Survival of veterans treated with enzalutamide and abiraterone for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer based on comorbid diseases

BACKGROUND

Comorbid diseases influence patient outcomes, yet little is known about how comorbidities interact with treatments for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). No head-to-head trials have compared the efficacy of abiraterone and enzalutamide - oral androgen-receptor targeted agents (ARTAs) for mCRPC. In patients with comorbid disease, outcomes with ARTAs may differ due to disparate mechanisms of action, adverse events, and drug interactions.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of US veterans initiating treatment for mCRPC with abiraterone or enzalutamide between September 2014 and June 2017. Treatment duration and overall survival (OS) was compared based on age and comorbid diseases. The association between ARTA and OS was assessed using Cox proportional hazards and propensity-score matched modeling while adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were performed based on patient age, comorbidities, and subsequent treatments for mCRPC.

RESULTS

Of 5822 veterans treated for mCRPC, 43.0% initially received enzalutamide and 57.0% abiraterone. Veterans initially treated with enzalutamide versus abiraterone were older (mean 75.8 vs. 75.0 years) with higher mean Charlson comorbidity index (4.4 vs. 4.1), and higher rates of cardiovascular disease or diabetes (74.2% vs. 70.6%). In the entire population, veterans initially treated with enzalutamide had longer median OS compared to those initially treated with abiraterone (24.2 vs. 22.1 months, p = 0.001). In veterans with cardiovascular disease or diabetes, median treatment duration with enzalutamide was longer (11.4 vs. 8.6 months, p < 0.001) with longer median OS compared to abiraterone (23.2 vs. 20.5 months, p < 0.001). In a propensity score matched cohort, enzalutamide was associated with decreased mortality compared to abiraterone (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Veterans with cardiovascular disease or diabetes had longer treatment duration and OS with enzalutamide compared to abiraterone. Further study of ARTA selection may benefit men with metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer and likely hormone sensitive prostate cancer, especially among patients with comorbid diseases.

Immunotherapy and Immunotherapy Combinations in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Although most prostate cancers are localized, and the majority are curable, recurrences occur in approximately 35% of men. Among patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence and PSA doubling time (PSADT) less than 15 months after radical prostatectomy, prostate cancer accounted for approximately 90% of the deaths by 15 years after recurrence. An immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) and impaired cellular immunity are likely largely responsible for the limited utility of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in advanced prostate cancer compared with other tumor types. Thus, for immunologically "cold" malignancies such as prostate cancer, clinical trial development has pivoted towards novel approaches to enhance immune responses. Numerous clinical trials are currently evaluating combination immunomodulatory strategies incorporating vaccine-based therapies, checkpoint inhibitors, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells. Other trials evaluate the efficacy and safety of these immunomodulatory agents' combinations with standard approaches such as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), taxane-based chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Here, we will review promising immunotherapies in development and ongoing trials for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). These novel trials will build on past experiences and promise to usher a new era to treat patients with mCRPC.

Management of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer During a Pandemic: Impact of Treatment Delay on Survival Outcomes for Patients Treated With Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

Introduction

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, providers and patients must engage in shared decision making to ensure that the benefit of early intervention for muscle-invasive bladder cancer exceeds the risk of contracting COVID-19 in the clinical setting. It is unknown whether treatment delays for patients eligible for curative chemoradiation (CRT) compromise long-term outcomes.

Patients and Methods

We used the National Cancer Data Base to investigate whether there is an association between a ≥ 90-day delay from transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) in initiating CRT and overall survival. We included patients with cT2-4N0M0 muscle-invasive bladder cancer from 2004 to 2015 who underwent TURBT and curative-intent concurrent CRT. Patients were grouped on the basis of timing of CRT: ≤ 89 days after TURBT (earlier) vs. ≥ 90 and < 180 days after TURBT (delayed).

Results

A total of 1387 (87.5%) received earlier CRT (median, 45 days after TURBT; interquartile range, 34-59 days), and 197 (12.5%) received delayed CRT (median, 111 days after TURBT; interquartile range, 98-130 days). Median overall survival was 29.0 months (95% CI, 26.0-32.0) versus 27.0 months (95% CI, 19.75-34.24) for earlier and delayed CRT (P = .94). On multivariable analysis, delayed CRT was not associated with an overall survival difference (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.27; P = .60).

Conclusion

Although these results are limited and require validation, short, strategic treatment delays during a pandemic can be considered on the basis of clinician judgment.

Effectiveness of postoperative radiotherapy after radical cystectomy for locally advanced bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Local-regional failure (LF) for locally advanced bladder cancer (LABC) after radical cystectomy (RC) is common even with chemotherapy and is associated with high morbidity/mortality. Postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) can reduce LF and may enhance overall survival (OS) but has no defined role. We hypothesized that the addition of PORT would improve OS in LABC in a large nationwide oncology database.

METHODS

We identified ≥ pT3pN0-3M0 LABC patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed 2004-2014 who underwent RC ± PORT. OS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to identify predictors of OS. Propensity matching was performed to match RC patients who received PORT vs those who did not.

RESULTS

15,124 RC patients were identified with 512 (3.3%) receiving PORT. Median OS was 20.0 months (95% CI, 18.2-21.8) for PORT vs 20.8 months (95% CI, 20.3-21.3) for no PORT (P = 0.178). In multivariable analysis, PORT was independently associated with improved OS: hazard ratio 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78-0.97); P = 0.008. A one-to-three propensity match yielded 1,858 patients (24.9% receiving PORT and 75.1% without). In the propensity-matched cohort, median OS was 19.8 months (95% CI, 18.0-21.6) for PORT vs 16.9 months (95% CI, 15.6-18.1) for no PORT (P = 0.030). In the propensity-matched cohort of urothelial carcinoma patients (N = 1,460), PORT was associated with improved OS for pT4, pN+, and positive margins (P < 0.01 all).

CONCLUSION

In this observational cohort, PORT was associated with improved OS in LABC. While the data should be interpreted cautiously, these results lend support to the use of PORT in selected patients with LABC, regardless of histology. Prospective trials of PORT are warranted.

A propensity analysis comparing definitive chemo-radiotherapy for muscle-invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder vs. urothelial carcinoma of the bladder using the National Cancer Database

•

Limited information is known about treatment outcomes for squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder (SqCC).

•

Treatment for SqCC is extrapolated from urothelial carcinoma.

•

Outcomes of chemoRT for SqCC are very limited.

•

Following chemoRT, patients with SqCC do worse than counterparts with urothelial carcinoma.

Introduction

Squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) is the second most common histology of primary bladder cancer, but still very limited information is known about its treatment outcomes. Most bladder cancer trials have excluded SqCC, and the current treatment paradigm for localized SqCC is extrapolated from results in urothelial carcinoma (UC). In particular, there is limited data on the efficacy of definitive chemo-radiotherapy (CRT). In this study, we compare overall survival outcomes between SqCC and UC patients treated with definitive CRT.

Materials/methods

We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for muscle-invasive (cT2-T4 N0 M0) bladder cancer patients diagnosed from 2004 to 2013 who underwent concurrent CRT. Propensity matching was performed to match patients with SqCC to those with UC. OS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier survival method, and the log-rank test and Cox regression were used for analyses.

Results

3332 patients met inclusion criteria of which 79 (2.3%) had SqCC. 73.4% of SqCC patients had clinical T2 disease compared to 82.5% of UC patients. Unadjusted median OS for SqCC patients was 15.6 months (95% CI, 11.7–19.6) versus 29.1 months (95% CI, 27.5–30.7) for those with UC (P < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with worse OS included: SqCC histology [HR: 1.53 (95% CI, 1.19–1.97); P = 0.001], increasing age [HR: 1.02 (95% CI, 1.02–1.03); P < 0.0001], increasing clinical T-stage [HR: 1.21 (95% CI, 1.13–1.29); P < 0.0001], and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index [HR: 1.26 (95% CI, 1.18–1.33); P < 0.0001]. Seventy-seven SqCC patients were included in the propensity-matched analysis (154 total patients) with a median OS for SqCC patients of 15.1 months (95% CI, 11.1–18.9) vs. 30.4 months (95% CI, 19.4–41.4) for patients with UC (P = 0.013).

Conclusions

This is the largest study to-date assessing survival outcomes for SqCC of the bladder treated with CRT. In this study, SqCC had worse overall survival compared to UC patients. Histology had a greater impact on survival than increasing T-stage, suggesting that histology should be an important factor when determining a patient’s treatment strategy and that treatment intensification in this subgroup may be warranted.