorine-containing small molecules have occupied a special position in drug discovery research. The successful clinical use of fluorinated corticosteroids in the 1950s and fluoroquinolones in the 1980s led to an ever-increasing number of approved fluorinated compounds over the last 50 years. They have shown various biological properties such as antitumor, antimicrobial, and anti-inflammatory activities. Fluoro-pharmaceuticals have been considered a strong and practical tool in the rational drug design approach due to their benefits from potency and ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion) points of view. Herein, approved fluorinated drugs from 2015 to 2022 were reviewed.