Deep and Durable Prostate-specific Antigen Response to Darolutamide with Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel, and Association with Clinical Outcomes for Patients with High- or Low-volume Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Analyses of the Randomized Phase 3 ARASENS Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Addition of darolutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel significantly improved overall survival (OS) in ARASENS (NCT02799602). Here we report on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses and their association with outcomes.

METHODS

ARASENS is an international, double-blind, phase 3 study in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) randomized to darolutamide 600 mg orally twice daily (n = 651) or placebo (n = 654), both with ADT + docetaxel. The proportion of patients with undetectable PSA (<0.2 ng/ml) and time to PSA progression (≥25% relative and ≥2 ng/ml absolute increase from nadir) were compared between groups in prespecified exploratory analyses. PSA outcomes by disease volume and the association of undetectable PSA with OS and times to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and PSA progression were assessed in post hoc analyses.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

The proportion of patients with undetectable PSA at any time was more than doubled with darolutamide versus placebo, at 67% versus 29% in the overall population, 62% versus 26% in the high-volume subgroup, and 84% versus 38% in the low-volume subgroup. Darolutamide delayed time to PSA progression versus placebo, with hazard ratios of 0.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.31) in the overall population, 0.30 (95% CI 0.24-0.37) in the high-volume subgroup, and 0.093 (95% CI 0.047-0.18) in the low-volume subgroup. Undetectable PSA at 24 wk was associated with longer OS, with a hazard ratio of 0.49 (95% CI 0.37-0.65) in the darolutamide group, as well as longer times to CRPC and PSA progression, with similar findings in the disease volume subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Darolutamide + ADT + docetaxel led to deep and durable PSA responses in patients with high- or low-volume mHSPC. Achievement of undetectable PSA (<0.2 ng/ml) was correlated with better clinical outcomes.

PATIENT SUMMARY

For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer being treated with androgen deprivation therapy and docetaxel, PSA (prostate-specific antigen) became undetectable (below 0.2 ng/ml) in 67% of those also receiving darolutamide versus 29% of patients also receiving placebo. On average, patients achieving undetectable PSA lived longer than patients with detectable PSA.

Real-World Evidence of Triplet Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: An Austrian Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Two randomized trials demonstrated a survival benefit of triplet therapy (androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) plus androgen receptor pathway inhibitor [ARPI] plus docetaxel) over doublet therapy (ADT plus docetaxel), thus changing treatment strategies in metastatic hormonesensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted the first real-world analysis comprising 97 mHSPC patients from 16 Austrian medical centers, among them 79.4% of patients received abiraterone and 17.5% darolutamide treatment. Baseline characteristics and clinical parameters during triplet therapy were documented. Mann-Whitney U test for continuous or X²-test for categorical variables was used. Variables on progression were tested using logistic regression analysis and tabulated as hazard ratios (HR), 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Of 83.5% patients with synchronous and 16.5% with metachronous disease were included. 83.5% had high-volume disease diagnosed by conventional imaging (48.9%) or PSMA PET-CT (51.1%). While docetaxel and ARPI were administered consistent with pivotal trials, prednisolone, prophylactic gCSF and osteoprotective agents were not applied guideline conform in 32.5%, 37%, and 24.3% of patients, respectively. Importantly, a nonsimultaneous onset of chemotherapy and ARPI, performed in 44.3% of patients, was associated with significantly worse treatment response (P = .015, HR 0.245). Starting ARPI before chemotherapy was associated with significantly higher probability for progression (P = .023, HR 15.781) than vice versa. Strikingly, 15.6% (abiraterone) and 25.5% (darolutamide) low-volume patients as well as 14.4% (abiraterone) and 17.6% (darolutamide) metachronous patients received triplet therapy. Adverse events (AE) occurred in 61.9% with grade 3 to 5 in 15% of patient without age-related differences. All patients achieved a PSA decline of 99% and imaging response was confirmed in 88% of abiraterone and 75% of darolutamide patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Triplet therapy arrived in clinical practice primarily for synchronous high-volume mHSPC. Regardless of selected therapy regimen, treatment is highly effective and tolerable. Preferably therapy should be administered simultaneously, however if not possible, chemotherapy should be started first.

A Randomized, Open-label, Cross-over Phase 2 Trial of Darolutamide and Enzalutamide in Men with Asymptomatic or Mildly Symptomatic Metastatic Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer: Patient Preference and Cognitive Function in ODENZA

BACKGROUND

Darolutamide and enzalutamide are second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors with activity in men with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and different toxicity profiles.

OBJECTIVE

ODENZA is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, cross-over, phase 2 trial designed to assess preference between darolutamide and enzalutamide in men with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic metastatic CRPC (mCRPC).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either darolutamide 1200 mg/d for 12 wk followed by enzalutamide 160 mg/d for 12 wk or enzalutamide followed by darolutamide. In both arms, the second treatment was given in absence of cancer progression.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was patient preference between the two drugs, as assessed by a preference questionnaire (p value calculated with the Prescott test). After week 24, patients entered an extension period during which they received their preferred treatment until progression or toxicity. The main secondary objectives included reasons for patient preference, response at week 12, tolerance of each drug, and measurement compared with baseline of cognitive outcomes assessed using tablet questionnaires.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Overall, 249 patients, with a median age of 72 yr, were randomized. Among the 200 patients who fulfilled the preplanned criteria for the evaluation of the primary endpoint of preference, 97 (49% [41; 56]), 80 (40% [33; 47]), and 23 (12% [7; 16]) chose darolutamide, chose enzalutamide, and had no preference, respectively (p = 0.92). Reduced fatigue, easier administration, and better quality of life were the main criteria that influenced patient choice. A moderate benefit in episodic memory from darolutamide was observed for the acquisition of new information (least square [LS] means difference = 2.2, effect size = 0.5) and for the recall of that information after a brief delay (LS means difference = 0.7, effect size = 0.3). Using the Brief Fatigue Inventory questionnaire, patients reported greater fatigue with enzalutamide (3.3 [3.0; 3.6]) than with darolutamide (2.7 [2.4; 3.0]). There was no difference in terms of depression, seizures, and falls.

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not show a difference in preference between the two treatments. In men with mCRPC, darolutamide was associated with a clinically meaningful benefit in episodic memory and less fatigue compared with enzalutamide.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Preference between darolutamide and enzalutamide was well balanced in men with castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Darolutamide was associated with a significant benefit in verbal learning and less fatigue compared with enzalutamide.

[First clinical and oncological experiences with triplet therapy for high-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Treatment with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus extended hormone therapy (ARTA) is the standard of care for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Recent data of triplet combination therapies of ADT + ARTA (abiraterone/darolutamide) + docetaxel chemotherapy showed a survival advantage for specific mHSPC patient subgroups.

PURPOSE

What treatment response is observed in real-world mHSPC setting using triplet combination therapy and what are the expected side effects?

RESULTS

All patients receiving triplet combination therapy of ADT + ARTA (abiraterone/darolutamide) + docetaxel were included in the current study. A total of 14 patients with a median age of 62 years and 10/14 abiraterone or 4/14 darolutamide therapy could be included. The median PSA before initiation of therapy was 77 ng/ml (IQR 44-150). Overall, 86% of patients had a PSA response > 90% and the median PSA nadir was 0.3 ng/ml. Severe adverse events (grade III) during triplet therapy occurred in two patients (35,7%) with respectively febrile neutropenia 7.1% (1/14) and diarrhea with infection 7.1%. Other low grade adverse events (grade I/II) consisted of polyneuropathy (1/14), mucositis (1/14), xerostomia (1/14), weight loss (1/14) and fatigue (3/14) were detected. Chemotherapy was interrupted in one patient due to adverse events. After a median follow-up of ten months (IQR: 7-17), two patients (14.2%) showed progression to castration resistance.

CONCLUSION

Triplet therapy shows a very good PSA response in clinical practice. Adverse events during therapy are mainly triggered by classical chemotherapy-known side effects.

Utility of green chemistry for sustainable fluorescence derivatization approach for spectrofluorimetric quantification of Darolutamide as antineoplastic drug in pharmaceutical formulation and spiked human plasma

Darolutamide is an oral nonsteroidal androgen receptor antagonist used to delay the process of prostate cancer to metastatic disease and to increase the quality of life for people with advanced prostate cancer. Here, a second spectrofluorimetric method was advanced for quantifying Darolutamide in pharmaceutical formulation and spiked human plasma. This method depends on the fluorescence derivatization of Darolutamide with 4-chloro-7-nitrobenzo-2-oxa-1,3-diazole (NBD-Cl) at 75°C in a (pH 9) of borate buffer to produce a fluorescent derivative that can be detected at 520 nm after excitation at 460 nm. The method has been validated using ICH criteria, and it demonstrated linearity in the range 5-200 ng ml-1 . The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantitation (LOQ) were 1.15 and 3.84 nm, respectively. The proposed method was applied precisely and accurately for quantifying Darolutamide within the pharmaceutical formulation and spiking human plasma without any interferences. Moreover, the method's sustainability was evaluated and compared with the published method using two greenness assessment tools termed analytical eco-scale and Analytical GREEnness (AGREE). These findings suggest that the method is more sustainable than the published method.

A Phase 2 Randomized Open-label Study of Oral Darolutamide Monotherapy Versus Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Men with Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer (EORTC-GUCG 1532)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Darolutamide is an androgen receptor inhibitor that increases overall survival in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa). This phase 2 study assessed the efficacy and safety of darolutamide as monotherapy without ADT in patients with eugonadal testosterone levels.

METHODS

This was a 24-wk, open-label, randomized study of patients with hormone-sensitive, histologically confirmed PCa requiring gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH); an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0/1; and life expectancy >1 yr. All patients received darolutamide 600 mg bid or a commercially available GnRH analog. The primary endpoint is a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, defined as a ≥80% decline at week 24 relative to baseline in the darolutamide study arm. The GnRH arm is used as an internal control. The secondary endpoints included changes in T levels, safety/tolerability, and quality of life.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Among 61 men enrolled, the median (range) age was 72 yr (53-86 yr); 42.6% of them had metastases. In the darolutamide arm, the evaluable population with available PSA values at baseline and week 24 consisted of 23 patients. Twenty-three (100%) evaluable darolutamide patients achieved a PSA decline of >80% at week 24 (primary endpoint), with a median (range) decrease of -99.1% (-91.9%, -100%). Serum T levels increased by a median (range) of 44.3 (5.7-144.0) at week 24, compared with baseline. In the darolutamide arm, 48.4% of men reported drug-related adverse events (AEs; mostly grade 1 or 2). The most frequent treatment-emergent AEs included gynecomastia (35.5%), fatigue (12.9%), hot flush (12.9%), and hypertension (12.9%). Health-related quality of life measures are descriptive, and GnRH arm results will be presented as an internal reference.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Darolutamide monotherapy was associated with a significant PSA response in nearly all men with hormone-naïve PCa. Testosterone-level changes and most common AEs (gynecomastia, fatigue, hypertension, and hot flush) were consistent with potent androgen receptor inhibition.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we report the first use of darolutamide, a novel antiandrogen, as monotherapy without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The study shows that darolutamide induce a profound suppression of prostate-specific antigen in all patients, with a safety profile different from that of ADT.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of darolutamide in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with comorbidities and concomitant medications from the randomised phase 3 ARAMIS trial

PURPOSE

In patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in the Androgen Receptor Antagonizing Agent for Metastasis-free Survival (ARAMIS) trial, darolutamide significantly improved median metastasis-free survival by nearly 2 years and reduced the risk of death by 31% versus placebo, with a favourable safety/tolerability profile. This post hoc analysis of ARAMIS evaluated efficacy and safety in patients by number of comorbidities and concomitant medications.

METHODS

Patients with nmCRPC were randomised 2:1 to darolutamide (n = 955) or placebo (n = 554) while continuing androgen-deprivation therapy. Overall survival (OS) and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated in subgroups by median numbers of ongoing comorbidities and concomitant medications. HRs were determined from univariate analysis using Cox regression.

FINDINGS

Median numbers of comorbidities and concomitant medications were 6 and 10, respectively, with 41.6% of patients having >6 comorbidities and 48.8% taking >10 concomitant medications. For patients with ≤ 6 and >6 comorbidities, darolutamide increased OS versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65 and 0.73, respectively), and this benefit was consistent for cardiovascular, metabolic, and other comorbidities (HR range: 0.39-0.88). For patients taking ≤ 10 and >10 concomitant medications, increased OS was also observed with darolutamide versus placebo (HR 0.76 and 0.66, respectively), and the benefit was consistent across medication classes (HR range: 0.45-0.80). Incidences of TEAEs and TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation with darolutamide were similar to placebo across subgroups by numbers of comorbidities and concomitant medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The OS benefit and safety of darolutamide remained consistent with that observed in the overall ARAMIS population, even in patients with high numbers of comorbidities or concomitant medications.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV REGISTRATION

NCT02200614.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Darolutamide increased overall survival versus placebo, and incidences of most adverse events were similar between treatments in patients with ≤ 6 or >6 comorbidities and those taking ≤ 10 or >10 concomitant medications.

Role of androgen signaling in androgen receptor-positive extramammary Paget's disease: Establishment of organoids and their biological analysis as a novel therapeutic target

BACKGROUND

Extramammary Paget's disease (EMPD) is a rare intraepithelial adenocarcinoma that mainly affects the anogenital and axillary regions. Although its etiology has not been fully elucidated, there is evidence that androgen receptors (AR) are expressed in most cases of EMPD. However, the role of androgen signaling in the pathogenesis of EMPD remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of androgen signaling in tumor growth of AR-positive EMPD.

METHODS

Patient-derived organoids were established and cultured from two AR-positive EMPD patients: one man and one woman. Cultured organoids were treated with androgen agonists and/or antagonists, then subjected to analysis of changes in organoid proliferation, as well as changes in androgen signaling pathway-specific genes.

RESULTS

Organoid cultures were established from each EMPD sample. These organoids were immunohistologically and genetically identical to the original tumor. For each organoid sample, viable cell number increased in response to androgen exposure. The mRNA level of Fkbp5, a known AR target gene, increased in a concentration-dependent manner in organoids exposed to the synthetic androgen R1881. Conversely, the AR inhibitor darolutamide suppressed the viable cell number in a concentration-dependent manner. The mRNA expression levels of MKI67 and Fkbp5 were also suppressed by darolutamide.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that androgen signaling is a key pathway involved in the growth of AR-positive EMPD. Therefore, androgen signaling inhibition may be a novel treatment option for EMPD patients who require systemic therapy.

Triplet or Doublet Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Updated Network Meta-analysis Stratified by Disease Volume

Two randomized controlled trials recently demonstrated an overall survival benefit with triplet therapy (androgen receptor axis-targeted agent [ARAT] + docetaxel + androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) over doublet therapy (docetaxel + ADT) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), broadening the treatment options. In our previous systematic review and network meta-analysis on the role of triplet versus doublet therapy, we focused on ARAT + ADT, as this is the actual standard of care in many countries for mHSPC. However, survival data by disease volume were only available for one triplet therapy regimen (PEACE-1). Survival data stratified by disease volume for a second triplet regimen (ARASENS) are now available, hence we updated our meta-analysis for low- and high-volume mHSPC. Consistent with previous findings, ADT alone no longer represents a valid treatment option for mHSPC. Similar considerations apply to doublet therapy with docetaxel + ADT. For low-volume mHSPC, in comparison to ADT, the benefit of combination therapies other than ARAT + ADT was not substantial. For high-volume mHSPC, darolutamide + docetaxel + ADT ranked first (P score 0.92), followed by abiraterone + docetaxel + ADT (P score 0.85) and then ARAT + ADT combination therapies. In high-volume mHSPC, only darolutamide + docetaxel + ADT demonstrated superior overall survival (hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.97) versus (pooled) ARAT + ADT, confirming the importance of triplet therapy in (high-volume) mHSPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We performed an updated comparison of double and triple therapy options for metastatic prostate cancer that still responds to hormone treatment. For patients with low-volume cancer, there was no significant survival benefit from addition of a third drug. For patients with high-volume cancer, the best survival was obtained with darolutamide + docetaxel + androgen deprivation therapy.

NR5A2/HSD3B1 pathway promotes cellular resistance to second-generation antiandrogen darolutamide

This study investigated cellular mechanisms in steroidogenesis responsible for treatment resistance to the novel antiandrogen agent darolutamide in prostate cancer. HSD3B1 was overexpressed in darolutamide-resistant cells and induced by darolutamide treatment and AR knockdown. Inversely, HSD3B1 knockdown increased cellular sensitivity to darolutamide. Similarly, its upstream regulator NR5A2 was up-regulated in darolutamide-resistant cells and induced by darolutamide treatment and AR knockdown. Inversely, NR5A2 knockdown and NR5A2 inhibitor ML180 decreased expression of various steroidogenic enzymes including HSD3B1, leading to increased cellular sensitivity to darolutamide. The NR5A2/HSD3B1 pathway promoted cellular resistance to darolutamide and targeting NR5A2/HSD3B1 pathway is a promising therapeutic strategy to overcome darolutamide resistance.

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.

Based on ARASENS trial: efficacy and safety of darolutamide as an emerging option of endocrinotherapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer-an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The newly published ARASENS trial has demonstrated the clinical efficacy of darolutamide for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the use of darolutamide as the latest first-line androgen receptor pathway inhibitor for mHSPC has not been compared with other androgen receptor targeted agents (ARTAs). Given the lack of head-to-head randomized trials, we performed this updated meta-analysis to conduct indirect comparison for the efficacy and safety of darolutamide with other new-generation ARTAs.

METHODS

By searching the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase, 9 large randomized controlled trials evaluating ARTAs for mHSPC patients were eventually screened according to PRISMA. We extracted data from overall survival, castration-resistant progression, and adverse events for network meta-analysis using the Bayesian and standard frequentist models.

RESULTS

Darolutamide combination emerged with superiority (HR = 0.68, 95%CrI = 0.57-0.81) among four androgen receptor inhibitors for patients with high Gleason score (HR = 0.71, 95%CrI = 0.59-0.86). Darolutamide was best tolerated in several androgen suppression-related adverse events (AEs).

CONCLUSION

Darolutamide appears to be an optional androgen receptor inhibitor for mHSPC patients, especially for patients with Gleason score ≥ 8. Its well-tolerated characteristic may provide a preferred drug option for patients with poor cardiovascular function and bone health.

Validation of an LC-MS/MS method for simultaneous quantification of abiraterone, enzalutamide and darolutamide in human plasma

Currently, several oral androgen receptor signalling inhibitors are available for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Quantification of plasma concentrations of these drugs is highly relevant for various purposes, such as Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) in oncology. Here, we report a liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) method for the simultaneous quantification of abiraterone, enzalutamide, and darolutamide. The validation was performed according to the requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicine Agency. We also demonstrate the clinical applicability of the quantification of enzalutamide and darolutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Darolutamide for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Efficacy, safety, and clinical perspectives of use

Darolutamide, a second-generation androgen receptor inhibitor (SGARI), has been shown to increase metastasis-free survival and overall survival among men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Its unique chemical structure potentially provides efficacy and safety advantages over the SGARIs apalutamide and enzalutamide, which are also indicated for nmCRPC. Despite a lack of direct comparisons, the SGARIs appear to have similar efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) results. Indirect evidence suggests that darolutamide is preferred for its good adverse event profile, an attribute valued by physicians, patients, and their caregivers for maintaining QoL. Darolutamide and others in its class are costly; access may be a challenge for many patients and may lead to modifications to guideline-recommended regimens.

Efficacy and Safety of Darolutamide in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Stratified by Prostate-specific Antigen Doubling Time: Planned Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 ARAMIS Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have a high risk of progression to metastatic disease, particularly if their prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) is ≤6 mo. However, patients remain at a high risk with a PSADT of >6 mo.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of darolutamide versus placebo in patients stratified by PSADT >6 or ≤6 mo.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A planned subgroup analysis of a global multicenter, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 trial in men with nmCRPC and PSADT ≤10 mo was conducted.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized 2:1 to oral darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, while continuing androgen-deprivation therapy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival (MFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and times to pain progression, first cytotoxic chemotherapy, and symptomatic skeletal events. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using validated prostate-relevant tools. Safety was recorded throughout the study.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 1509 patients enrolled, 469 had PSADT >6 mo (darolutamide n = 286; placebo n = 183) and 1040 had PSADT ≤6 mo (darolutamide n = 669; placebo n = 371). Baseline characteristics were balanced between subgroups. Darolutamide significantly prolonged MFS versus placebo in both subgroups (unstratified hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: PSADT >6 mo, 0.38 [0.26-0.55]; PSADT ≤6 mo, 0.41 [0.33-0.52]). OS and other efficacy and QoL endpoints favored darolutamide with significant improvement over placebo in both subgroups. The incidence of adverse events, including events commonly associated with androgen receptor inhibitors (fractures, falls, hypertension, and mental impairment), and discontinuations due to adverse events were low and similar to placebo. Limitations include small subgroup populations.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with nmCRPC and PSADT >6 mo (maximum 10 mo), darolutamide provided a favorable benefit/risk ratio, characterized by significant improvements in MFS, OS, and other clinically relevant endpoints; maintenance of QoL; and favorable tolerability.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In patients with prostate cancer that has stopped responding to standard hormonal therapy (indicated by an increase in prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels), there is a risk that the cancer will spread to other parts of the body. This risk is highest when the time it takes for the PSA level to double (ie, "PSA doubling time" [PSADT]) is less than 6 mo. However, there is still a risk that the cancer will spread even if the PSADT is longer than 6 mo. In a group of patients whose PSADT was more than 6 mo but no more than 10 mo, treatment with darolutamide slowed the cancer spread and allowed them to live longer than patients who received placebo (inactive drug). Darolutamide treatment did not cause many side effects and helped maintain patients' quality of life without disruptions.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Darolutamide Combined with Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Patients with High-Risk Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in China

INTRODUCTION

The increasing incidence of prostate cancer (PC) in China leads to a significant disease burden. Although three novel androgen inhibitors (darolutamide, apalutamide, and enzalutamide) have been approved for patients with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), the economic evaluation of these novel treatments in China remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of darolutamide combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), comparing with apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT, in patients with high-risk nmCRPC from a healthcare system perspective in China.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was developed to capture time spent by patients in three health states: nmCRPC, metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), and death. Clinical outcomes from the ARAMIS, PROSPER, and SPARTAN studies were obtained. In the absence of head-to-head studies, indirect treatment comparisons were conducted to capture the comparative effectiveness between darolutamide + ADT, apalutamide + ADT, and enzalutamide + ADT. The prices of apalutamide and enzalutamide were assumed to be the same as the initial launch price of darolutamide, since post-negotiation prices after national reimbursement drug list (NRDL) inclusion remain confidential. Other health resources costs, baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and utility were collected through literature or clinical expert interviews. Selected sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

For a 20-year time horizon, darolutamide + ADT was associated with lower cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT (202,897 Chinese yuan (CNY)/QALY vs. 228,998 CNY/QALY and 221,409 CNY/QALY, respectively) (exchange rate, 1 USD = 6.7871 CNY). Darolutamide + ADT had better health outcomes and lower total costs compared to both apalutamide + ADT (+ 0.22 QALYs and - 72,818 CNY) and enzalutamide + ADT (+ 0.09 QALYs and - 67,451 CNY). Across the modelled sensitivity analyses (including hazard ratios and drug costs), darolutamide + ADT remained dominant or cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

This economic evaluation suggested that, in comparison with apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT, darolutamide + ADT was a dominant or cost-effective treatment option for patients with high-risk nmCRPC in China.

nmCRPC, a look in the continuous care of prostate cancer patients: state of art and future perspectives

Non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is a clinical setting defined as confirmed rising levels of PSA in patients treated with ADT but without detectable metastases on conventional imaging with computerized tomography (CT) and technetium-99 m scintigraphy. Men with nmCRPC and a PSA doubling time (PSADT) ≤ 10 months are considered at high risk of rapidly developing metastases with a consequent possible impact on survival. Three recent phase III trials have demonstrated, in this setting, the efficacy of adding a next-generation androgen receptor targeted agent (ARTA) to ADT in respect to ADT only, in delaying the development of metastases (metastasis-free survival, MFS) and prolong overall survival. The magnitude of clinical benefit of these agents was even more meaningful if considering the low incidence of drug related adverse events. Our review described the latest advances in the management of nmCRPC, deriving from the pivotal clinical trials, SPARTAN, PROSPER and ARAMIS, in order to support clinicians to optimally manage these patients. Of note, the emergence of novel, more accurate, next-generation imaging techniques (including Ga PSMA-PET/CT), as well as eventual future tumor biomarkers, is modifying the entity and definition of the nmCRPC setting, with a consequent impact on patient's diagnosis and management.

[Androgen deprivation therapy plus chemotherapy ± androgen receptor-targeting agents for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Although androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone has been the standard of care (SOC) in the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) for decades, combination therapies of novel hormone therapy (androgen receptor-targeting agents [ARTA]) or docetaxel chemotherapy have more recently replaced single ADT treatment. In addition, data for triplet therapies with ADT plus ARTA (abiraterone/darolutamide) and docetaxel chemotherapy are now available.

OBJECTIVES

The present review addresses the question which therapy is suitable for which mHSPC patient. Who benefits from doublet therapy and which patient from triplet therapy? Which side effects can be expected?

RESULTS

Triplet therapy consisting of ADT + docetaxel + abiraterone/darolutamide resulted in a significantly longer overall survival compared to therapy consisting of ADT + docetaxel of all mHSPC (ARASENS) and primary metastatic high-volume (PEACE-1) mHSPC patients. In the setting of high-volume mHSPC, prolonged overall survival is seen for the specific triplet combination of ADT + docetaxel + abiraterone. In the low-volume mHSPC setting, only an extended progression-free survival but not overall survival was observed. Data regarding the classification of high- vs. low-volume mHSPC for the triplet therapy consisting of darolutamide are currently not available. Side effects with triplet therapies are almost comparable with those of doublet therapies and relate to typical chemotherapy-associated (neutropenia) and ARTA-specific side effects (abiraterone).

CONCLUSION

ADT alone or ADT + docetaxel should no longer play a role in first-line therapy for mHSPC. Accordingly, therapy consisting of ADT + ARTA or ADT + ARTA + docetaxel represents the current primary treatment option pending further data and regarding patient-specific characteristics (age, ECOG status, metastatic burden, primary/secondary metastatic disease).

Novel hormonal therapies in the management of advanced prostate cancer: extrapolating Asian findings to Southeast Asia

There is a paucity of information on the use of novel hormonal agents in Southeast Asian patients. We reviewed the clinical roles of novel hormonal therapy (NHT), namely abiraterone acetate (AA), enzalutamide, apalutamide and darolutamide, in the management of advanced prostate cancer, and data on its use in Asian patients, in order to extrapolate these findings to the Southeast Asian patient population. There are some differences in the molecular features between the NHTs, which influenced their respective permeabilities through the blood-brain barrier. The Asian sub-analyses of the landmark studies of each NHT were limited. The primary endpoints of the Asian sub-analyses generally reflect the efficacy outcomes of the respective landmark study. Hypertension, fatigue, musculoskeletal disorders, rash, and hot flushes were among the common toxicities observed in Asian patients. Real-world data on AA in the Asian setting is favourable, but data is limited for enzalutamide, apalutamide and darolutamide. Based on the sub-analyses and real-world data, the efficacy and safety of NHTs in the Asian patients showed a similar trend to the respective landmark studies. The lack of clinical trials in the Southeast Asian region hampers the ability to make a robust conclusion on any specific efficacy or safety differences that may be present; clinicians must assume that the broader Asian sub-analyses and real-world data reflects Southeast Asian patients' outcomes.

Triplet or Doublet Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported overall survival benefit of triplet therapy (androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy agent [ARAT], docetaxel, and androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) over that of doublet therapy (docetaxel and ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Ranking of therapy options and comparisons between triplet therapy and doublet ARAT and ADT therapy are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To rank therapy options (triplet vs doublet [docetaxel and ADT] vs doublet [ARAT and ADT]) and address them within formal network meta-analyses (NMAs); subsequently, NMAs were refitted following stratification according to (1) low- and high-volume tumor burden and (2) doublet versus triplet therapy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature review (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane database) of RCT trials that investigated the overall survival efficacy of systemic treatment in the setting of mHSPC was conducted. The study search and inclusion criteria were in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Ten RCTs (n = 9702) were identified. The NMA focusing on the overall cohort of mHSPC demonstrated that triplet therapies (darolutamide, docetaxel, and ADT, and abiraterone, docetaxel, and ADT) were ranked first and second (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-0.66; HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.46-0.78), followed by doublet therapy (ARAT and ADT) and lastly docetaxel and ADT. Owing to missing data within one RCT, the NMA for low- and high-volume mHSPC focused on nine trials. In high-volume disease, triplet therapy (abiraterone, docetaxel, and ADT) was ranked first (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.38-0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Triplet therapy, consisting of an ARAT, docetaxel, and ADT, ranked first in systematic treatment in mHSPC. Moreover, triplet therapy might result in more pronounced overall survival benefit than doublet ARAT and ADT therapy in high-volume mHSPC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We compared different systemic therapy options for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and concluded that triplet therapy, consisting of androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy agent, docetaxel, and androgen deprivation therapy, seems to be most beneficial for overall survival. Back to top.

Survival with novel hormonal therapies in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: indirect comparison of three randomized phase-III trials

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, new treatments have been approved for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (M0CRPC). Because direct comparisons between these treatments are not available to guide treatment decisions, indirect comparisons can be of interest.

METHODS

Our analysis evaluated second-generation hormone treatments proposed for M0CRPC. We searched multiple databases for articles published between 2010 and 2022. Phase-III clinical trials that studied these agents in M0CRPC patients were eligible. Among these, we included trials reporting overall survival (OS) through Kaplan-Meier curves. We performed the reconstruction of individual patient data from Kaplan-Meier graphs, according to the Shiny method, to indirectly compare the efficacy of the different agents. Indirect comparisons included testing for equivalence according to FDA criteria. Confidence intervals (CI) were 95% in all analyses except equivalence testing, where 90%CIs were used.

RESULTS

Three studies met these inclusion criteria. Apalutamide (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.88), darolutamide (HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.58-0.84), and enzalutamide (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.65-0.90) were all significantly more effective than the placebo. Our results showed no difference in OS between any of these three agents, and in testing for equivalence, our estimates of HR met the 0.75-1.33 level.

CONCLUSIONS

While the Shiny method has confirmed its validity in reconstructing individual patient data, our indirect comparisons based on mature OS demonstrated similar efficacy and substantial equivalence among these three second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors.

Darolutamide and survival in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a patient and caregiver perspective and plain language summary of the ARASENS study

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?

This is a summary of a publication about the ARASENS trial, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in February 2022. The trial includes 1,306 men with a type of prostate cancer called metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (also called mHSPC). In the trial, researchers wanted to learn if combining a treatment called darolutamide (also known by the brand name Nubeqa^®) with two other medicines called androgen deprivation therapy (also called ADT) and docetaxel (brand name Taxotere^®) could help treat patients with mHSPC better than placebo plus ADT and docetaxel. ADT with docetaxel is a treatment used for patients with mHSPC. Darolutamide is an approved treatment for a different type of prostate cancer called non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (also called nmCRPC).

WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?

The trial results showed that combining darolutamide with ADT and docetaxel increased the chance of survival and lowered the risk of death by 32.5% compared to combining ADT and docetaxel with placebo instead. Compared to patients who received the placebo, patients who received darolutamide had a delay in: their cancer becoming castration-resistant worsening pain having cancer-related bone fractures or related symptoms needing additional therapies for cancer The percentage of trial patients who had medical problems during the trial, also called adverse events, was similar between trial patients who received darolutamide and those who received the placebo.

WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?

Combining darolutamide with ADT and docetaxel helped treat trial patients with mHSPC better than placebo with ADT and docetaxel. Darolutamide in combination with ADT and docetaxel could be a treatment option for patients with mHSPC. Patients should always talk to their doctors and nurses before making any decisions about their treatment. This summary also includes perspectives on the ARASENS trial and prostate cancer from 3 members of the patient community. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT number: NCT02799602.

Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the evolving treatment landscape and role of nurse specialists

Prostate cancer is the most common type of cancer in men in the UK. Within 2 years of diagnosis, one-third of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) will develop metastatic disease, which is associated with significantly greater morbidity and mortality compared to disease without metastases. The approval of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors such as darolutamide has transformed the nmCRPC treatment landscape because they lead to prolonged metastasis-free survival and better maintenance of quality of life compared with placebo. Early identification of patients with nmCRPC who are suitable for treatment is imperative because most of these patients are asymptomatic. Clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) play a critical, supportive role in the management of disease and treatment follow-up. This product-focused article discusses the use of darolutamide in nmCRPC and the vital role that CNSs play in the management and care of patients with prostate cancer.

Decisions and dilemmas in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer management

Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) indicates a condition characterized by the progression of the prostate-specific antigen without radiographic evidence of distant metastasis on conventional imaging during androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Recently, 3 phase III trials have shown that the addition of next-generation androgen-receptor inhibitors (ARIs) apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide to ADT allows patients with high-risk nmCRPC to delay the appearance of metastasis and to obtain long-term clinical benefits. However, the lack of head-to head comparison makes it difficult to choose one among these agents. We reviewed the literature and explained the rationale of the possible therapeutic choices. In any case, the availability of novel ARIs means that patients with nmCRPC have now a new effective treatment option that provides them a renewed hope.

Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: management recommendations

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Survival and quality of life (QoL) of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) deteriorate significantly when they develop metastases. New generation antiandrogens (apalutamide, enzalutamide and darolutamide) can prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in these patients, maintaining their QoL.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

After the performance of a systematic review of the literature, a scientific committee reached a consensus on simple and practical recommendations to consolidate and improve the management of patients with nmCRPC in urology consultations.

RESULTS

Recommendations are made on the frequency of PSA determination and imaging tests in patients with nmCRPC. The importance of co-morbidities in patients with nmCRPC is also highlighted, and recommendations are also made on functional and QoL assessment that can be carried out during urology consultations. The efficacy, safety, and effects on QoL of new generation antiandrogens are reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

To evaluate treatment of patients with nmCRPC, it is necessary to consider co-morbidities and QoL, in addition to age. New generation antiandrogens are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The recommendations of this review can be helpful in optimizing the management of nmCRPC patients in urology consultations.

The Hospitalization-Related Costs of Adverse Events for Novel Androgen Receptor Inhibitors in Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: An Indirect Comparison

INTRODUCTION

Three novel androgen receptor inhibitors are approved in the USA for the treatment of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC): apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide. All three therapies have demonstrated prolonged metastasis-free survival in their respective phase III trials, with differing safety profiles. The objective of this study was to compare the mean per-patient costs of all-cause adverse events (AEs) requiring hospitalization between darolutamide versus apalutamide and enzalutamide for nmCRPC in the USA.

METHODS

All-cause grade ≥ 3 AEs with corresponding any-grade AEs reported among at least 10% of patients in any arm of the ARAMIS (darolutamide), SPARTAN (apalutamide), and PROSPER (enzalutamide) trials were selected for inclusion in the primary analyses. After matching-adjusted indirect comparison, AE costs were calculated by multiplying the AE rates from the trials by their respective unit costs of hospitalization taken from the US Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) database. Sensitivity analyses which further included any-grade AEs reported among at least 5% of patients were also performed.

RESULTS

After reweighting and adjusting for the trials' placebo arms, the mean per-patient AE costs were $1021 and $387 lower for darolutamide than for apalutamide and enzalutamide, respectively, over the trials' duration (SPARTAN and PROSPER, 43 months; ARAMIS, 48 months). For darolutamide vs. apalutamide, the largest drivers of the per-patient cost differences were fracture (adjusted difference $416), hypertension ($143), and rash ($219); for darolutamide vs. enzalutamide, they were fatigue not including asthenia ($290) and hypertension including increased blood pressure (i.e., any AE of hypertension or with elevated blood pressure not yet classified as hypertension) ($60). The results of the sensitivity analyses were consistent with the primary results.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with nmCRPC treated with darolutamide in ARAMIS incurred lower AE-related costs (USD), as determined using HCUP costing data, compared with patients treated with either apalutamide (in SPARTAN) or enzalutamide (in PROSPER).

Apalutamide Compared with Darolutamide for the Treatment of Non-metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Efficacy and Tolerability in a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison

Introduction

Apalutamide and darolutamide are next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors that have demonstrated superior efficacy compared to placebo in men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In the absence of head-to-head studies, the present study sought to indirectly compare the efficacy and tolerability between these two treatments.

Methods

This anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) used patient-level data from the phase 3, randomized, controlled SPARTAN study (apalutamide + ADT), weighted to match aggregate published data from the ARAMIS study (darolutamide + ADT) for clinically relevant baseline measures. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were estimated for efficacy endpoints: metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Odds ratios were estimated for tolerability outcomes: adverse events and serious adverse events.

Results

Before weighting, baseline characteristics from SPARTAN versus ARAMIS were different for median PSA (7.8 vs. 9.2 ng/mL), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 (23% vs. 31%), use of bone-targeted agents (10% vs. 4%), median time from initial diagnosis (94.9 vs. 85.4 months), and proportion of patients from North America (35% vs. 12%) and Europe (50% vs. 64%). After matching (n = 455), our analysis demonstrated that apalutamide + ADT had a Bayesian probability of being more effective than darolutamide + ADT for MFS [98.3%; HR 0.70 (95% CrI 0.51, 0.98)], PSA progression [~ 100%; HR 0.46 (95% CrI 0.33, 0.64)], and PFS [93.2%; HR 0.79 (95% CrI 0.59, 1.08)]. Results for OS and tolerability were similar between apalutamide + ADT and darolutamide + ADT.

Conclusion

This anchored MAIC analysis of pivotal phase 3 studies in patients with nmCRPC suggests that apalutamide + ADT is more effective than darolutamide + ADT for MFS, progression-free survival (PFS), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, with a similar OS benefit and tolerability profile.

Trial Registration

ARAMIS ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02200614; SPARTAN ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01946204.

Impact of New Systemic Therapies in Overall Survival in Non-Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There was a high medical need for patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) when several next-generation anti-androgens (apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide) demonstrated clinically relevant delays in metastasis onset. However, to date, few publications have assessed the pooled effect of these treatments on overall survival (OS). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized, placebo-controlled studies investigating a systemic treatment in nmCRPC. Publications were identified by searching several databases on April 7, 2021. The primary objective of this analysis was to determine the OS benefit. Secondary outcomes included the relative risk (RR) of adverse events (AEs) and grade 3-4 AEs. A sensitivity analysis with simulated data was also conducted to examine the influence of the study designs on the results. Three randomized controlled studies (SPARTAN, PROSPER, ARAMIS) met our inclusion criteria. Pooled meta-analyses showed a significant benefit in OS with the active agents versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.83), as well as increased risk of any grade (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01-1.17) and grade 3-4 AEs (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.23-1.83). The sensitivity analysis with SPARTAN-like simulated populations demonstrated that when using ARAMIS statistical design, OS would be statistically significant in 98.1% of the cases, at a shorter follow-up and with lower number of events. First-line treatment of nmCRPC patients with anti-androgens increased OS with an acceptable safety profile. In light of the different study designs and follow-up, results should be interpreted separately.

Darolutamide and health-related quality of life in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: An analysis of the phase III ARAMIS trial

BACKGROUND

In the ARAMIS trial, darolutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus placebo plus ADT significantly improved metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS) and time to pain progression in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Herein, we present analyses of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial randomised patients with nmCRPC and prostate-specific antigen doubling time ≤10 months to darolutamide 600 mg (n = 955) twice daily or matched placebo (n = 554) while continuing ADT. The primary end-point was MFS; the secondary end-points included OS and time to pain progression. In this analysis, HRQoL was assessed by the time to deterioration using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) prostate cancer subscale (PCS) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Prostate Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-PR25) subscales.

RESULTS

Darolutamide significantly prolonged time to deterioration of FACT-P PCS versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.91; P = 0.0005) at the primary analysis (cut-off date: 3rd September 2018). Time to deterioration of EORTC QLQ-PR25 outcomes showed statistically significant delays with darolutamide versus placebo for urinary (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54-0.76; P < 0.0001) and bowel (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.92; P = 0.0027) symptoms. Time to worsening of hormonal treatment-related symptoms was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with nmCRPC who are generally asymptomatic, darolutamide maintained HRQoL by significantly delaying time to deterioration of prostate cancer-specific quality of life and disease-related symptoms versus placebo.

[Treatment of nonmetastatic CRPC : Androgen receptor inhibition as new treatment standard in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with high risk of metastasis]

In patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC or M0CRPC) at high risk of progression (defined as prostate-specific antigen [PSA] doubling time ≤ 10 months), new androgen receptor inhibitors (ARI) in combination with continued androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are considered the new standard of care. Apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide have been approved on the basis of improved metastasis-free survival (MFS) in the respective large pivotal studies SPARTAN, PROSPER and ARAMIS and now, with a longer follow-up period, were able to show also a statistically significant and clinically relevant overall survival advantage compared to placebo plus ADT. The data available to date indicate that all three ARIs are comparably effective, accompanied by good tolerability. Moreover, the generally good quality of life of this patient population, who usually has no tumor-related symptoms, was maintained. Comparative head-to-head trials of the three approved substances are not available yet.

Darolutamide in hormone-sensitive and castration-resistant prostate cancer

Introduction: Important changes in the treatment of prostate cancer have taken place in recent years. Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) has been clinically delineated. In this setting, three drugs have been approved in high-risk disease: apalutamide, enzalutamide and darolutamide.Areas covered:This manuscript aims to profile darolutamide, its clinical development, pharmacologic properties, efficacy and safety. We presented the results of published clinical studies, but we also investigated ongoing ones.Expert opinion: An indirect comparison with the other two aforementioned drugs emerged. While the clinical efficacy is comparable, the toxicity profile is different for darolutamide, resulting in greater tolerance. We must wait for the results of the trials that study darolutamide in hormone-sensitive disease, both in the metastatic phase and in the localized phase. Clinical experience will also be important to determine ever more personalized treatments for patients.

Seizures and Neuropsychiatric Toxicity in Patients with Non-Metastatic CRPC Treated with New Antiandrogens: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Recently, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide have shown benefits in metastasis-free survival in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients compared to placebo. Previous evidence about the safety profile of these new androgens is limited. This meta-analysis studies seizure and neuropsychiatric effects of new anti-androgens compared to placebo in nmCRPC patients.

METHODS

PubMed and Cochrane databases were systematically reviewed until 1 March 2020 by 2 independent researchers using a pre-specified search strategy. Placebo-compared randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of nmCRPC patients treated with new anti-androgens providing data on neuropsychiatric events and seizures were included. Variables were seizure, headache, mental impairment, and dizziness. Pooled risk ratios (RR) were calculated using the Mantel-Hansel random effects model and Review Manager v5.3 software.

RESULTS

After systematic review, 3 eligible RCTs were selected that included 4,104 patients; 2,687 comprised the treatment group and 1,417 the control group. No significant increase in RR for seizures was registered with the new anti-androgens compared to placebo (RR 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-9.61). However, 2 trials excluded patients with risk factors or a history of seizures. There was also no significant increase RR for grade ≥3 seizures (RR 2.50; 95% CI 0.12-52.02). RR for suffering dizziness (any grade) was 1.57 (95% CI 1.07-2.32) with the new anti-androgens, but no significant differences were found in the other study regarding neuropsychiatric events or grade ≥3 events.

CONCLUSIONS

New anti-androgens (i.e., enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide) are acceptably safe in terms of seizures and neuropsychiatric toxicity compared to placebo in patients with nmCRPC.

Endocrine consequences of treatment with the new androgen receptor axis-targeted agents for advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the commonest non-cutaneous malignancy worldwide and the second cause of cancer death among males in the USA. Approval of the new androgen receptor axis-targeted (ARAT) agents (abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide) has altered the course of advanced PCa. We aimed to assess the endocrine and metabolic adverse events associated with treatment using ARAT compounds.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases from database inception to August 2020. We included randomized controlled trials reporting the endocrine and metabolic side effects of ARAT agents compared to each other or to placebo.

RESULTS

Although metastatic PCa remains incurable, ARAT medications combined with androgen deprivation therapy improve overall metastasis-free and progression-free survival in metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa, non-metastatic castration-resistant PCa, and metastatic castration-resistant PCa patients. This benefit comes at the cost of certain endocrine and metabolic consequences. Treatment with abiraterone acetate induces mineralocorticoid excess, hypokalemia, hypertension, elevated liver function tests, insulin resistance, and hyperglycemia. Enzalutamide may induce or worsen hypertension and increase the risk of falls and fractures in elderly patients, while common endocrine adverse events of apalutamide include hypothyroidism, hypertension, and skin rash. On the other hand, darolutamide seems to have a somewhat safer endocrine and metabolic profile.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of advanced PCa should be personalized, with administration of a combination of androgen deprivation therapy, ARAT agents, and chemotherapy being based on the patient's safety profile and the risk of side effects.

Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Novel agents to treat a lethal disease

Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) - defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 2 ng/mL, testosterone castration levels < 1.7 nm/L, and the absence of metastatic lesions on conventional imaging (computed tomography or bone scan) - has been defined as a lethal disease by the Prostate Cancer Work Group. One-third of patients with prostate cancer who receive androgen deprivation therapy for biochemical recurrence after local treatment will develop CRPC, with death occurring an average of 2.5 years after diagnosis of castration resistance. Most patients diagnosed with nmCRPC are asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic at diagnosis due to local treatment. In patients with short PSA doubling times (< 10 mo) and high baseline PSA levels, there is a high risk of bone metastases followed by prostate cancer-related mortality. These patients also present significant morbidity that negatively impacts quality of life (QoL). Recently, the results of three randomized trials (PROSPER, SPARTAN, and ARAMIS) were published. Those trials evaluated the efficacy of three different androgen receptor inhibitors - enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide - in patients with nmCRPC. In all three trials, the study drugs improved both metastasis-free survival and overall survival compared to placebo, plus on-going androgen deprivation therapy without a negative impact on QoL. In patients with nmCRPC, the most important clinical objective is early detection and treatment to maintain a low tumor burden and to prolong the symptom-free interval. For patients with nmCRPC, these novel drugs offer new hope for better QoL and survival outcomes.

Pharmacokinetics of Darolutamide in Mouse - Assessment of the Disposition of the Diastereomers, Key Active Metabolite and Interconversion Phenomenon: Implications to Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Darolutamide is recently approved for the treatment of non-metastatic castrate resistance prostate cancer. Hitherto, no stereoselective pharmacokinetic data have been published pertaining to darolutamide and its diastereomers in animals or humans. The key aims of the experiment were to examine darolutamide, S,S-darolutamide and S,R-darolutamide with respect to (a) assessment of in vitro metabolic stability and protein binding and (b) characterization of in vivo oral and intravenous pharmacokinetics in mice.

METHODS

In vitro (liver microsomes stability and protein binding) and in vivo experiments (oral/intravenous dosing to mice) were carried out using darolutamide, S,S-darolutamide and S,Rdarolutamide. Besides, tissue levels of darolutamide, S,S-darolutamide and S,R-darolutamide were measured following oral and intravenous dosing. Appropriate plasma/tissue samples served to determine the pharmacokinetics of various analytes in mice. Liquid chromatography in tandem with mass spectrometry procedures enabled the delineation of the plasma pharmacokinetics, in vitro and tissue uptake data of the various analytes.

RESULTS

Chiral inversion was absent in the metabolic stability study. However, darolutamide showed profound stereoselectivity (S,S-darolutamide greater than S,R-darolutamide) after either intravenous or oral dosing. S,R-darolutamide but not S,S-darolutamide showed conversion to its antipode post oral and intravenous dosing to mice. Regardless of oral or intravenous dosing, active keto darolutamide formation was evident after administration of darolutamide, S,S-darolutamide or S,R- darolutamide. Tissue data supported the observations in plasma; however, tissue exposure of darolutamide, S,Sdarolutamide and S,R-darolutamide was much lower as compared to plasma.

CONCLUSION

In lieu of the human pharmacokinetic data, although the administration of diastereomeric darolutamide was justified, it is proposed to delineate the clinical pharmacokinetics of S,Rdarolutamide and S,S-darolutamide relative to darolutamide in future clinical pharmacology studies.

(2020)

BACKGROUND

Saini et al. recently investigated the pharmacokinetics of darolutamide and its diastereomers in vitro and in vivo in Balb/c mice, reporting higher levels of (S,S)-darolutamide than (S,R)-darolutamide following intravenous or oral dosing, and interconversion of (S,R)-darolutamide to (S,S)-darolutamide.

OBJECTIVE

To present our in vitro and in vivo studies of darolutamide pharmacokinetics in mice, which contrast with the findings of Saini et al. Methods: Nude male Balb/c mice were orally dosed for 7 days with 25, 50, or 100 mg/kg of darolutamide twice daily. Pharmacokinetic parameters in plasma and tissue samples were assessed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Metabolism and interconversion of darolutamide and its diastereomers were investigated in cryopreserved Balb/c mouse hepatocytes. Protein binding was determined in plasma samples by equilibrium dialysis.

RESULTS

On day 7, C_max was reached 30 min after the last dose. Rapid formation and greater exposure of keto-darolutamide versus darolutamide were observed. Plasma exposure of (S,R)-darolutamide was 3-5-fold higher than that of (S,S)-darolutamide. The fraction of unbound keto-darolutamide was almost 6-fold lower than for darolutamide. In mouse hepatocytes, the conversion of (S,S)- to (S,R)-darolutamide was observed, but the conversion of (S,R)- to (S,S)-darolutamide was not detectable. Back-formation of keto-darolutamide to both diastereomers occurred at low levels.

CONCLUSION

The darolutamide diastereomer ratio changes upon administration in mice and other species due to interconversion through keto-darolutamide. This is not considered clinically relevant since both diastereomers and keto- darolutamide are pharmacologically similar in vitro. Based on the high protein binding of keto-darolutamide, its contribution in vivo in humans is considered low.

An up-to-date evaluation of darolutamide for the treatment of prostate cancer

Introduction: Currently, in prostate cancer, an increasing number of novel drugs are being used to delay its advancement to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Apalutamide, enzalutamide, and most recently, darolutamide (novel androgen receptor antagonists) have been approved for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).Areas covered: The authors have evaluated darolutamide, covering all aspects of the clinical development, competence, and safety profile of the drug.Expert opinion: The unique structure of darolutamide is characterized by a high affinity for androgen receptors and detainment of antagonist activity in mutant isoforms of androgen receptors. In clinical practice, this is the main reason that makes darolutamide exceptional in terms of safety and efficacy compared to other drugs in this category. Darolutamide is considered to have the lowest probability for adverse events (AEs) compared to apalutamide and enzalutamide. Future studies, along with real-world clinical data are warranted to improve personalized treatment strategies as well as sequencing treatment between approved novel drugs.

Androgen receptor inhibitor treatments: Cardiovascular adverse events and comorbidity considerations in patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Prostate cancer and cardiovascular (CV) disease share several risk factors, with the incidence of both rising with increasing age. Systemic prostate cancer therapies may increase CV risk. For example, gonadotropic releasing hormone agonists have been associated with increased development of CV risk factors, and potentially with CV disease. For men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), the opportunity to mitigate CV risk by appropriate selection of therapy (i.e., use of newer agents such as androgen receptor inhibitors) may be possible. The phase 3 PROSPER, SPARTAN, and ARAMIS trials for enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide, the 3 approved androgen receptor inhibitors for men with nmCRPC, were all associated with increased metastasis-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Our objective in writing this review is to improve awareness of the relationship between long-term androgen deprivation and increased risk for CV disease and inform treatment decision making for patients with mCRPC who also have CV comorbidities.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched from 2010 to November 5, 2019 for articles pertaining to androgen receptor inhibitors, androgen inhibition, apalutamide, darolutamide, enzalutamide, CV, and CaP.

RESULTS

We found literature describing the relationship between androgen inhibition and CV disease and risks. Given the increased risk of CV disease due to exposure to gonadotropic releasing hormone agonist therapy alone, understanding the potential for additional CV risks is important for patients with CV comorbidities when an androgen receptor inhibitor is added to their treatment. Another important consideration is the possibility of drug-drug interactions with comedications.

CONCLUSION

Management strategies for patients with mCRPC also treated for comorbidities including CV disease require appropriate selection of therapy, diet, and exercise to meet the needs of the individual patient profile.

Darolutamide for treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer

Darolutamide is a novel, nonsteroidal androgen receptor (AR)-signaling inhibitor. It serves as a second-generation antiandrogen and is currently indicated for the treatment of patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). The product was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in July 2019 and by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in January 2020 for the treatment of men with nmCRPC, and is awaiting approval in the E.U. for the same indication. This review will cover the background, preclinical development, safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical studies that led to the approval of darolutamide. The key clinical data, ongoing trials and future directions for darolutamide are also discussed herein.

Comparative efficacy of apalutamide darolutamide and enzalutamide for treatment of non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Studies using apalutamide, enzalutamide, or darolutamide have shown improved metastasis free survival (MFS) rates, leaving clinicians with a dilemma of choosing one over the other, for nonmetastatic castration recurrent prostate cancer (nmCRPC). We performed a network meta-analysis to provide an indirect comparison of oncologic outcomes and adverse events (AEs) of these medications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS databases, for studies reporting apalutamide, enzalutamide, or darolutamide until January 25, 2020. Results were input into an EndNote library, and data were extracted into a predefined template. Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as radiologic progression or death. Network meta-analysis was done using R and meta-analysis was performed with RevMan v. 5. Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) value was used to provide rank probabilities.

RESULTS

We found 3 studies reporting results for apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide. MFS was significantly lower in patients receiving darolutamide compared to both apalutamide (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.97) and enzalutamide (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.93). MFS was similar for enzalutamide and apalutamide (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.73-1.28). In PFS, apalutamide showed a slightly higher rate compared to darolutamide (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.99). There was no difference in overall survival (OS) between any of the medications. There was no statistically significant difference in AEs profile of the 3 medications. However, darolutamide had the highest SUCRA value and probability of being the most preferred medication based on AEs profile.

CONCLUSION

Enzalutamide and apalutamide had similar and higher MFS rate in indirect comparison with darolutamide. In cases where AEs are concerning, darolutamide might be the preferred agent.

Treatment of non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer in 2020: What is the best?

Lately the development of 3 novel second-generation androgen receptor antagonists (enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide) chanced the treatment landscape of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. After proofing their clinical efficacy in large phase III registration trials with good compatibilities and tolerable side effects currently all 3 substances are Food and Drug Administration-approved in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The present short review article provides an overview about these new treatment options and discusses their use in daily routine focusing on patient selection as well as on the impact of novel sensitive imaging modalities like prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron-emission tomography for detection of this stage of disease.

Apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) has undergone a paradigm shift with next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. However, direct comparative data are not available to inform treatment decisions and/or guideline recommendations. Therefore, we performed network meta-analysis to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of currently available treatments. Multiple databases were searched for articles published before June 2020. Studies that compared overall and/or metastasis-free and/or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (OS/MFS/PSA-PFS) and/or adverse events (AEs) in nmCRPC patients were considered eligible. Three studies (n = 4117) met our eligibility criteria. Formal network meta-analyses were conducted. For MFS, apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide were significantly more effective than placebo, and apalutamide emerged as the best option (P score: 0.8809). Apalutamide [hazard ratio (HR): 0.85, 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.77-0.94] and enzalutamide (HR: 0.86, 95% CrI: 0.78-0.95) were both significantly more effective than darolutamide. For PSA-PFS, all three agents were statistically superior to placebo, and apalutamide emerged as the likely preferred option (P score: 1.000). Apalutamide (HR: 0.71, 95% CrI: 0.69-0.74) and enzalutamide (HR: 0.76, 95% CrI: 0.74-0.79) were both significantly more effective than darolutamide. For AEs (including all AEs, grade 3 or grade 4 AEs, grade 5 AEs, and discontinuation rates), darolutamide was the likely best option. Apalutamide and enzalutamide appear to be more efficacious agents for therapy of nmCRPC, while darolutamide appears to have the most favorable tolerability profile. These findings may facilitate individualized treatment strategies and inform future direct comparative trials.

M0CRPC overview of management options

Though prostate cancer usually responds to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the beginning, the majority of prostate cancers will develop castration resistance over time. The androgen receptor (AR) pathway is often found to be activated in castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Thus, AR signalling remains a therapeutic target upon the development of CRPC. The term M0CRPC is used when ADT leads to castration resistance and there are no metastases detectable by means of conventional imaging. Until recently, there was no therapeutic standard for this group of patients. With the PROSPER-, SPARTAN- and ARAMIS-studies three large placebo-controlled phase III trials have been published lately that showed a significant benefit in metastasis-free survival in men with M0CRPC and short PSA doubling time (PSADT). The efficacy data are very similar in these studies, meaning that the drugs' safety profiles, final analyses of overall survival and their availability will be more important to help clinicians decide which of these three drugs they use for their patients with M0CRPC.

Role of novel hormonal therapies in the management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a literature-based meta-analysis of randomized trials. Clin Transl Oncol. 2020;22:1033-1039. [PMID: 31617061 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-019-02228-2]

BACKGROUND

Novel hormonal therapies have been recently investigated in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We performed a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of novel hormonal therapies in non-metastatic CRPC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The primary outcome was metastasis-free survival (MFS). The secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), time to PSA progression and safety. We planned a subgroup analysis according to the PSA doubling time (> 6 vs < 6 months), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (1 vs 0) and concomitant use of bone-targeting agent (yes vs no).

RESULTS

Pooled analysis of novel hormonal therapies revealed significantly increased MFS compared with placebo (hazard ratio (HR): HR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.25-0.41; p < 0.00001). The subgroup analysis showed a statistically significant MFS advantage in favour of men with the lower ECOG performance status. Other secondary endpoints favoured the novel hormonal therapies. The relative risk (RR) of grade ≥ 3 adverse events and ≥ 3 hypertension was 1.31 and 1.39, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirmed the efficacy and safety of the novel hormonal therapies in non-metastatic CRPC.

New Hormonal Agents in Patients With Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety Outcomes

In the past few years several hormonal agents have been tested in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) leading to an impressive improvement in terms of metastases-free survival (MFS). We performed a meta-analysis aimed to: (1) estimate the pooled effect of new hormonal compounds in terms of MFS, overall survival (OS) in overall and specific subpopulations; and (2) estimate the effect of high-grade toxicities of these drugs. We identified 881 studies published between January 1, 2010 and February 16, 2018 on PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Three randomized placebo controlled clinical trials were selected (PROSPER, SPARTAN, and ARAMIS). Because of the absence of individual data, all of the analyses performed were made on aggregated data provided in selected studies. We used the inverse variance technique for the meta-analysis of the hazard ratios collected for MFS and OS analysis. Fixed and randomized models were used. Relative risk and 95% confidence intervals and risk difference were estimated considering the number of Grade 3 adverse events in treatment and control arms. Administration of new hormonal compounds in nmCRPC patients led to a significant benefit in MFS in the overall population and in all subgroups analyzed. These agents might also improve OS but longer follow-up is needed to confirm this hypothesis. Indeed results of OS analysis should be carefully evaluated because none of the studies selected provided mature OS data. Administration of these agents resulted in a significant increased risk of treatment-related death, high cardiovascular toxicity, hypertension, fractures, and falls. Administration of new hormonal compounds prolongs the time of metastases occurrence and might prolong also survival in patients with nmCRPC. Treatment-related toxicity is an important issue because these agents increase the risk of death, cardiovascular toxicity, hypertension, fractures, and risk of falls.

Clinical Development of Darolutamide: A Novel Androgen Receptor Antagonist for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second most common cancer in men and is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men. Androgen receptor (AR) signaling plays a key role in PC tumor growth and progression, with androgens stimulating PC proliferation and survival. Castration-resistant PC (CRPC) is characterized by increasing levels of prostate-specific antigen or radiographic progression despite androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). In most patients, castration resistance results from aberrations in AR or the AR signaling pathway. Up to one-third of patients with localized high-risk PC will have disease progression on local therapy and develop CRPC. This review summarizes the key clinical data, including ongoing trials, for hormonal therapies in CRPC and provides an overview of the clinical development of darolutamide, a novel, nonsteroidal AR antagonist currently in phase III development for the treatment of nonmetastatic CRPC and metastatic hormone-sensitive PC. In phase I/II trials, darolutamide has demonstrated a favorable safety profile, antitumor activity, and significant decreases in prostate-specific antigen in patients with metastatic CRPC. In the phase III ARAMIS (NCT02200614; A Multinational, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III Efficacy and Safety Study of Darolutamide [ODM-201] in Men With High-Risk Non-metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer) study, metastasis-free survival is being evaluated in men with nonmetastatic CRPC who will receive ADT in combination with darolutamide or placebo. The ARASENS (NCT02799602; A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Phase III Study of Darolutamide [ODM-201] Versus Placebo in Addition to Standard Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel in Patients With Metastatic Hormone Sensitive Prostate Cancer) study is a placebo-controlled trial assessing whether the addition of darolutamide to ADT and docetaxel significantly prolongs overall survival in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive PC.

Phase 1 study of darolutamide (ODM-201): a new-generation androgen receptor antagonist, in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

This trial assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of darolutamide (ODM-201), a new-generation nonsteroidal androgen receptor antagonist, in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

METHODS

In this open-label, nonrandomized, two-cohort, dose-escalating phase 1 study, Japanese patients with mCRPC were enrolled after a screening period. In the single-dose period (≈1 week), darolutamide was administered at 300 mg (Cohort 1) or 600 mg (Cohort 2) on day -5 (fasting state) and day -2 (fed condition). In the subsequent multiple-dose period (fed condition), patients received darolutamide 300 mg twice daily (Cohort 1) or 600 mg twice daily (Cohort 2) for 12 weeks. Primary endpoints: evaluate safety and pharmacokinetics of darolutamide.

RESULTS

Of 12 patients enrolled, 9 received darolutamide (Cohort 1, n = 3; Cohort 2, n = 6). All 9 patients experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE; majority Grade 1/2). Incidence of drug-related TEAEs (DR-TEAEs) was 44% (all grades; n = 4); most common DR-TEAE was decreased appetite (22%), and 1 serious DR-TEAE (Grade 3 nausea) was observed. No Grade ≥4 DR-TEAEs or new safety signals were observed. C max and AUC (0-t last) were dose-dependent; pharmacokinetics of each dose appeared to be linear over time. Prostate-specific antigen response was observed in 11% (1/9) of patients. Compared with fasting status, geometric mean C max increased 2.5-fold after 300 mg and 2.8-fold after 600 mg; geometric mean AUC (0-t last) increased 2.5-fold after both doses under fed conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Darolutamide was well tolerated at the examined doses in Japanese patients with mCRPC, without differences in safety and pharmacokinetics relative to Western patients.