Novel hormone therapy and coordination of care in high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer

Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurs in 20-50% of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing primary definitive treatment. Patients with high-risk BCR have an increased risk of metastatic progression and subsequent PCa-specific mortality, and thus could benefit from treatment intensification. Given the increasing complexity of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, multidisciplinary care (MDC) can play a crucial role in the individualized management of this patient population. This review explores the role for MDC when evaluating the clinical evidence for the evolving definition of high-risk BCR and the emerging therapeutic strategies, especially with novel hormone therapies (NHTs), for patients with either high-risk BCR or oligometastatic PCa. Clinical studies have used different characteristics to define high-risk BCR and there is no consensus regarding the definition of high-risk BCR nor for management strategies. Next-generation imaging and multigene panels offer potential enhanced patient identification and precision-based decision-making, respectively. Treatment intensification with NHTs, either alone or combined with radiotherapy or metastasis-directed therapy, has been promising in clinical trials in patients with high-risk BCR or oligometastases. As novel risk-stratification and treatment options as well as evidence-based literature evolve, it is important to involve a multidisciplinary team to identify patients with high-risk features at an earlier stage, and make informed decisions on the treatments that could optimize their care and long-term outcomes. Nevertheless, MDC data are scarce in the BCR or oligometastatic setting. Efforts to integrate MDC into the standard management of this patient population are needed, and will likely improve outcomes across this heterogeneous PCa patient population.

Molecular Targeted Therapies in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Recent Advances and Future Challenges

Prostate cancer is the most frequent malignant tumor in men, and, despite the great improvements in survival in patients with localized cancer, the prognosis for metastatic disease remains poor. Novel molecular targeted therapies, which block specific molecules or signaling pathways in tumor cells or in their microenvironment, have shown encouraging results in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Among these therapeutic approaches, prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted radionuclide therapies and DNA repair inhibitors represent the most promising ones, with some therapeutic protocols already approved by the FDA, whereas therapies targeting tumor neovascularization and immune checkpoint inhibitors have not yet demonstrated clear clinical benefits. In this review, the most relevant studies and clinical trials on this topic are illustrated and discussed, together with future research directions and challenges.

Prostate cancer risk, screening and management in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations

Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumour suppressor genes are associated with prostate cancer risk; however, optimal screening protocols for individuals with these mutations have been a subject of debate. Several prospective studies of prostate cancer incidence and screening among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have indicated at least a twofold to fourfold increase in prostate cancer risk among carriers of BRCA2 mutations compared with the general population. Moreover, BRCA2 mutations are associated with more aggressive, high-grade disease characteristics at diagnosis, more aggressive clinical behaviour and greater prostate cancer-specific mortality. The risk for BRCA1 mutations seems to be attenuated compared with BRCA2. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement or prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone is an imperfect indicator of clinically significant prostate cancer; therefore, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers might benefit from refined risk stratification strategies. However, the long-term impact of prostate cancer screening is unknown, and the optimal management of BRCA1/2 carriers with prostate cancer has not been defined. Whether timely localized therapy can improve overall survival in the screened population is uncertain. Long-term results of prospective studies are awaited to confirm the optimal screening strategies and benefits of prostate cancer screening among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, and whether these approaches ultimately have a positive impact on survival and quality of life in these patients.

PARP Inhibitors: A New Horizon for Patients with Prostate Cancer

The introduction of PARP inhibitors (PARPi) in prostate cancer is a milestone and provides a pathway to hope in fighting this disease. It is the first time that drugs, based on the concept of synthetic lethality, have been approved for prostate cancer. In addition, it is also the first time that genetic mutation tests have been included in the therapeutic algorithm of this disease, representing a significant step forward for precision and personalized treatment of prostate cancer. The objectives of this review are: (1) understanding the mechanism of action of PARPi in monotherapy and combinations; (2) gaining insights on patient selection for PARPi; (3) exposing the pivotal studies that have allowed its approval, and; (4) offering an overview of the ongoing trials. Nevertheless, many unsolved questions remain, such as the number of patients who could potentially benefit from PARPi, whether to use PARPi in monotherapy or in combination, and when is the best time to use them in advanced or localized disease. To answer these and other questions, many clinical trials are underway. Some of them have recently demonstrated promising results that may favor the introduction of new combinations in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PARP Inhibition, a New Therapeutic Avenue in Patients with Prostate Cancer

Up to 25% of patients with metastatic prostate cancer present with germline or somatic DNA damage repair alterations, some of which are associated with aggressive disease and poor outcomes. New data have brought poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors into sharp focus in the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Olaparib improved survival after at least one new hormonal therapy (NHT) in a cohort of patients harboring BRCA1, BRCA2 or ATM mutations in the PROfound trial, while rucaparib, talazoparib and niraparib demonstrated compelling activity in phase II trials. While patients with prostate cancer and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations may derive greatest benefit of PARP inhibition, the magnitude of benefit seems much lower in the context of most other homologous recombination gene mutations. Several PARP inhibitors are currently developed in combination with conventional therapy, including chemotherapy, NHT, and alpha-particle emitters, at different disease stages. Herein, we review the rationale for PARP inhibition in patients with prostate cancer, discuss the impact of PARP inhibitors on outcomes, and explore underlying challenges for future developments.

Should androgen deprivation therapy and other systemic treatments be used in men with prostate cancer and a rising PSA post-local treatments?

Biochemical recurrence is an evolving space in prostate cancer, with increasing multidisciplinary involvement. Androgen deprivation therapy has shown proof of its value in complementing salvage radiotherapy in high-risk biochemical relapsing patients; ongoing trials aim to further refine this treatment combination. As systemic treatments, and notably next-generation androgen receptor targeted agents, have moved towards early hormone-sensitive and non-metastatic stages, the prostate specific antigen (PSA)-relapse disease stage will be undoubtedly challenged by future evidence from such ongoing clinical trials. With the use of modern imaging and newer molecular technologies, including integration of tumoral genomic profiling and liquid biopsies in risk stratification, a path towards a precision oncology-focused approach will become a reality to guide in the future decisions for patients with a diagnosis of biochemical recurrence.

Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score in germline BRCA2- versus ATM-altered prostate cancer

The homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score integrates three DNA-based measures of genomic instability, and has been understudied in prostate cancer. Given the recent FDA approval of two PARP inhibitors for prostate cancer, HRD score analysis could help to refine treatment selection. We assessed HRD score (defined as the sum of loss-of-heterozygosity, telomeric allelic imbalance, and large-scale state transitions) in three cohorts of primary prostate cancer, including a Johns Hopkins University (JHU) cohort with germline mutations in BRCA2, ATM, or CHEK2 (n = 64), the TCGA cohort (n = 391), and the PROGENE cohort (n = 102). In the JHU cohort, tumors with germline BRCA2 mutations had higher HRD scores (median = 27) than those with germline ATM or CHEK2 mutations (median = 16.5 [p = 0.029] and 9 [p < 0.001], respectively). For TCGA tumors without underlying HR pathway mutations, the median HRD score was 11, significantly lower than ovarian carcinoma lacking BRCA1/2 mutations (median = 28). In the absence of HR gene mutations, the median HRD score was unexpectedly higher among prostate cancers with TP53 mutations versus those without (17 vs. 11; p = 0.015); this finding was confirmed in the PROGENE cohort (24 vs. 16; p = 0.001). Finally, among eight BRCA2-altered patients who received olaparib, progression-free survival trended longer in those with HRD scores above versus below the median (14.9 vs. 9.9 months). We conclude that HRD scores are low in primary prostate cancer and higher in cases with germline BRCA2 or somatic TP53 mutations. Germline BRCA2-altered cases have significantly higher HRD scores than germline ATM-altered or CHEK2-altered cases, consistent with the lower efficacy of PARP inhibitors among the latter.

Clinical Implications of Germline Testing in Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

CONTEXT

Germline testing (GT) is increasingly impacting prostate cancer (PCa) management and screening, with direct effects in urology, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. The majority of testing indications and recommendations center on men with metastatic disease, although guidelines now encompass newly diagnosed, early-stage PCa and entail assessment of personal history, pathologic features, and family history to determine eligibility for testing.

OBJECTIVE

To describe current guidelines on GT for men with PCa and the impact on management. An additional objective was to review the literature on current uptake of GT across practice settings.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A nonsystematic review was performed of current guidelines on GT in PCa from professional societies and consensus conferences, detailing supporting evidence for these recommendations. This was supplemented by a literature review of uptake of GT and precision medicine in practice.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Multiple guidelines and consensus panels recommend GT for men with metastatic PCa. Guidelines endorse BRCA2 testing in metastatic PCa because of strong evidence for PCa risk, aggressiveness, and PARP inhibitor candidacy. Testing of additional DNA repair genes in metastatic disease is also endorsed across guidelines. Immunotherapy with pembrolizumab is an option in some guidelines for men with DNA mismatch repair deficiency. In localized disease, GT is recommended on the basis of histologic features and family history; criteria vary between guidelines. GT for localized disease informs hereditary cancer risk and will probably impact future PCa management. Practice gaps exist regarding utilization of GT.

CONCLUSIONS

Germline evaluation is increasingly important in the management of men with metastatic PCa and may also affect the prognosis for men with localized disease. The presence of germline mutations has important hereditary cancer implications for men and their families. Uptake of germline evaluation may be underutilized in some practice settings, so strategies for optimization are required.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients with prostate cancer should talk to their doctor about the pros and cons of genetic testing, with attention to family history and cancer features. Genetic testing can have important implications for treatment, cancer screening, and family cancer risk.

Genetic biomarkers to guide poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor precision treatment of prostate cancer

Precision therapy for a subgroup of genetically defined metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients may become a reality in the near future. DNA damage repair gene mutated prostate cancer might be vulnerable to treatment with PARP inhibitors (PARPi). PARPi clinical trials for prostate cancer investigate both germline and somatic genomic alterations of 43 genes for the applicability as genomic biomarker of PARPi sensitivity. Clinical trials with preliminary results show that BRCA2 and BRCA1, but also ATM, additionally BRIP1, FANCA, CDK12 and PALB2 may affect clinical end points, and may be potential candidates for genome-guided patient selection in PARPi treatment of prostate cancer.

When and How to Use PARP Inhibitors in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature with an Update on On-Going Trials

CONTEXT

The goal of precision oncology is to use the underlying genomic characteristics of the patient and the cancer to select the optimal treatment at a given time. The recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer heralds the onset of precision medicine for this disease.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the emerging role that PARP inhibitors may play as a personalised future treatment option in patients with prostate cancer, with a focus on patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) whose tumour cells harbour mutations resulting from deficient homologous recombination repair (HRR).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

To identify publications relevant to this review, a systematic literature search of PubMed was conducted for articles and proceedings of relevant major congresses, published between January 2010 and March 2020, reporting the use of PARP inhibitors in the treatment of cancers.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 168 publications were identified, and 18 of these met the criteria for subsequent review. In addition, 15 phase 2 or on-going phase 3 (mCRPC) studies evaluating PARP inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination, which had not yet reported data, were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. Emerging data suggest that the greatest efficacy with single-agent PARP inhibitors is seen in mCRPC patients with germline or somatic BRCA1/2 alterations (especially BRCA2 or biallelic mutations), with potential efficacy also observed in men with PALB2 and FANCA mutations.

CONCLUSIONS

PARP inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in mCRPC, and similar to ovarian and breast cancers, the greatest effect is observed in patients with HRR deficiency. The PARP inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib are now FDA approved for mCRPC patients with HRR mutations and BRCA1/2 mutations, respectively. Furthermore, when PARP inhibition is combined with novel hormonal therapies, a treatment benefit may be observed regardless of the HRR deficiency status. Gaps in the knowledge and understanding around PARP inhibitor use in prostate cancer, including the most appropriate diagnostic testing method for identifying an HRR mutation, remain to be resolved.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib are now approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Here, we reviewed the literature and proceedings from meeting presentations and published papers relevant to the use of PARP inhibitors in the treatment of prostate cancer. Testing methods for detecting homologous recombination repair gene mutations, as diagnostic tools to help identify patients most likely to benefit from PARP inhibitor treatment, are also discussed.