De Novo Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Are We Moving toward a Personalized Treatment?

De novo metastatic hormone-sensitive PC (mHSPC) accounts for 5-10% of all prostate cancer (PC) diagnoses but it is responsible for nearly 50% of PC-related deaths. Since 2015, the prognosis of mHSPC has slightly improved thanks to the introduction of new hormonal agents and chemotherapy combined with androgen deprivation therapy from the first-line setting. This review describes the current therapeutic opportunities for de novo mHSPC, focusing on potential molecular biomarkers identified in the main clinical trials that have modified the standard of care, the genomic features of de novo mHSPC, and the principal ongoing trials that are investigating new therapeutic approaches and the efficacy of a biomarker-guided treatment in this setting. The road toward personalized treatment for de novo mHSPC is still long, considering that the randomized clinical trials, which have furnished the basis of the current therapeutic options, stratified patients according to clinical criteria that did not necessarily reflect the biological rationale of the chosen therapy. The role of transcriptomic profiling of mHSPC as a predictive biomarker requires further validation, and it remains to be ascertained how the genomic variants detected in mHSPC, which are regarded as predictive in the castration-resistant disease, can be exploited in the mHSPC setting.

Current status and future perspectives of the managements of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The therapeutic landscape for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has changed dramatically. Here, we provide the current status and future prospective of the management of mHSPC.

METHODS

We reviewed recent literature of landmark studies on the managements of mHSPC.

RESULTS

Upfront docetaxel or androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSi) in addition to ADT has improved survival in mHSPC patients and has become the new standard of care. Triplet therapy with docetaxel, ARSi and ADT also improved survival. In the future, triplet therapy may become the standard of care. Oligometastatic mHSPC patients could benefit from local therapy. The inclusion of risk factors or the genetic biomarkers will provide the best treatment for individual mHSPC patients.

CONCLUSION

Strong systemic therapy in the first-line treatment of mHSPC has been shown to improve survival and quality of life. Currently, several clinical trials are evaluating novel compounds such as PARP inhibitor, AKT inhibitor, and immune checkpoint inhibitor. The therapeutic landscape of mHSPC management will change dramatically.

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.

Clinical utility of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate in treatment selection for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the usefulness of androgen receptor axis-targeted agents (ARATs) such as abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide for the upfront treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has been demonstrated. However, it remains unclear which patients would truly benefit from these treatments. Furthermore, intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is a known poor prognostic factor in patients with prostate cancer. We investigated the association between the presence of IDC-P and response to therapy in patients with mHSPC.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included 318 patients with mHSPC who received treatment at Nagoya University and its 12 affiliated institutions between 2014 and 2021. Their biopsy specimens were evaluated for the presence of IDC-P. The patients were classified according to their first-line treatment into the ARAT (n = 100, receiving a combination of androgen-deprivation therapy [ADT] and ARAT) or conventional therapy (n = 218, receiving ADT with or without standard antiandrogen agents) group. We compared the overall survival (OS) and second progression-free survival (PFS2) between the ARAT and conventional groups according to the presence of IDC-P to evaluate whether presence of IDC-P predicts the response to each treatment. PFS2 was defined as the period from mHSPC diagnosis to disease progression on second-line treatment or death. Propensity score matching with one-to-one nearest-neighbor matching was used to minimize the potential effects of selection bias and confounding factors. The clinicopathological variables of the patients were well-balanced after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Most patients in the ARAT (79%) and conventional therapy (71%) groups were ICD-P positive. In the propensity score-matched cohort, the OS and PFS2 of IDC-P-positive patients were significantly longer in the ARAT group than in the conventional group (OS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; p = 0.047; PFS2: HR, 0.30; p < 0.001). In contrast, no difference in OS and PFS2 was observed between the ARAT and conventional groups in IDC-P-negative patients (OS: HR, 1.09; p = 0.920; PFS2: HR, 0.40; p = 0.264).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings highlight a high prevalence of IDC-P among patients with mHSPC and suggest that IDC-P positivity may be a reliable indicator that ARAT should be implemented as first-line treatment.

Identification of DNA Damage Repair-Associated Prognostic Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer Using Transcriptomic Data Analysis

In the recent decade, the importance of DNA damage repair (DDR) and its clinical application have been firmly recognized in prostate cancer (PC). For example, olaparib was just approved in May 2020 to treat metastatic castration-resistant PC with homologous recombination repair-mutated genes; however, not all patients can benefit from olaparib, and the treatment response depends on patient-specific mutations. This highlights the need to understand the detailed DDR biology further and develop DDR-based biomarkers. In this study, we establish a four-gene panel of which the expression is significantly associated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in PC patients from the TCGA-PRAD database. This panel includes DNTT, EXO1, NEIL3, and EME2 genes. Patients with higher expression of the four identified genes have significantly worse OS and PFS. This significance also exists in a multivariate Cox regression model adjusting for age, PSA, TNM stages, and Gleason scores. Moreover, the expression of the four-gene panel is highly correlated with aggressiveness based on well-known PAM50 and PCS subtyping classifiers. Using publicly available databases, we successfully validate the four-gene panel as having the potential to serve as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for PC specifically based on DDR biology.

Optimal Sequencing and Predictive Biomarkers in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer

The treatment landscape of advanced prostate cancer has completely changed during the last decades. Chemotherapy (docetaxel, cabazitaxel), androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSi) (abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide), and radium-223 have revolutionized the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 is also going to become another treatment option for these patients. In addition, docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and radiotherapy to primary tumor have demonstrated the ability to significantly prolong the survival of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Finally, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide have recently provided impactful data in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant disease (nmCRPC). However, which is the best treatment sequence for patients with advanced prostate cancer? This comprehensive review aims at discussing the available literature data to identify the optimal sequencing approaches in patients with prostate cancer at different disease stages. Our work also highlights the potential impact of predictive biomarkers in treatment sequencing and exploring the role of specific agents (i.e., olaparib, rucaparib, talazoparib, niraparib, and ipatasertib) in biomarker-selected populations of patients with prostate cancer (i.e., those harboring alterations in DNA damage and response genes or PTEN).

Transcriptional profiling of primary prostate tumor in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and association with clinical outcomes: correlative analysis of the E3805 CHAARTED trial

BACKGROUND

The phase III CHAARTED trial established upfront androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel (D) as a standard for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) based on meaningful improvement in overall survival (OS). Biological prognostic markers of outcomes and predictors of chemotherapy benefit are undefined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Whole transcriptomic profiling was performed on primary PC tissue obtained from patients enrolled in CHAARTED prior to systemic therapy. We adopted an a priori analytical plan to test defined RNA signatures and their associations with HSPC clinical phenotypes and outcomes. Multivariable analyses (MVAs) were adjusted for age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, de novo metastasis presentation, volume of disease, and treatment arm. The primary endpoint was OS; the secondary endpoint was time to castration-resistant PC.

RESULTS

The analytic cohort of 160 patients demonstrated marked differences in transcriptional profile compared with localized PC, with a predominance of luminal B (50%) and basal (48%) subtypes, lower androgen receptor activity (AR-A), and high Decipher risk disease. Luminal B subtype was associated with poorer prognosis on ADT alone but benefited significantly from ADT + D [OS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.45; P = 0.007], in contrast to basal subtype which showed no OS benefit (HR 0.85; P = 0.58), even in those with high-volume disease. Higher Decipher risk and lower AR-A were significantly associated with poorer OS in MVA. In addition, higher Decipher risk showed greater improvements in OS with ADT + D (HR 0.41; P = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the utility of transcriptomic subtyping to guide prognostication in mHSPC and potential selection of patients for chemohormonal therapy, and provides proof of concept for the possibility of biomarker-guided selection of established combination therapies in mHSPC.

Apalutamide: A Review in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

Apalutamide (Erleada^®) is an oral selective androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor that binds directly to the ligand-binding domain of the AR. It is approved in the EU and the USA for the treatment of adult men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). In a multinational, phase III study (TITAN) in this patient population, the addition of apalutamide (240 mg once daily) to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), median overall survival (OS) and the median time to cytotoxic chemotherapy, while maintaining health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and not substantially differing from placebo plus ADT in safety. Although mature OS data are awaited with interest, the addition of apalutamide to ADT extends the treatment options available for standard of care in adult men with mCSPC.

Association of Molecular Subtypes With Differential Outcome to Apalutamide Treatment in Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Question

Are specific molecular features associated with benefit from the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer?

Findings

In this cohort study examining data on 233 patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, patients with a high Decipher genomic classifier score demonstrated more sustained benefit with the addition of apalutamide compared with patients with a low genomic classifier score. Patients with luminal subtype tumors also showed more sustained benefit with the addition of apalutamide.

Meaning

The molecular signatures examined in this study appear to have prognostic utility and can be useful in clinical decision-making regarding treatment intensification in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer at high risk for metastasis; larger studies are warranted for validation of these findings.

Importance

There is a need to identify prognostic biomarkers to guide treatment intensification in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).

Objective

To examine whether molecular subtypes predict response to apalutamide, using archived primary tumor samples from the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 SPARTAN trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study, gene expression data from 233 archived samples from patients with nmCRPC enrolled in the SPARTAN trial were generated using a human exon microarray. The present analysis was conducted from May 10, 2018, to October 15, 2020.

Interventions

Patients were randomized (2:1) to apalutamide, 240 mg/d, with androgen deprivation therapy (apalutamide+ADT) or placebo+ADT.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patients were stratified into high-risk and low-risk categories for developing metastases based on genomic classifier (GC) scores for high (GC >0.6) and low to average (GC≤0.6) and into basal and luminal subtypes; associations between these molecular subtypes and metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results

Median age of the 233 included patients was 73 (range, 49-91) years. A total of 116 of 233 patients (50%) in the SPARTAN biomarker subset had high GC scores. Although all patients receiving apalutamide+ADT had improved outcomes, having high GC scores was associated with the greatest improvement in MFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.40; P < .001), OS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29-0.94; P = .03), and PFS2 (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.23-0.67; P = .001) vs placebo+ADT. In total, 152 of 233 patients (65%) had the basal molecular subtype. Although there were no significant differences in MFS, PFS2, or OS between patients with the luminal vs basal subtype in the placebo+ADT arm, patients with the luminal subtype in the apalutamide+ADT arm had a significantly longer MFS (apalutamide+ADT: HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18-0.91; P = .03; placebo+ADT: HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.33-1.31; P = .23) compared with patients with basal subtype; similar trends were observed for OS (apalutamide+ADT: HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-0.98; P = .04; placebo+ADT: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.38-1.60; P = .50), and PFS2 (apalutamide+ADT: HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.42-1.22; P = .22; placebo+ADT: HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.39; P = .33). In regression analysis, the luminal-basal subtype score was significantly associated with MFS in patients receiving apalutamide+ADT (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.15-6.08; P = .02), whereas GC score was significantly associated with MFS in placebo+ADT recipients (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.02-4.27; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this study suggest that the GC score and basal-luminal subtype derived from archived tumor specimens may be biomarkers of response to apalutamide+ADT in the nmCRPC setting. Although overall, the addition of apalutamide to ADT was beneficial, higher-risk and luminal subtypes appeared to benefit most. Obtaining GC scores may be useful for identifying patients for early treatment intensification with apalutamide, and basal-luminal subtyping may be a beneficial approach for patient selection for further treatment intensification in trials combining novel therapies with apalutamide.

Population-Based Study of Docetaxel or Abiraterone Effectiveness and Predictive Markers of Progression Free Survival in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Both Docetaxel (DOC) and Abiraterone (ABI) improve the survival of men with metastatic, castration sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). However, the outcome among mCSPC patients is highly variable, while there is a lack of predictive markers of therapeutic benefit. Furthermore, there is limited data on the comparative real-world effectiveness of adding DOC or ABI to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 121 mCSPC patients treated at Odette Cancer Centre (Toronto, ON, Canada) between Dec 2014 and Mar 2021 (DOC n = 79, ABI n = 42). The primary endpoint studied was progression free survival (PFS), defined as the interval from start of ADT to either (i) biochemical, radiological, or symptomatic progression, (ii) start of first-line systemic therapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), or (iii) death, whichever occurred first. To identify independent predictive factors for PFS in the entire cohort, a Cox proportional hazard model (stepwise selection) was applied. Overall survival (OS) was among secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 39.6 and 25.1 months in the DOC and ABI cohorts, respectively, 79.7% of men in the DOC and 40.5% in the ABI group experienced a progression event. PFS favored the ABI cohort (p = 0.0038, log-rank test), with 78.0% (95%CI 66.4-91.8%) of ABI versus 67.1% (57.5-78.3%) of DOC patients being free of progression at 12 months. In univariate analysis superior PFS was significantly related to older age at diagnosis of mCSPC, metachronous metastatic presentation, low-volume (CHAARTED), and low-risk (LATITUDE) disease, ≥90% PSA decrease at 3 months (PSA90), and PSA nadir ≤0.2 at 6 months. Age (HR = 0.955), PSA90 (HR = 0.462), and LATITUDE risk stratification (HR = 1.965) remained significantly associated with PFS in multivariable analysis. OS at 12 months was 98.7% (96.3-100%) and 92.7% (85.0-100%) in the DOC and ABI groups (p = 0.97), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world group of men undergoing treatment intensification with DOC or ABI for mCSPC, we did not find a significant difference in OS, but PFS was favoring ABI. Age at diagnosis of mCSPC, PSA90 at 3 months and LATITUDE risk classification are predictive factors of PFS in men with mCSPC.

Treatment Strategies for Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: From "All-Comers" to "Personalized" Approach

Standard treatment for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) was androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for >7 decades, and this was termed the "all-comers" approach. A remarkable evolution in the treatment of mCSPC has been noted in the previous several years. High-quality clinical trials have shown that the addition of docetaxel or androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, such as abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, and apalutamide, to ADT improves the overall survival (OS) as compared to ADT alone. The first 2 trials demonstrated the benefits of docetaxel and abiraterone acetate in terms of OS in high-volume and high-risk cancer subgroups, respectively. The later trials indicated that upfront combination therapies were associated with improved OS in all patients, irrespective of tumor volume and risk category. Upfront combination therapies are becoming a standard of care for all patients with mCSPC. However, meta-analyses have failed to show that all upfront combination therapies provide significant survival benefits in all patient subgroups. In the low-volume subgroup, significance was observed only for treatment with enzalutamide and radiation to the prostate. Men with low-volume low-risk cancer who have favorable response to ADT achieve long-term survival with ADT only, and toxicities induced by combination therapies would exceed the benefit for these patients. Treatments should be tailored to each patient because mCSPC has marked diversity in its biological and clinical features. Recent advances in diagnostic and molecular technologies will provide useful prognostic and predictive biomarkers, and the treatment strategy will shift from the "for all-comers" to the "individualized" approach.