Systemic anticancer therapy for urothelial carcinoma: UK oncologists' perspective

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a common cancer associated with a poor prognosis in patients with advanced disease. Platinum-based chemotherapy has remained the cornerstone of systemic anticancer treatment for many years, and recent developments in the treatment landscape have improved outcomes. In this review, we provide an overview of systemic treatment for UC, including clinical data supporting the current standard of care at each point in the treatment pathway and author interpretations from a UK perspective. Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is recommended for eligible patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and is preferable to adjuvant treatment. For first-line treatment of advanced UC, platinum-eligible patients should receive cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by avelumab maintenance in those without disease progression. Among patients unable to receive platinum-based chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment is an option for those with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumours. Second-line or later treatment options depend on prior treatment, and enfortumab vedotin is preferred after prior ICI and chemotherapy, although availability varies between countries. Additional options include rechallenge with platinum-based chemotherapy, an ICI, or non-platinum-based chemotherapy. Areas of uncertainty include the optimal number of first-line chemotherapy cycles for advanced UC and the value of PD-L1 testing for UC.

Diagnosis, treatment and survival from bladder, upper urinary tract, and urethral cancers: real-world findings from NHS England between 2013 and 2019

OBJECTIVE

We report NHS England data for patients with bladder cancer (BC), upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC: renal pelvic and ureteric), and urethral cancers from 2013 to 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hospital episode statistics, waiting times, and cancer registrations were extracted from NHS Digital.

RESULTS

Registrations included 128 823 individuals with BC, 16 018 with UTUC, and 2533 with urethral cancer. In 2019, 150 816 persons were living with a diagnosis of BC, of whom 113 067 (75.0%) were men, 85 117 (56.5%) were aged >75 years, and 95 553 (91.7%) were Caucasian. Incidence rates were stable (32.7-34.3 for BC, 3.9-4.2 for UTUC and 0.6-0.7 for urethral cancer per 100 000 population). Most patients 52 097 (mean [range] 41.3% [40.7-42.0%]) were referred outside the 2-week-wait pathway and 15 340 (mean [range] 12.2% [11.7-12.6%]) presented as emergencies. Surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or multimodal treatment use varied with disease stage, patient factors and Cancer Alliance. Between 27% and 29% (n = 6616) of muscle-invasive BCs did not receive radical treatment. Survival rates reflected stage, grade, location, and tumour histology. Overall survival rates did not improve over time (relative change: 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.97-0.97) at 2 years in contrast to other cancers.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic pathway for BC needs improvement. Increases in survival might be delivered through greater use of radical treatment. NHS Digital data offers a population-wide picture of this disease but does not allow individual outcomes to be matched with disease or patient features and key parameters can be missing or incomplete.

European Association of Urology Guidelines on Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: 2023 Update

CONTEXT

The European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines panel on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) has updated the guidelines to aid clinicians in evidence-based management of UTUC.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of the EAU guidelines on UTUC as an aid to clinicians.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The recommendations provided in these guidelines are based on a review of the literature via a systematic search of the PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Data were searched using the following keywords: urinary tract cancer, urothelial carcinomas, renal pelvis, ureter, bladder cancer, chemotherapy, ureteroscopy, nephroureterectomy, neoplasm, (neo)adjuvant treatment, instillation, recurrence, risk factors, metastatic, immunotherapy, and survival. The results were assessed by a panel of experts.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Even though data are accruing, for many areas there is still insufficient high-level evidence to provide strong recommendations. Patient stratification on the basis of histology and clinical examination (including imaging) and assessment of patients at risk of Lynch syndrome will aid management. Kidney-sparing management should be offered as a primary treatment option to patients with low-risk UTUC and two functional kidneys. In particular, for patients with high-risk or metastatic UTUC, new treatment options have become available. In high-risk UTUC, platinum-based chemotherapy after radical nephroureterectomy, and adjuvant nivolumab for unfit or patients who decline chemotherapy, are options. For metastatic disease, gemcitabine/carboplatin chemotherapy is recommended as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible patients. Patients with PD-1/PD-L1-positive tumours should be offered a checkpoint inhibitor (pembrolizumab or atezolizumab).

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines contain information on the management of individual patients according to the current best evidence. Urologists should take into account the specific clinical characteristics of each patient when determining the optimal treatment regimen according to the risk stratification of these tumours.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Cancer of the upper urinary tract is rare, but because 60% of these tumours are invasive at diagnosis, timely and appropriate diagnosis is most important. A number of known risk factors exist.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Biomarker-Selected, Phase II Clinical Trial of Maintenance Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase Inhibition With Rucaparib Following Chemotherapy for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

PURPOSE

A DNA repair deficiency (DRD) phenotype exists within a subset of metastatic urothelial carcinomas (mUC) predicting benefit from platinum-based chemotherapy. We tested switch maintenance therapy with the poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor rucaparib, following chemotherapy, for DRD biomarker-positive mUC.

METHODS

DRD biomarker-positive mUC patients, within 10 weeks of chemotherapy, and without cancer progression, were randomly assigned (1:1) to maintenance rucaparib 600 mg twice a day orally, or placebo, until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Statistical analysis targeted a hazard ratio of 0.5 with a 20% one-sided α for this signal-seeking trial. PFS (RECIST 1.1) was compared between trial arms, by intention to treat, within a Cox model.

RESULTS

Out of 248 patients, 74 (29.8%) were DRD biomarker-positive and 40 were randomly assigned. A total of 12 (60%) and 20 (100%) PFS events occurred in the rucaparib and placebo arms, respectively (median follow-up was 94.6 weeks in those still alive). Median PFS was 35.3 weeks (80% CI, 11.7 to 35.6) with rucaparib and 15.1 weeks (80% CI, 11.9 to 22.6) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.53; 80% CI, 0.30 to 0.92; one-sided P = .07). In the safety population (n = 39) treatment-related adverse events were mostly low grade. Patients received a median duration of 10 rucaparib or six placebo cycles on treatment. Treatment-related adverse events (all grades) of fatigue (63.2% v 30.0%), nausea (36.8% v 5.0%), rash (21.1% v 0%), and raised alanine aminotransferase (57.9% v 10%) were more common with rucaparib.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance rucaparib, following platinum-based chemotherapy, extended PFS in DRD biomarker-selected patients with mUC and was tolerable. Further investigation of poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibition in selected patients with mUC is warranted.

Overall Survival Update for Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Capivasertib and Docetaxel in the Phase 2 ProCAID Clinical Trial

The PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway is frequently deregulated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). ProCAID was a phase 2 trial assessing addition of the AKT1/2/3 inhibitor capivasertib to docetaxel for patients with mCRPC. We previously reported that capivasertib did not extend a composite progression-free survival primary endpoint but did significantly improve the secondary endpoint of overall survival (OS). Here we present OS data after 66% of events had occurred in the intent-to-treat population (n = 150). Median OS was 25.3 mo for capivasertib plus docetaxel versus 20.3 mo for placebo plus docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-1.05; nominal p = 0.09). Receipt of subsequent life-extending treatments was balanced between the treatment arms. The OS benefit associated with capivasertib was maintained in a subset of patients previously treated with abiraterone and/or enzalutamide (median OS 25.0 vs 17.6 mo; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.91; nominal p = 0.02) but not in abiraterone/enzalutamide-naïve patients (median OS 31.1 mo vs not reached; HR 1.43, 95% CI 0.63-3.23). We conclude that OS may be extended by addition of capivasertib to docetaxel. Exploratory analysis revealed that the OS benefit was maintained in a subset of patients previously exposed to androgen receptor-targeted agents, which should be evaluated in prospective trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The ProCAID study examined whether adding the AKT inhibitor drug capivasertib to docetaxel chemotherapy improves outcomes for patients with advanced prostate cancer. Initial analysis of the ProCAID results suggested that capivasertib improved overall survival benefit. This follow-up analysis suggests that capivasertib addition may be particularly beneficial for patients whose cancer was previously treated with drugs that target the androgen receptor.

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone for metastatic patients starting hormone therapy: 5-year follow-up results from the STAMPEDE randomised trial (NCT00268476)

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (AAP) previously demonstrated improved survival in STAMPEDE, a multiarm, multistage platform trial in men starting long-term hormone therapy for prostate cancer. This long-term analysis in metastatic patients was planned for 3 years after the first results. Standard-of-care (SOC) was androgen deprivation therapy. The comparison randomised patients 1:1 to SOC-alone with or without daily abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + prednisolone 5 mg (SOC + AAP), continued until disease progression. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Metastatic disease risk group was classified retrospectively using baseline CT and bone scans by central radiological review and pathology reports. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, accounting for baseline stratification factors. One thousand and three patients were contemporaneously randomised (November 2011 to January 2014): median age 67 years; 94% newly-diagnosed; metastatic disease risk group: 48% high, 44% low, 8% unassessable; median PSA 97 ng/mL. At 6.1 years median follow-up, 329 SOC-alone deaths (118 low-risk, 178 high-risk) and 244 SOC + AAP deaths (75 low-risk, 145 high-risk) were reported. Adjusted HR = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.71; P = 0.31 × 10^-9 ) favoured SOC + AAP, with 5-years survival improved from 41% SOC-alone to 60% SOC + AAP. This was similar in low-risk (HR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.76) and high-risk (HR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.43-0.69) patients. Median and current maximum time on SOC + AAP was 2.4 and 8.1 years. Toxicity at 4 years postrandomisation was similar, with 16% patients in each group reporting grade 3 or higher toxicity. A sustained and substantial improvement in overall survival of all metastatic prostate cancer patients was achieved with SOC + abiraterone acetate + prednisolone, irrespective of metastatic disease risk group.

Docetaxel for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Outcomes in the STAMPEDE Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

STAMPEDE previously reported adding upfront docetaxel improved overall survival for prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report long-term results for non-metastatic patients using, as primary outcome, metastatic progression-free survival (mPFS), an externally demonstrated surrogate for overall survival.

METHODS

Standard of care (SOC) was androgen deprivation therapy with or without radical prostate radiotherapy. A total of 460 SOC and 230 SOC plus docetaxel were randomly assigned 2:1. Standard survival methods and intention to treat were used. Treatment effect estimates were summarized from adjusted Cox regression models, switching to restricted mean survival time if non-proportional hazards. mPFS (new metastases, skeletal-related events, or prostate cancer death) had 70% power (α = 0.05) for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.70. Secondary outcome measures included overall survival, failure-free survival (FFS), and progression-free survival (PFS: mPFS, locoregional progression).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 6.5 years with 142 mPFS events on SOC (3 year and 54% increases over previous report). There was no good evidence of an advantage to SOC plus docetaxel on mPFS (HR = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.19; P = .43); with 5-year mPFS 82% (95% CI = 78% to 87%) SOC plus docetaxel vs 77% (95% CI = 73% to 81%) SOC. Secondary outcomes showed evidence SOC plus docetaxel improved FFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.88; P = .002) and PFS (nonproportional P = .03, restricted mean survival time difference = 5.8 months, 95% CI = 0.5 to 11.2; P = .03) but no good evidence of overall survival benefit (125 SOC deaths; HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.21; P = .44). There was no evidence SOC plus docetaxel increased late toxicity: post 1 year, 29% SOC and 30% SOC plus docetaxel grade 3-5 toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

There is robust evidence that SOC plus docetaxel improved FFS and PFS (previously shown to increase quality-adjusted life-years), without excess late toxicity, which did not translate into benefit for longer-term outcomes. This may influence patient management in individual cases.

Addition of nintedanib or placebo to neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin in locally advanced muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NEOBLADE): a double-blind, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Recurrence is common after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. We investigated the effect of adding nintedanib to neoadjuvant chemotherapy on response and survival in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

METHODS

NEOBLADE was a parallel-arm, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy with nintedanib or placebo in locally advanced muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, were recruited from 15 hospitals in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to nintedanib or placebo using permuted blocks with random block sizes of two or four, stratified by centre and glomerular filtration rate. Treatments were allocated using an interactive web-based system, and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation throughout the study. Patients received oral nintedanib (150 mg or 200 mg twice daily for 12 weeks) or placebo, in addition to usual neoadjuvant chemotherapy with intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and intravenous cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 3-weekly cycle. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response rate, assessed at cystectomy or at day 8 of cyclde 3 (plus or minus 7 days) if cystectomy did not occur. Primary analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with EudraCT, 2012-004895-01, and ISRCTN, 56349930, and has completed planned recruitment.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 4, 2014, and Sept 3, 2018, 120 patients were recruited and were randomly allocated to receive nintedanib (n=57) or placebo (n=63). The median follow-up for the study was 33·5 months (IQR 14·0-44·0). Pathological complete response in the intention-to-treat population was reached in 21 (37%) of 57 patients in the nintedanib group and 20 (32%) of 63 in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] 1·25, 70% CI 0·84-1·87; p=0·28). Grade 3 or worse toxicities were observed in 53 (93%) of 57 participants who received nintedanib and 50 (79%) of 63 patients in the placebo group (OR 1·65, 95% CI 0·74-3·65; p=0·24). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were thromboembolic events (17 [30%] of 57 patients in the nintedanib group vs 13 [21%] of 63 patients in the placebo group [OR 1·63, 95% CI 0·71-3·76; p=0·29]) and decreased neutrophil count (22 [39%] in the nintedanib group vs seven [11%] in the placebo group [5·03, 1·95-13·00; p=0·0006]). 45 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in the nintedanib group and 43 occurred in the placebo group. One treatment-related death occurred in the placebo group, which was due to myocardial infarction.

INTERPRETATION

The addition of nintedanib to chemotherapy was safe but did not improve the rate of pathological complete response in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

FUNDING

Boehringer Ingelheim.

A systematic review of disease related stigmatization in patients living with prostate cancer

Background

Prostate cancer has been shown to be susceptible to significant stigmatisation, because to a large extent it is concealable, it has potentially embarrassing sexual symptoms and has significant impact on the psychosocial functioning.

Methods

This review included studies that focused on qualitative and/or quantitative data, where the study outcome was prostate cancer and included a measure of stigmatization. Electronic databases (CINAHL, Medline, PubMed, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, and the Joanna Briggs Institute) and one database for grey literature Opengrey.eu, were screened. We used thematic analysis, with narrative synthesis to analyse these data. We assessed risk of bias in the included studies using the RoBANS.

Results

In total, 18 studies met review inclusion criteria, incorporating a total of 2295 participants. All studies recruited participants with prostate cancer, however four studies recruited participants with other cancers such as breast cancer and lung cancer. Of the 18 studies, 11 studies evaluated perceived or felt stigma; four studies evaluated internalised or self-stigma; three studies evaluated more than one stigma domain.

Discussion

We found that patients living with prostate cancer encounter stigmatisation that relate to perception, internalisation, and discrimination experiences. We also identified several significant gaps related to the understanding of prostate cancer stigmatization, which provides an opportunity for future research to address these important public health issues.

Registration

This systematic review protocol is registered with PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews in health and social care. Registration number: CRD42020177312.

Pan-AKT Inhibitor Capivasertib With Docetaxel and Prednisolone in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase II Trial (ProCAID)

PURPOSE

Capivasertib is a pan-AKT inhibitor. Preclinical data indicate activity in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and synergism with docetaxel.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ProCAID was a placebo controlled randomized phase II trial in mCRPC. Patients received up to ten 21-day cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenous, day 1) and prednisolone (5 mg twice daily, oral, day 1-21) and were randomly assigned (1:1) to oral capivasertib (320 mg twice daily, 4 days on/3 days off, from day 2 each cycle), or placebo, until disease progression. Treatment allocation used minimization factors: bone metastases; visceral metastases; investigational site; and prior abiraterone or enzalutamide. The primary objective, by intention to treat, determined if the addition of capivasertib prolonged a composite progression-free survival (cPFS) end point that included prostate-specific antigen progression events. cPFS and overall survival (OS) were also assessed by composite biomarker subgroup for PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway activation status.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty patients were enrolled. Median cPFS was 7.03 (95% CI, 6.28 to 8.25) and 6.70 months (95% CI, 5.52 to 7.36) with capivasertib and placebo respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 80% CI, 0.73 to 1.16; one-sided P = .32). Median OS was 31.15 (95% CI, 20.07 to not reached) and 20.27 months (95% CI, 17.51 to 24.18), respectively (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.88; two-sided P = .01). cPFS and OS results were consistent irrespective of PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway activation status. Grade III-IV adverse events were equivalent between arms (62.2%). The most common adverse events of any grade deemed related to capivasertib were diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, and rash.

CONCLUSION

The addition of capivasertib to chemotherapy did not extend cPFS in mCRPC irrespective of PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway activation status. The observed OS result (a secondary end point) will require prospective validation in future studies to address potential for bias.

Addition of Docetaxel to First-line Long-term Hormone Therapy in Prostate Cancer (STAMPEDE): Modelling to Estimate Long-term Survival, Quality-adjusted Survival, and Cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Results from large randomised controlled trials have shown that adding docetaxel to the standard of care (SOC) for men initiating hormone therapy for prostate cancer (PC) prolongs survival for those with metastatic disease and prolongs failure-free survival for those without. To date there has been no formal assessment of whether funding docetaxel in this setting represents an appropriate use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether administering docetaxel to men with PC starting long-term hormone therapy is cost-effective in a UK setting.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We modelled health outcomes and costs in the UK NHS using data collected within the STAMPEDE trial, which enrolled men with high-risk, locally advanced metastatic or recurrent PC starting first-line hormone therapy.

INTERVENTION

SOC was hormone therapy for ≥2 yr and radiotherapy in some patients. Docetaxel (75mg/m2) was administered alongside SOC for six three-weekly cycles.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The model generated lifetime predictions of costs, changes in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The model predicted that docetaxel would extend survival (discounted quality-adjusted survival) by 0.89 yr (0.51) for metastatic PC and 0.78 yr (0.39) for nonmetastatic PC, and would be cost-effective in metastatic PC (ICER £5514/QALY vs SOC) and nonmetastatic PC (higher QALYs, lower costs vs SOC). Docetaxel remained cost-effective in nonmetastatic PC when the assumption of no survival advantage was modelled.

CONCLUSIONS

Docetaxel is cost-effective among patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic PC in a UK setting. Clinicians should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support docetaxel use in patients with nonmetastatic PC, as the opportunity to offer docetaxel at hormone therapy initiation will be missed for some patients by the time more mature survival data are available.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Starting docetaxel chemotherapy alongside hormone therapy represents a good use of UK National Health Service resources for patients with prostate cancer that is high risk or has spread to other parts of the body.

ProCAID: a phase I clinical trial to combine the AKT inhibitor AZD5363 with docetaxel and prednisolone chemotherapy for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer

Background Docetaxel and prednisolone chemotherapy (DP) extends survival in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, emergent clinical resistance is almost inevitable. AKT pathway activation is highly prevalent in mCRPC contributing to disease progression and DP resistance. AZD5363 is a potent oral pan-AKT inhibitor with pre-clinical data indicating activity in mCRPC and synergy with docetaxel. Methods This phase I trial was to determine an AZD5363 recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for combination with DP. Eligibility criteria included chemotherapy naive mCRPC, PSA or radiographic disease progression and ECOG performance status 0 or 1. Treatment comprised DP (75 mg/m2, IV, day 1 and 5 mg BID, PO, day 1-21 respectively for ten cycles) and AZD5363 to disease progression for all patients. We utilised a 3 + 3 dose escalation design to determine a maximum tolerated dose according to defined dose limiting toxicity criteria assessed using CTCAE version 4.03. Planned AZD5363 dose levels were 320 mg (DL1), 400 mg (DL2) and 480 mg (DL3), BID, PO, 4 days on/3 days off, from day 2 of each cycle. Results 10 patients were treated. Dose limiting toxicities affected 2 patients (grade 3 rash ≥5 days; grade 3 diarrhoea) in DL2. The commonest grade 3 or 4, AZD5363 related, symptomatic adverse events were rash and diarrhoea. Hyperglycaemia affected all patients but was self-limiting. PSA reduction to <50% at 12 weeks occurred in 7 patients. Conclusions The RP2D for AZD5363 is 320 mg BID, 4 days on/3 days off, in combination with full dose DP for mCRPC.

Abiraterone for Prostate Cancer Not Previously Treated with Hormone Therapy

BACKGROUND

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone improves survival in men with relapsed prostate cancer. We assessed the effect of this combination in men starting long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), using a multigroup, multistage trial design.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive ADT alone or ADT plus abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and prednisolone (5 mg daily) (combination therapy). Local radiotherapy was mandated for patients with node-negative, nonmetastatic disease and encouraged for those with positive nodes. For patients with nonmetastatic disease with no radiotherapy planned and for patients with metastatic disease, treatment continued until radiologic, clinical, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression; otherwise, treatment was to continue for 2 years or until any type of progression, whichever came first. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. The intermediate primary outcome was failure-free survival (treatment failure was defined as radiologic, clinical, or PSA progression or death from prostate cancer).

RESULTS

A total of 1917 patients underwent randomization from November 2011 through January 2014. The median age was 67 years, and the median PSA level was 53 ng per milliliter. A total of 52% of the patients had metastatic disease, 20% had node-positive or node-indeterminate nonmetastatic disease, and 28% had node-negative, nonmetastatic disease; 95% had newly diagnosed disease. The median follow-up was 40 months. There were 184 deaths in the combination group as compared with 262 in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.76; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.75 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.61 in those with metastatic disease. There were 248 treatment-failure events in the combination group as compared with 535 in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.34; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.21 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.31 in those with metastatic disease. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 47% of the patients in the combination group (with nine grade 5 events) and in 33% of the patients in the ADT-alone group (with three grade 5 events).

CONCLUSIONS

Among men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer, ADT plus abiraterone and prednisolone was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and failure-free survival than ADT alone. (Funded by Cancer Research U.K. and others; STAMPEDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00268476 , and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN78818544 .).

Informed consent in randomised controlled trials: development and preliminary evaluation of a measure of Participatory and Informed Consent (PIC)

BACKGROUND

Informed consent (IC) is an ethical and legal prerequisite for trial participation, yet current approaches evaluating participant understanding for IC during recruitment lack consistency. No validated measure has been identified that evaluates participant understanding for IC based on their contributions during consent interactions. This paper outlines the development and formative evaluation of the Participatory and Informed Consent (PIC) measure for application to recorded recruitment appointments. The PIC allows the evaluation of recruiter information provision and evidence of participant understanding.

METHODS

Published guidelines for IC were reviewed to identify potential items for inclusion. Seventeen purposively sampled trial recruitment appointments from three diverse trials were reviewed to identify the presence of items relevant to IC. A developmental version of the measure (DevPICv1) was drafted and applied to six further recruitment appointments from three further diverse trials to evaluate feasibility, validity, stability and inter-rater reliability. Findings guided revision of the measure (DevPICv2) which was applied to six further recruitment appointments as above.

RESULTS

DevPICv1 assessed recruiter information provision (detail and clarity assessed separately) and participant talk (detail and understanding assessed separately) over 20 parameters (or 23 parameters for three-arm trials). Initial application of the measure to six diverse recruitment appointments demonstrated promising stability and inter-rater reliability but a need to simplify the measure to shorten time for completion. The revised measure (DevPICv2) combined assessment of detail and clarity of recruiter information and detail and evidence of participant understanding into two single scales for application to 22 parameters or 25 parameters for three-arm trials. Application of DevPICv2 to six further diverse recruitment appointments showed considerable improvements in feasibility (e.g. time to complete) with good levels of stability (i.e. test-retest reliability) and inter-rater reliability maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

The DevPICv2 provides a measure for application to trial recruitment appointments to evaluate quality of recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding and participation during IC discussions. Initial evaluation shows promising feasibility, validity, reliability and ability to discriminate across a range of recruiter practice and evidence of participant understanding. More validation work is needed in new clinical trials to evaluate and refine the measure further.

Adding abiraterone for men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT): Survival results from STAMPEDE (NCT00268476)

LBA5003

Background: Abiraterone showed a survival advantage in men with castration-refractory prostate cancer. We assessed whether abiraterone would work earlier in the disease. STAMPEDE is a randomized controlled trial using a multi-arm multi-stage platform design. It recruits patients (pts) with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic PCa starting long-term ADT. We report the first comparative survival data. Methods: The standard-of-care (SOC) was ADT for 2+yrs; radiotherapy (RT) was mandated for men with N0M0 disease & encouraged for N+M0. Stratified randomization allocated pts 1:1 to SOC or SOC+abiraterone 1000mg + prednisolone 5mg daily. Treatment duration depended on stage & intent to give radical RT: pts not having RT or M1 disease, treatment continued until PSA, radiological & clinical progression; otherwise treatment continued until the earlier of 2 years or all types of progression. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. Comparison to control for survival had 90% power at 2.5% 1-sided alpha for hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, requiring ~267 control arm deaths, accounting for 3 intermediate lack-of-benefit analyses on failure-free survival (FFS). Analyses used Cox proportional hazards & flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. Results: 1,917 pts were contemporaneously randomized to these arms (Nov 2011- Jan 2014). Groups were balanced: median age 67yrs; 52% metastatic, 20% N+/X M0, 28% N0M0; 95% newly-diagnosed; median PSA 53ng/ml. Median follow-up was 40m. There were 262 control arm deaths (82% PCa). The adjusted HR = 0.63 (95% CI 0.52-0.76; p=0.115x10-7; 184 deaths) for SOC+Abi vs SOC, with 3yr OS improved from 76% to 83%. There were 535 control arm FFS events; the adjusted HR = 0.29 (95% CI 0.25-0.34; p = 0.377x10-63, 248 FFS events) for SOC+Abi vs SOC. Grade 3 & 4 adverse events were seen in 29% & 3% SOC, 41% & 5% SOC+Abi; Grade 5: 3 & 9 (1 & 2 related). Conclusions: The results show a clinically & statistically significant effect on overall survival & failure-free survival from adding abiraterone at start of ADT with a manageable increase in toxicity. ADT (+/- RT) + abiraterone is a new standard of care for this group. Clinical trial information: NCT00268476.

Adding abiraterone for men with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT): Survival results from STAMPEDE (NCT00268476)

LBA5003

The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstracts.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Saturday, June 3, 2017, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2017, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Saturday edition of ASCO Daily News.

Treatment outcomes in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and cardiovascular disorders or diabetes: The Prostate Cancer Registry

e16537

Background: The Prostate Cancer Registry is a prospective study of >3000 men with mCRPC in routine care. These patients (pts) have a high level of comorbidities which are often underrepresented in RCTs. Methods: Data were collected from pts with mCRPC irrespective of treatment (tx). Outcomes in pts with comorbidities were assessed. Results: At study entry, 16.6% of pts had a cardiac disorder, 9.7% hypertension only, 17.7% diabetes. Characteristics, first txs and outcomes are shown in the table below. Conclusions: In this real-life setting, AAP, ENZ, or DOC tx was feasible in pts with cardiac disorders, hypertension or diabetes; proportions treated with each drug were similar to the overall mCRPC population. Regardless of tx PFS was shorter than TTP, which may reflect the impact of pts’ comorbidities in real life. Pts with cardiac disorders had poorer outcomes vs the overall population. Clinical trial information: NCT02236637. [Table: see text]

Real-world outcomes in second-line treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): The Prostate Cancer Registry

5028

Background: The Prostate Cancer Registry is a prospective, international observational study that began in June 2013 and will assess the characteristics and management of > 3000 mCRPC patients (pts) in routine clinical practice for ≤ 3 years. Methods: Data were collected from men with mCRPC irrespective of treatment (tx). This interim analysis reports baseline characteristics, txs and outcomes in pts with ≥ 12-month follow-up receiving second-line mCRPC tx following docetaxel as the only prior mCRPC tx. Results: The most commonly initiated second-line mCPRC txs (n ≥ 50) were abiraterone acetate + prednisone (AAP, n = 177), enzalutamide (ENZ, n = 94), or cabazitaxel (CAB, n = 70). Characteristics and outcomes are shown in the table below. TTP was not significantly different for AAP vs ENZ, AAP vs CAB or ENZ vs CAB (propensity score adjusted p = 0.5954, p = 0.5888 and p= 0.4808, respectively). Conclusions: In this real-world study, clinical outcomes reveal that, in pts receiving second-line mCRPC tx after docetaxel, TTP was similar across tx groups; QoL improved most in AAP and ENZ groups and no deterioration was observed most in AAP and CAB groups. Clinical trial information: NCT02236637. [Table: see text]

Efficacy of cabazitaxel (CABA) rechallenge in heavily-treated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

5033

Background: Only 2 chemotherapies have shown an overall survival (OS) benefit in mCRPC: docetaxel (DOC) and CABA. In patients (pts) previously treated with a new hormonal therapy (NHT: enzalutamide or abiraterone), DOC and CABA, therapeutic options are limited. We previously reported some activity of DOC rechallenge in good responders to first-line DOC. We present here the results of a retrospective study evaluating the efficacy and safety of CABA rechallenge. Methods: Records of 70 mCRPC pts rechallenged with CABA were collected in 17 centers (France, Italy, UK, Austria). To be included, pts should have previously received DOC, NHT and CABA with a good response to CABA. Results: Of these 70 pts, 52 received DOC-NHT-CABA, 15 DOC-CABA-NHT and 3 NHT-DOC-CABA. At rechallenge, 83% had a high-volume disease (CHAARTED definition), 10% had visceral mets, 66% consumed narcotic analgesics, 68 % were ECOG 0-1 and median neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was 3.1. CABA was rechallenged for a median of 6 cycles (25 mg/m2 q3w, 59%; 20 mg/m2, 27%; 16 mg/m2q3w 11%) with prophylactic G-CSF in 47%. Median time from last CABA cycle was 8.6 months (mo). CABA rechallenge had an acceptable tolerability: 7 pts (10%) had grade 3-4 toxicity (neutropenia). Data on efficacy are reported in Table 1. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.3 mo with DOC, 12 mo with NHT, 11.9 mo with first CABA (median 8 cycles), and 7.8 mo with CABA rechallenge. Median OS calculated from the first life-extending therapy was 59.9 mo (95% CI 47.8; 66.4). Conclusions: This retrospective cohort of heavily treated mCRPC pts suggests that CABA rechallenge has a good activity with a manageable toxicity. CABA rechallenge might be an option in heavily treated pts still fit to receive chemotherapy. [Table: see text]

Real-world treatment with abiraterone acetate in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

239

Background: In the COU-AA-302 trial, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) resulted in extension of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients compared to prednisone alone. However, limited data on AAP treatment and outcomes is available in the real-world in this setting. The aim of this study is to describe the duration of AAP treatment in routine clinical practice in mCRPC patients prior to chemotherapy. Methods: The study was designed as a retrospective chart review of mCRPC patients identified through oncology and urology practice in Belgium, France, Germany and the UK. This first analysis reports baseline patient characteristics at AAP initiation for the first 224 patients. Treatment duration, PFS and rPFS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Potential factors associated with treatment duration were explored using the log-rank test. Results: Data from 224 mCRPC patients treated with AAP (Belgium: 67; Germany: 150; UK: 7; none from France) across 19 centres was considered in this initial analysis. At baseline, the median age was 75.5 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 69.0-82.0) and the median PSA level was 50.0 ng/mL (IQR: 21.0-121.0). Patients with visceral metastases (9.8%) and ECOG 2-3 (9.4%) were included in this study, in contrast to those included in the COU-AA-302 study. Median duration of AAP treatment was 11.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.2-12.8), whilst median PFS and rPFS were 11.9 months (95% CI: 10.8-13.3) and 16.5 months (95% CI: 13.5-20.0), respectively. Reasons for discontinuing AAP involved PSA progression (52.2%), radiographic progression (38.9%), symptomatic progression (27.8%), non-toxic death (19.4%) and toxicity (2.2%). Treatment duration was significantly longer in mCRPC patients with either baseline ECOG status 0, lower PSA, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, or lactate dehydrogenase levels (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest similar treatment duration and rPFS for mCRPC patients in this real-life cohort with poorer clinical features compared to those observed in the COU-AA-302 trial population.

Real life treatment sequences and survival of men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving cabazitaxel in clinical practice across England

e573

Background: New life-prolonging anticancer treatments (LPT), including docetaxel (D), cabazitaxel (C), abiraterone (A) and enzalutamide (E) have transformed outcomes for patients with mCRPC; however, optimal treatment sequencing is unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the anticancer treatment sequencing and outcomes of patients receiving cabazitaxel in England. Methods: A multi-centre, observational, retrospective study of mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel after docetaxel treatment failure was conducted. Data on patient characteristics, anticancer treatments, toxicity and outcomes were collected from medical records between March 2015 and March 2016. Results: 115 patients with mCRPC from 5 English hospitals were evaluated. Mean age at cabazitaxel initiation was 69.4 (SD: 6.7) years. Median time from mCRPC diagnosis to cabazitaxel initiation was 18.0 (interquartile range: 11.4–28.7) months. Cabazitaxel was 2nd line therapy after docetaxel in 58/115 (50%) patients. Patients received a median of 3 (range: 2–4) different LPTs: 5 patients received 2 therapies (DC = 5); 89 patients received 3 therapies (DAC = 44, DCA = 32, DCE = 7, ADC = 4, DEC = 1, EDC = 1); 21 patients received 4 therapies (DACE = 9; DCAE = 5; DCEA = 5; DAEC = 2). Median overall survival (OS) from mCRPC diagnosis and from docetaxel initiation according to number of LPTs is presented in the table. Conclusions: A variety of mCRPC treatment sequences are used in real-world practice. OS was greater in those patients receiving ≥3 LPTs, with a non-significant yet intriguing trend to longer OS with DCA. Further follow up may indicate whether this will become statistically significant. [Table: see text]

Results of a randomised phase II study of hypofractionated bladder radiotherapy (RT) with or without image guided adaptive planning (HYBRID - CRUK/12/055)

283

Background: Muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) incidence increases with age, with many patients (pts) unfit for radical therapy. We aimed to demonstrate feasibility of delivery & acceptable rates of hypofractionated RT toxicity using image guided adaptive techniques for these pts in a multicentre trial. Methods: Pts with T2-T4aN0M0 MIBC had 36 Gray (Gy) in 6 fractions (fr) over 6 weeks & were randomised (1:1) to standard (SP) or adaptive planning (AP). For AP 3 RT plans (small, medium, large) were generated with preRT cone beam (CB) CT used to select best fitting ‘plan of the day’ at each fr. A QA programme aided standardised CBCT image interpretation. The SP group had RT with 1 plan. The aim was to exclude ≥30% grade ≥3 (≥G3) acute (to 3 months (m)) non-genitourinary (GU) toxicity for AP in pts with no MIBC death by 3m (p0=0.7 p1=0.9 α=0.05 β=0.2). Secondary endpoints included 36Gy/6fr acute toxicity in pts who had ≥1 RT fr & proportion of AP fr using small/large plan. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed (CTCAE v4) weekly on RT, 4 weeks & 3m post RT. Blind independent review assessed relatedness of non-GU AEs to RT. Results: Between Apr 2014 & Aug 2016 65 pts were randomised (SP (n=32) AP (n=33)) from 12 UK sites. Median age was 85yrs; 68% male; 92% transitional cell MIBC; 99% grade 3; 25% clinical stage T3 & 6% T4. 58 pts are evaluable to date, ≥G3 acute non-GU adverse reactions (AR) were reported in 2/30 (7%; 90% CI: 1%–20%) AP (G3 hyperkalemia & hyponatremia; G3 diarrhea & dehydration) & 3/28 (11%; 90% CI: 3% –25%) SP pts (G3 fatigue; G3 hyperkalemia, weight loss & anorexia; G3 diarrhoea). 24/65 (37%; 90% CI: 27%-48%) pts who had ≥1 RT fr had ≥G3 acute AEs including G4 hyponatremia (2 AP pts), G5 pneumonia (1 SP, 1 AP), G5 sepsis (1 AP) & G5 renal failure (1 SP) (all G4/5 unrelated to RT). 7/65 pts received <6 fr RT due to toxicity. In the 33 AP pts 40/182 fr (22%) used a small plan & 29/182 (16%) large (adaption rate=38%; 95% CI: 31%-45%). Conclusions: Though overall ≥G3 AE rate was significant, 36Gy/6fr with AP is feasible, met predefined toxicity criteria (<30% ≥G3 acute non-GU ARs) & with >25% fr adapted has potential for benefit. Comparative randomised studies are needed to quantify benefits of AP over SP. Clinical trial information: 18815596.

5-year patient-reported outcomes of bowel and urinary bother in the CHHiP trial (CRUK/06/016)

23

Background: Hypofractionated radiotherapy (hRT) has been shown to be non-inferior to conventional fractionation (cRT) in the CHHiP trial. Clinician reported toxicity was low across all fractionation schedules at 5 years (y), as were patient reported outcomes (PRO) to 2y. Here we aim to confirm these findings with PRO data at 5y. Methods: The CHHiP trial randomised patients (pts) in a 1:1:1 ratio to cRT: 74Gy/37 fractions (f) or hRT: 60Gy/20f or 57Gy/19f. Overall bowel bother (BB) and urinary bother (UB) were assessed as single items of the UCLA-PCI and EPIC-50 instruments. PRO were completed before hormone therapy and RT (pRT). Late symptoms were assessed 6 monthly from 6-24 months and yearly to 5y. Differences in the distribution of scores were assessed using a chi2 trend test. Odds of an increase in bother were modelled using ordered logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate time to “small” or worse bother, with RT schedules compared using the log-rank test. Results: Between Oct, 2002 and Nov, 2009 2100 pts were recruited into the PRO sub-study (696 74Gy, 698 60Gy and 706 57Gy). Return rates at 5y were 355 (51%), 388 (56%) and 402 (57%) for the 74, 60 and 57Gy schedules respectively. Cross-sectional analyses at 5y showed no difference between groups (Table 1). The odds of an increase in BB from pRT to 5y for hRT compared to cRT were (Odds Ratio (OR) (99% CI), p-value): 60Gy: 0.78 (0.52-1.18), 0.12; 57Gy: 0.75 (0.50-1.12), 0.06, and for UB were: 60Gy: 1.00 (0.67-1.50), 1.00; 57Gy: 1.08 (0.72-1.61), 0.62. Time to first late “small” or worse BB was also similar across groups (Hazard ratio (HR) (99% CI), p-value): 60Gy: 1.08 (0.85-1.37), 0.42; 57Gy: 0.92 (0.71-1.18), 0.36 or UB: 60Gy: 0.93 (0.73-1.20), 0.48; 57Gy: 0.91 (0.71, 1.17), 0.34. Conclusions: After 5 years follow-up, cRT and hRT showed a similar low level of patient reported BB and UB. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN97182923. [Table: see text]

Real-world outcomes in first-line treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): The prostate cancer registry

212

Background: The Prostate Cancer Registry is the first prospective, international observational study in mCRPC documenting characteristics and management in routine clinical practice, independent of treatment used. The study began in June 2013 enrolling > 3000 mCRPC patients (pts) followed for ≤ 3 years. Methods: Source-verified data were collected from men with documented mCRPC initiating a new mCRPC treatment or in surveillance. A history of disease progression despite surgical or chemical ADT was confirmed in all pts. This interim analysis reports baseline characteristics, treatments and outcomes in pts with no prior mCRPC treatment. To evaluate comparative effectiveness between treatments, propensity scoring (PS) methods were used to reduce effects of confounding. Results: Of 1906 evaluable pts with ≥ 12-month follow-up, the most commonly initiated first-line mCPRC treatments (n ≥ 50) were abiraterone acetate + prednisone (AA, n = 472), enzalutamide (ENZ, n = 98) or docetaxel (DOC, n = 382). Baseline characteristics, time to progression (TTP) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response ( ≥ 50% decrease within 6 months) are shown in the table below. Conclusions: In this real-world study, pts receiving DOC as their first mCRPC treatment had more severe disease at entry and a trend for shorter TTP vs androgen inhibitors. TTP results are consistent with those in randomised clinical trials for AA and ENZ. Clinical trial information: NCT02236637. [Table: see text]

Sequencing in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Updated results of the FLAC International Database

267

Background: Optimal sequencing of new androgen-receptor targeted agents (ART) abiraterone and enzalutamide with docetaxel (DOC) and cabazitaxel (CABA) is unknown. In this large retrospective cohort of mCRPC patients (pts) treated with CABA after docetaxel (DOC), we evaluated the impact of 3 different sequences: DOC → CABA (group 1, n = 267) Or DOC → ART → CABA (group 2, n = 183) Or DOC → CABA → ART (group 3, n = 124). Methods: Records of 574 consecutive mCRPC patients were retrospectively collected in 44 centres in 6 European countries (France, Spain, UK, Greece, Poland, Turkey) from August 2012 to July 2016. Disease history and clinical characteristics at initiation of DOC therapy and outcomes were collected. Factors influencing OS were evaluated using multivariate stepwise logistic regression. Results: At DOC initiation, median age was 67 years, 83% of pts were ECOG 0-1, 45.1% had pain and 10.8% had visceral metastases. Median number of DOC cycles was 7 (6 in group 2, 7 in groups 1 and 3). Median number of CABA cycles was 6 (6 in groups 1 and 2, 7 in group 3). Median duration of ART treatment was 5.9 and 4.4 mths in groups 2 and 3, retrospectively. Median OS from first DOC cycle were 30.1, 37.1 and 40.1 mths in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Factors influencing OS are summarized in the table below. Conclusions: Results of this retrospective cohort suggest that patients receiving DOC → CAB → ART show the greatest OS. High baseline PSA, short response to first-ADT and clinical progression of pts are major prognostic factors of OS at DOC initiation. The window of opportunity for chemotherapy should not be missed. [Table: see text]

Development and Validation of Consensus Contouring Guidelines for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy

PURPOSE

To develop multi-institutional consensus clinical target volumes (CTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) for male and female bladder cancer patients undergoing adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in clinical trials.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We convened a multidisciplinary group of bladder cancer specialists from 15 centers and 5 countries. Six radiation oncologists and 7 urologists participated in the development of the initial contours. The group proposed initial language for the CTVs and OARs, and each radiation oncologist contoured them on computed tomography scans of a male and female cystectomy patient with input from ≥1 urologist. On the basis of the initial contouring, the group updated its CTV and OAR descriptions. The cystectomy bed, the area of greatest controversy, was contoured by another 6 radiation oncologists, and the cystectomy bed contouring language was again updated. To determine whether the revised language produced consistent contours, CTVs and OARs were redrawn by 6 additional radiation oncologists. We evaluated their contours for level of agreement using the Landis-Koch interpretation of the κ statistic.

RESULTS

The group proposed that patients at elevated risk for local-regional failure with negative margins should be treated to the pelvic nodes alone (internal/external iliac, distal common iliac, obturator, and presacral), whereas patients with positive margins should be treated to the pelvic nodes and cystectomy bed. Proposed OARs included the rectum, bowel space, bone marrow, and urinary diversion. Consensus language describing the CTVs and OARs was developed and externally validated. The revised instructions were found to produce consistent contours.

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus descriptions of CTVs and OARs were successfully developed and can be used in clinical trials of adjuvant radiation therapy for bladder cancer.

Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone.

METHODS

Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544).

FINDINGS

2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc.

INTERPRETATION

Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

Comparison of hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy schedules for prostate cancer: Results from the phase III randomized CHHiP trial (CRUK/06/016)

2

Background: We aimed to explore the dose response relationship for two 3 Gray (Gy) hypofractionated radiotherapy (hRT) schedules for localised prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: hRT schedules of 60Gy/20 fractions (f) and 57Gy/19f were compared with conventional RT (cRT) 74Gy/37f; iso-effective for alpha-beta ratios of 2.5Gy and 1.5Gy respectively. The trial was powered to demonstrate non-inferiority between each hRT schedule and cRT, with 3,213 patients (pt) needed to rule out 5% inferiority (80% power, 1-sided alpha 5%) assuming 70% event-free rate in cRT, corresponding to a critical hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21. The trial was not formally powered to directly compare the two hRT schedules. Pt with N0 T1b-T3a localised PCa were randomized (1:1:1 ratio). The primary endpoint was PCa progression (freedom from biochemical failure by Phoenix consensus guidelines or PCa recurrence). Acute toxicity was assessed up to 18 weeks post treatment and late side effects to 5 years (yr) by RTOG, LENT-SOM and patient reported outcomes (PROs). Results: 3,216 pts were randomized between 2002 and 2011; 1,065 (74Gy), 1,074 (60Gy), 1,077 (57Gy). Baseline characteristics were well balanced across groups: median age 69 yr; NCCN risk group 15% low, 73% intermediate, 12% high. With median follow up 5.2yr, 5yr progression-free rate (95% CI) was 74Gy: 88.3% (86.0%, 90.2%); 60Gy: 90.6% (88.5%, 92.3%), 57Gy: 85.9 (83.4, 88.0); HR60/74: 0.83, 90% CI (0.68, 1.03), HR57/74: 1.20, 90% CI (0.99, 1.45). Significantly more events were observed with 57Gy compared to 60Gy; HR57/60: 1.44, 90% CI (1.18, 1.75), log-rank p=0.003. No significant difference in acute RTOG bladder or bowel toxicity was observed between hRT schedules. Late toxicity profile was favorable; with grade 2+ RTOG bladder (60Gy: 16/960 (1.7%); 57Gy: 11/962 (1.1%), p=0.34) and bowel (60Gy: 28/960 (2.9%); 57Gy: 17/962 (1.8%), p=0.10) toxicity at 2yr. Analysis of LENT-SOM and PROs supported these results. Conclusions: With 5 yr follow-up treatment with a 3Gy schedule of 60Gy/20f shows improved treatment efficacy compared to 57Gy/19f and is non-inferior to 74Gy/37f with a similar low level of acute and late normal tissue damage. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN97182923.

Development and validation of contouring guidelines for post-cystectomy adjuvant radiation of bladder cancer

409

Background: Several organizations are developing clinical trials to evaluate adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for bladder cancer patients at elevated risk of locoregional failure (LF). However, the clinical target volumes (CTVs) & organs at risk (OARs) for this treatment have not been defined in detail. Our purpose was to define multi-institutional consensus CTVs & OARs for male & female bladder cancer patients undergoing adjuvant RT in clinical trials. Methods: We convened a multi-disciplinary group of bladder cancer specialists from 9 centers in 3 countries. 5 radiation oncologists (ROs) & 7 urologists participated in the development of the proposed contours. The group proposed initial language for the CTVs & OARs and contoured them on CT scans of a male & female cystectomy patient with input from ≥ 1 urologist at each center. Using the binomial maximum-likelihood estimates method, we generated 95% level initial contours. We evaluated the contours for level of agreement using the Landis & Koch interpretation of the K statistic. Based on the initial contouring, the group updated its descriptions of the CTVs & OARs. To determine if the revised language produced consistent contours, the cystectomy bed (CB) contour was redrawn on the CT sets by an additional 5 ROs. Results: The group proposed that patients at elevated risk for LF with R0 resections should be treated to the pelvic nodes alone (internal/external iliac, distal common iliac & presacral) whereas patients with ≥ R1 resections should be treated to the pelvic nodes & CB. The group proposed the rectum, bowel space, bone marrow & urinary diversion as OARs. The level of agreement for the initial CTVs & OARs from the group varied substantially (Table). Consensus language to describe CTV & OAR structures where the initial contours varied was successfully developed. Contours & feedback from the validation group are being analyzed. Conclusions: Initial descriptions of CTVs & OARs have been successfully developed. External validation & feedback are pending. The results will be applicable to clinical trials of adjuvant RT in bladder cancer. [Table: see text]

TOUCAN: A randomised phase II trial of carboplatin and gemcitabine +/- vandetanib in first line treatment of advanced urothelial cell cancer in patients who are not suitable to receive cisplatin

448

Background: Whilst cisplatin combination therapy remains the standard of care for patients with advanced urothelial cancers, many patients are unsuitable for cisplatin and go on to receive carboplatin combination therapy. Although responses are frequent, overall outcomes remain poor, and there is a high unmet need for more effective first line treatment. Vandetanib is a well-tolerated, oral inhibitor of vascular and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, both of which are implicated in the pathogenesis of urothelial cancers. Methods: Patients with metastatic or inoperable urothelial cancer who had no prior chemotherapy and were unsuitable for cisplatin were randomly allocated to receive carboplatin (AUC 4.5, day 1) plus gemcitabine (1000mg/m2, days 1 and 8) plus either vandetanib (100mg od, days 1-21) (GCV) or matching placebo (GCP) in 21-day cycles up to a total of 6 cycles. Treatment allocation was double-blind. There was a planned safety review after the first 40 patients had received at least one cycle. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Sample size (n=82) was calculated using a one-sided alpha of 0.2 and power 80% to detect a HR of 0.65 for PFS. We present the final efficacy results. The trial was coordinated by the Wales Cancer Trials Unit at Cardiff University and funded by Cancer Research UK (CRUK/09/024) and AstraZeneca. Results: Of 82 patients, 40 received GCV. 62 (76%) had a bladder primary, and 56 (68%) had poor renal function. The arms were well balanced except for age > 75 (13 (16%) GCV, 23 (28%) GCP). Median PFS was 8.5 months (m) (95% CI 6.0, 9.7) and 8.8 m (5.8, 9.0) for GCV and GCP respectively (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.93 (0.50, 1.71), P=0.89). Overall survival was 10.8 m (8.0, 13.0) and 13.8 m (11.1, 16.6) for GCV and GCP respectively (adjusted HR 1.38 (0.77, 2.46), P=0.24). Response rates were 50% (n=20) and 55% (n=23) for GCV and GCP. All-grade adverse events were similar but there were significantly more grade 3+ events in the GCV arm. Conclusion: Vandetanib did not improve efficacy of chemotherapy but increased toxicity in advanced urothelial cancer not suitable for cisplatin. Clinical trial information: 68146831.

ProCAID: A phase I clinical trial to combine the AKT inhibitor AZD5363 with docetaxel and prednisolone (DP) chemotherapy for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

228

Background: DP extends survival in mCRPC. However emergent clinical resistance is effectively inevitable. Serine/threonine protein kinase AKT (protein kinase B) pathway activation is highly prevalent in mCRPC contributing to disease progression and DP therapeutic resistance. AZD5363 is a potent oral pan-AKT inhibitor. Pre-clinical data suggest activity in mCRPC and synergy with docetaxel. This phase I trial was to develop a DP/AZD5363 combination in mCRPC. Methods: Eligibility included chemotherapy naive histologically/cytologically proven measurable/evaluable mCRPC, PSA or radiographic disease progression, ECOG performance status 0 or 1, serum testosterone <1.7 nmol/L. Treatment comprised DP up to 10 cycles (75 mg/m2, IV, day 1; prednisolone 5 mg BID, PO, day 1–21) and AZD5363 to disease progression. Planned AZD5363 dose levels were 320 mg (DL1), 400 mg (DL2) and 480 mg (DL3), BID, PO, 4 days on/3 days off, from cycle 1, day 2. We utilised a conventional 3+3 dose escalation to determine a recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for AZD5363 combined with DP according to defined dose limiting toxicity (DLT) using CTCAEv4. Results: 10 patients were recruited (4 DL1, 6 DL2), median age 67.5 (Range: 56-72). A median of 6.5 cycles (Range: 3-10) of DP and 4 cycles (Range: 1-13) of AZD5363 were administered. No DLTs were seen in DL1. 2 patients in DL2 experienced DLTs (G3 rash, G3 diarrhoea). 7 pts (70%) had at least one G3/4 IMP-related AE with neutropenia (n=3) and maculo-papular rash (n=3) the most common. G3/4 AEs considered related to AZD5363 occurred in 3 patients (0 DL1, 3 DL2) including maculo-papular rash, diarrhoea and neutropenia. Transient hyperglycaemia occurred in all patients (Random glucose C1D2 pre dose mean 6.0 mmol/L, 2 hour mean 8.7 mmol/L, 4 hour mean 9.5 mmol/L, 8 hour mean 6.5 mmol/L). Conclusions:The RP2D for AZD5363 is 320 mg bd 4 days on/3 days off in combination with full dose DP for mCRPC. A placebo controlled randomised phase II trial for this approach has commenced recruitment. This work was supported by CRUK [C9317/A16029]. CRUK Reference: CRUK/12/042. This research was conducted with support from the Investigator-Sponsored Study Collaboration between AstraZeneca and the National Cancer Research Network. Clinical trial information: NCT02121639.

Final quality of life and safety data for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with cabazitaxel in the UK Early Access Programme (EAP) (NCT01254279)

OBJECTIVE

To compile the safety profile and quality of life (QoL) data for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with cabazitaxel in the UK Early Access Programme (UK EAP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 112 patients participated at 12 UK cancer centres. All had mCRPC with disease progression during or after docetaxel. Patients received cabazitaxel 25 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks with prednisolone 10 mg daily for up to 10 cycles. Safety assessments were performed before each cycle and QoL was recorded at alternate cycles using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire and visual analogue scale (VAS). The safety profile was compiled after completion of the UK EAP and QoL measures were analysed to record trends. No formal statistical analysis was carried out.

RESULTS

The incidences of neutropenic sepsis (6.3%), grade 3 and 4 diarrhoea (4.5%) and grade 3 and 4 cardiac toxicity (0%) were low. Neutropenic sepsis episodes, though low, occurred only in patients who did not receive prophylactic granulocyte-colony stimulating factor. There were trends towards improved VAS and EQ-5D-3L pain scores during treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The UK EAP experience indicates that cabazitaxel might improve QoL in mCRPC and represents an advance and a useful addition to the armamentarium of treatment for patients whose disease has progressed during or after docetaxel. In view of the potential toxicity, careful patient selection is important.

Clinical outcomes in patients with castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) metastatic to bone randomized in the factorial TRAPEZE trial to docetaxel (D) with strontium-89 (Sr89), zoledronic acid (ZA), neither, or both (ISRCTN 12808747)

LBA5000

Background: Bony metastatic CRPC has a poor prognosis and high morbidity. TRAPEZE is a factorial RCT using three agents, D, ZA, and Sr89. All have palliative benefits and are used in bony metastatic CRPC to control bone symptoms and (for D) to prolong survival. ZA was approved on the basis of reducing skeletal related events (SRE). Sr89 was approved to control pain from metastases and to reduce the need for subsequent bone treatments. ZA is commonly combined with D in practice but evidence that the combination is effective is lacking and costs considerable. Sr89 is generally used as a palliative therapy in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase II analysis confirmed the safety and feasibility of combining these agents. TRAPEZE aimed to determine clinical and cost-effectiveness scheduling. Methods: Patients were randomised to receive 6 cycles of D plus prednisolone: alone; with ZA; with a single dose of Sr89 after cycle 6 or both. Primary outcomes were clinical progression-free survival (CPFS: pain progression, SRE or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were SRE free interval (SREFI); total SREs, and overall survival (OS). The log rank test and Cox regression modelling were used to determine clinical effectiveness. Results: TRAPEZE randomised 757 patients; median age 68.7 yrs; ECOG 0: 40% 1: 52% 2: 8%; prior RT 45%; median PSA 144 (IQR 51, 354). Provisional stratified log rank analysis of CPFS did not reach statistical significance for either agent (Sr89 p=0.11, ZA p=0.45). Cox regression analysis adjusted for all stratification variables showed benefit of Sr89 on CPFS (HR=0.845; 95%CI 0.72, 0.99, p=0.036) and confirmed no effect of ZA (p=0.46). ZA did show a significant effect on SREFI (HR=0.76; 95%CI 0.63, 0.93, p=0.008). There was no effect of either agent on overall survival (Sr89 p=0.74, ZA p=0.91). Conclusions: Sr89 after six cycles of docetaxel improved CPFS but not OS. ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but did significantly improve median SREFI, mostly post progression, suggesting a role as post chemotherapy maintenance therapy. Further health economic and QoL analyses are pending. Clinical trial information: 12808747.

A randomized trial of 72-hour infusional bleomycin in BEP (cisplatin, etoposide, and bleomycin) versus conventional weekly bleomycin in patients with metastatic IGCCCG good prognosis disease

4535

Background: Bleomycin is an integral part of combination chemotherapy in germ cell tumours. Pulmonary symptoms often dictate drug cessation and death occurs in 1-2% of patients. Circumstantial evidence suggests that continuous infusion may be less toxic. Methods: We conducted a randomized phase 3 study to see whether infusional bleomycin was associated with less pulmonary toxicity. Patients were stratified for smoking, renal dysfunction and age and were randomized to receive either conventional BEP with weekly bleomycin (3,0000 units /week iv over 30min) or the same doses but administered as a 90,000 unit infusion on day 1 over 72 hours. The primary endpoint was CT proven lung toxicity, secondary endpoints included PFS and changes in lung function testing. CT scans and lung function testing were conducted after 1 cycle, end of treatment and 1 year post treatment. Sample size of 210 was calculated to detect a difference of 16% Bleomycin damage with 80% power at the 5% level of significance using 2-sided test. Results: The median follow-up was 2.5 years. At day 21 of the treatment, 52% patients in the infusional arm had grade 1 or above toxicity compared to 55% in the conventional. At the end of treatment the results were 84% vs. 60% and at one year it was 65% vs. 59%. Repeated measures mixed effects model shows no significant difference in percentage of grade 1 and above toxicity between the two arms (Difference=1.63, P=0.09, 95% CI: -0.28, 3.54). However, there was a significantly higher level of grade 2 and above toxicity in patients in the infusion arm (difference=0.8; 95% CI 0.11 to 1.49). Toxicity level was the highest at the end of treatment and in older patients (Age>30). Lung function testing between the two arms failed to show any differences. Two-years PFS rate was 93% in both arms (hazard ratio infusion vs conventional was 0.91; 95% CI 0.33 to 2.52). There was an association between toxicity after 1 cycle and subsequent toxicity at end of treatment and at 1 year (p=0.003). Conclusions: Infusional bleomycin has no advantage over standard administration of bleomycin. Clinical trial information: 08648791.

Double-blind randomized trial of aflibercept versus placebo with docetaxel and prednisone for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

5002

Background: Docetaxel/prednisone is standard first-line chemotherapy for men with mCRPC. Aflibercept is a recombinant human fusion protein that binds A and B isoforms of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor and Placental-derived Growth Factors, thereby inhibiting angiogenesis. Methods: We performed an international double-blind randomized trial (known as VENICE) which recruited men with mCRPC, adequate organ function and no prior chemotherapy. Men were treated with docetaxel (75mg/m² intravenously every 3 weeks) and oral prednisone (5mg twice daily) and randomized 1:1 to receive aflibercept (6 mg/kg) or placebo, intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival: 873 deaths were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.8 with 90% power. Results: A total of 1,224 men were randomized, 612 in each arm. Median age was 68 years and baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms. Participants received a median of 8 (aflibercept) and 9 (placebo) cycles of therapy. Median relative dose intensity was >0.93 for aflibercept, placebo and docetaxel. At final analysis, median follow-up was 35 months and 873 pts had died. Median survival was 22.1 months (95.6% CI: 20.3-24.1 months) in the aflibercept arm and 21.2 months (95.6% CI: 19.6-23.8 months) in the placebo arm (stratified HR = 0.94; 95.6% CI: 0.82-1.08, p=0.38). Pre-defined secondary endpoints for aflibercept and placebo arms were similar, including PSA response rate (68.6% and 63.5%), time to first skeletal-related event (median: 15.3 and 15.0 months), and progression-free survival (median: 6.9 and 6.2 months). Quality of Life analysis using FACT-P and a trial-specific module will be reported. Higher incidence of grade 3-4 gastrointestinal disorders, hemorrhagic events, hypertension, fatigue, infections and fatal adverse events (5.6% vs. 3.3%) was observed in the aflibercept arm. Conclusions: Aflibercept in combination with docetaxel/prednisone given as first-line chemotherapy for men with mCRPC did not lead to an improvement in survival and added toxicity. Trial Registration: NCT00519285. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT00519285.

Clinical outcomes in patients with castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) metastatic to bone randomized in the factorial trapeze trial to docetaxel (D) with strontium-89 (Sr89), zoledronic acid (ZA), neither, or both (ISRCTN 12808747)

LBA5000

The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstract.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Sunday, June 2, 2013, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2013, issue of Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Sunday edition of ASCO Daily News.

Cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen: A single U.K. cancer center's experience using Early Access Programme and Cancer Drugs Fund

224

Background: The TROPIC Trial demonstrated improved overall survival in patients with mCRPC who progressed during or after treatment with docetaxel. The trial established cabazitaxel as a tolerable and viable second line treatment option in these patients. We report our experience with cabazitaxel in patients receiving treatment within the Early Access Programme (EAP) and via the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF). Methods: Retrospective review of patients receiving cabazitaxel chemotherapy from 1st January 2011 to 1st January 2012. Chemotherapy administration was corroborated via the electronic prescribing system. Patient records provided documentation regarding disease response and treatment toxicities. For patients within the EAP, data was confirmed and supplemented via the Trials Office. Results: 22 patients were identified, of which 20 received cabazitaxel. 12 were treated within the EAP and 8 via the CDF. Median age was 68.5 years (59-83) within the EAP group and 70 years (52-78) within the CDF group, whilst median number of cycles was 6 (1-10) and 5.5 (1-8) respectively. 83.3% of EAP patients received full dose throughout, compared with 62.5% of the CDF patients. Primary GCSF was used in 91.6% of EAP patients and 75% of CDF patients, with secondary GCSF in 8.3% and 12.5% respectively. 3/20 patients had treatment discontinued due to progressive disease (after a minimum of 3 cycles). 13/20 patients had a positive biochemical and/or clinical response. 15/20 patients (Gleason score ≥ 8, 7 of 15) remain alive with a mean survival of 12.1 months (3.4-19.4). There were no treatment related deaths. Treatment related adverse events are shown in the Table. Conclusions: Our results are comparable with the TROPIC data, suggesting cabazitaxel offers demonstrable response rates and meaningful survival with an acceptable toxicity profile. [Table: see text]

Cabazitaxel for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Final quality-of-life (QOL) results with safety data from the United Kingdom (UK) Early Access Programme (EAP) (NCT01254279)

91

Background: Several drugs can now improve survival in mCRPC after docetaxel, including cabazitaxel, a next generation taxane. TROPIC (NCT00417079) showed an overall survival benefit of 2.4 months for cabazitaxel compared with mitoxantrone for mCRPC. The UK EAP provided patients access to cabazitaxel; detailed QOL and safety data were recorded. Interim analysis suggested improvements in QOL, particularly pain scores and a good safety profile. We report final QOL and updated safety data. Methods: 108 patients recruited at 12 centres received cabazitaxel 25mg/m2intravenously every 3 weeks with oral prednisolone 10mg daily. EQ-5D questionnaires and health state visual analogue scale (VAS) were completed at baseline, at alternate cycles and at 30 days post treatment. Safety assessments followed each cycle. Results: According to EQ-5D and VAS scores, QOL was stable with an overall trend towards improvement in patients who continued treatment. Paired ‘within patient’ analyses also support this trend. Improved pain was noted more frequently than deterioration at all time points and pain scores were at least stable in 96% of patients at cycle 10. A median of 6 cycles were given. 34 patients (31%) received 10 or more cycles. Grade 3/4 adverse events were uncommon, the most frequent being fatigue (9.3%), diarrhoea (2.8%) and neutropenic sepsis (1.9%). 85% received prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor. Conclusions: Almost 1/3 of patients completed 10 or more cycles in the UK EAP. QOL was stable with trends to improved EQ-5D and VAS scores. Improved or stable pain was observed in the majority of patients continuing therapy. The UK EAP provides the first data on QOL benefit with cabazitaxel in mCRPC post docetaxel and demonstrates manageable toxicity. Final safety data will be available for presentation. Clinical trial information: NCT01254279. [Table: see text]

Aflibercept versus placebo in combination with docetaxel/prednisone for first-line treatment of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Results from the multinational phase III trial (VENICE)

13

Background: Docetaxel/prednisone is standard first-line chemotherapy for mCRPC. Aflibercept (known as ziv-aflibercept in the US) is a recombinant human fusion protein that binds VEGF-A, VEGF-B and Placental Growth Factor (PlGF), thereby inhibiting angiogenesis. Methods: VENICE was a double-blind, randomized phase III study with overall survival (OS) as primary endpoint. Men with mCRPC, ECOG PS 0-2, adequate organ function and no prior cytotoxic therapy were treated with docetaxel (75 mg/m² iv q3w) and oral prednisone (5mg bid) and randomized double blind 1:1 to receive aflibercept (A) 6 mg/kg or placebo (Pbo), IV every 3 weeks. Pts were stratified by ECOG PS (0-1 vs 2). For final OS analysis, 873 deaths were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.8 with 90% power (overall 2-sided α = 0.05). Results: From Aug 2007 to Feb 2010, 1224 patients (median age 68 yr, PS 0-1 96%) were randomized. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms. Median number of cycles was 8 (A) and 9 (Pbo). Median relative dose intensity was >0.93 for A, Pbo and docetaxel. At final cut-off, median follow-up was 35.4 mos and 873 pts had died. Results for primary and key secondary endpoints with confidence intervals are in the table. Higher incidence of all grade hypertension, stomatitis, appetite disorders, diarrhea, dehydration, epistaxis, dysphonia, cough, headache and infections was observed in the aflibercept arm. Conclusions: Aflibercept in combination with docetaxel/prednisone given as first line chemotherapy for mCRPC did not lead to a statistically significant improvement in OS and added toxicity. (NCT00519285 sponsored by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) Clinical trial information: NCT00519285. [Table: see text]