Clinical outcomes of anti-androgen withdrawal and subsequent alternative anti-androgen therapy for advanced prostate cancer following failure of initial maximum androgen blockade

Efficacy and safety of apalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (GENESIS): protocol for a multicentre, open-label, single-arm clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

This is a multicentre, open-label, single-arm clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The trial will be performed at 4 university hospitals and 14 city hospitals in Japan. The target number of patients will be 110. The patients will be orally administered 240 mg apalutamide once daily during the treatment period. The primary outcome is the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate. PSA response is defined as ≥50% decline from baseline at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes are time to PSA progression, progression-free survival, overall survival, progression-free survival during second therapy, ≥50% decline in PSA from baseline at 24 and 48 weeks, ≥90% decline in PSA from baseline or lower PSA detection sensitivity after the initial dose at 12, 24 and 48 weeks, PSA maximal changes, accumulated PSA response from screening to 24 and 48 weeks, and grade 3 or 4 adverse events according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Certified Research Review Board of Kobe University (No. CRB5180009). All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Findings will be disseminated through scientific and professional conferences and peer-reviewed journal publications. The datasets generated during the study will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

jRCTs051220077.

PSA response to antiandrogen withdrawal: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antiandrogen withdrawal (AAW) response is the paradoxical decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) following the withdrawal of antiandrogen in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Currently, the reported literature on the proportion of patients exhibiting AAW response and the differences in PSA response between the types of antiandrogens is unclear.

METHODS

This review aimed to explore the PSA response to AAW and to identify if the response depends on the type of antiandrogens. A literature search was performed using databases PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE with a cut-off date of 23rd of November 2020. Studies reporting on outcomes of AAW and prostate cancer were included. Studies were screened by two reviewers and relevant data extracted. Meta-analysis of outcomes was reported using random-effects and fixed-effects model. A subgroup analysis was performed for type of antiandrogen.

RESULTS

From 450 studies, 23 were included with a total of 1474 patients with advanced prostate cancer were available for further analysis. Overall, 395 (26%) patients had any reduction in PSA levels (95% CI: 20-32%) and 183 (11%) patients had a ≥50% reduction in PSA levels (95% CI: 6-16%). Among the 1212 patients on first-generation antiandrogens, 30% (95% CI: 23-38%) had any PSA decline with 15% patients having a ≥50% PSA decline (95% CI: 8-22%). In contrast, among the 108 patients on second-generation antiandrogens, 7% (95% CI: 0-13%) had any PSA decline and only 1% (95% CI: 0-5%) had a ≥50% PSA decline. Also, among the 154 patients on androgen synthesis inhibitors, 26% (95% CI: 19-33%) had any PSA decline and only 4% (95% CI: 0-13%) had a ≥50% PSA decline.

CONCLUSIONS

One-fourth of patients treated with AAW show a PSA response. However, PSA response to AAW is uncommon with second-generation antiandrogens and androgen synthesis inhibitors. Further research is required to understand the differences in response between the types of antiandrogen.

Comparative assessment of prognostic outcomes between first-generation antiandrogens and novel androgen-receptor-axis-targeted agents in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

To compare the prognostic outcomes between first-generation antiandrogen (FGA) and novel androgen-receptor-axis-targeted agent (ARATA) as first-line therapy in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).

METHODS

This study retrospectively included a total of 103 consecutive nmCRPC patients consisting of 47 (45.6%) and 56 (54.4%) who received FGA (bicalutamide or flutamide) and ARATA (abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide), respectively, as the first-line agent after the failure of primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the major clinicopathological parameters and previous therapeutic histories between the FGA and ARATA groups. During the observation period, 31 (66.0%) and 29 (51.8%) discontinued first-line therapy in the FGA and ARATA groups, respectively, and of these, 27 (87.1%) and 23 (79.3%) in the FGA and ARATA groups, respectively, were subsequently treated with approved agents as second-line therapy. The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate in the FGA group was significantly lower than that in the ARATA group. Although no significant difference in overall survival was noted between the FGA and ARATA groups, there were significant differences in the PSA progression-free survival on first-line therapy and metastasis-free survival between the two groups, favoring the ARATA group compared with FGA group.

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively, these findings suggest that among nmCRPC patients who progressed following treatment with the primary ADT, the introduction of ARATA may result in the delay of disease progression compared with FGA.

Prior switching to a second-line nonsteroidal antiandrogen does not impact the therapeutic efficacy of abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a real-world retrospective study

Even in the era of novel targeted agents, switching to a second-line nonsteroidal antiandrogen (NSAA) is still widely used in treating metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), especially in undeveloped countries. However, whether prior treatment with a second-line NSAA would impact the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (Abi) remains uncertain. In the current study, 87 mCRPC patients treated with Abi were analyzed. Among them, 21 were treated with a second-line NSAA (from bicalutamide to flutamide) before receiving abiraterone, while the remaining 66 received Abi directly. Therapeutic efficacy of Abi was compared between those with and without prior second-line NSAA using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, and Cox regression models. The therapeutic efficacy of Abi was similar between those with or without the prior switching treatment of flutamide, in terms of either prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PSA-PFS, 5.5 vs 5.6 months, P = 0.967), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS, 12.8 vs 13.4 months, P = 0.508), overall survival (OS, not reached vs 30.6 months, P = 0.606), or PSA-response rate (71.4% [15/21] vs 60.6% [40/66], P = 0.370). This is the first time that the impact of prior switching of treatment to a second-line NSAA on the efficacy of Abi in mCRPC patients has been addressed. Our data support that, use of prior sequential bicalutamide and flutamide does not seem to preclude response to abiraterone, although larger cohort studies and, ideally, a randomized controlled trial are needed. These findings will facilitate doctors' decision-making in the treatment of mCRPC patients, especially for those with previous experience of switching NSAA second-line treatments in the clinic.

Diethylstilbestrol, flutamide and their combination impaired the spermatogenesis of male adult zebrafish through disrupting HPG axis, meiosis and apoptosis

Both diethylstilbestrol (DES, an environmental estrogen) and flutamide (FLU, an anti-androgen) are found to impair spermatogenesis by disrupting hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis and altering androgen levels through different mechanisms/modes of action in fish with poorly understood underlying mechanisms. Furthermore, it is not known whether and how a combined exposure of DES and FLU has a stronger effect than the compounds alone. In this study, male zebrafish adults were exposed to DES, FLU and their combination (DES+FLU) for 30days, and their effects on histological structure and sperm count in testis, androgen level in plasma, as well as the mRNA levels of genes involved in HPG axis, meiotic regulation and apoptosis were analyzed. After exposure, DES and FLU disrupted spermatogenesis in zebrafish, and their combination resulted in even more severe impairment, indicating the inhibitory roles of these chemicals on spermatogenesis and their additive effects on zebrafish. The different regulation of vtg1 expression in the liver in response to DES and FLU further confirmed the different modes of action of these drugs. Gene expression and plasma steroid level analyses demonstrated the suppressed mRNA levels of the key genes (such as gnrh3, fshβ and lhβ in brain and dmrt1, sf1, cyp17a1 and cyp11b2 in testis) in HPG axis and decreased 11-ketotestosterone (11-KT) levels in plasma. The declined level of 11-KT was thus supposed to be closely related to the down-regulation of cyp26a1 (encoding the catabolic enzyme of retinoic acid) and suppression of genes involved in meiotic regulation (nanos1, dmc1 and sycp3). In fish exposed to DES and DES+FLU, enhanced apoptosis (elevated bax/bcl-2 expression ratio) was also observed. The suppression of meiotic regulation in response to all the exposures and enhanced apoptosis in response to DES were thus supposed to result in the spermatogenic impairment in zebrafish. The present study greatly extends our understanding on the mechanisms underlying of reproductive toxicity of environment estrogens and anti-androgens in fish.