Docetaxel Provides Oncological Benefits in the Era of New-Generation Androgen Receptor Inhibitors - or Is Three a Crowd?

In recent years, several systemic therapies have been introduced for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, including androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with docetaxel (Doc) and/or new-generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI). Trials evaluating ADT + ARSI have consistently demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit for doublet therapy over ADT alone. Similarly, the STOPCaP meta-analysis showed an OS benefit in favor of ADT + Doc versus ADT alone. ARSI, Doc, and ADT have different antitumor mechanisms, thus potentiating the effect of combination therapy. Two randomized trials showed that the addition of ARSI to ADT + Doc improves OS, especially for synchronous high-volume disease. However, the real question about triplet therapy remains unanswered: whether combining Doc with ARSI improves outcomes compared to ADT + ARSI. As there are no head-to-head comparisons, this narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding triplet therapy versus doublet therapy including ADT+ ARSI.

Jorge clinical study: 10-year outcomes of risk-adapted radiotherapy defined by multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To analyze the 10-year biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients diagnosed with localized prostate adenocarcinoma treated with radiotherapy (RT) ± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), according to the risk groups based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) instead of digital rectal exam (DRE). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 140 consecutive patients diagnosed with localized prostate adenocarcinoma, stratified into different risk groups-low (LR), intermediate (IR), and high (HR) by mpMRI results. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 104 months, in LR group (n = 15), 10-year BRFS was 86.7%, 10-year LRFS was 86.7%, 10-year MFS was 93.3%, and 10-year OS was 100%. In IR group (n = 80), 10-year BRFS was 80.5%, 10-year LRFS was 86.1%, 10-year MFS was 92.6%, and 10-year OS was 76%. In HR group (n = 45), 10-year BRFS was 72.8%, 10-year LRFS was 78.7%, 10-year MFS was 82.1%, and 10-year OS was 77% (2 deaths from prostate cancer). According to mpMRI results, 36 (25.7%) patients change the risk group and 125 (89.28%) patients change the TNM stage. There was a trend for higher metastatic relapse in patients who switched from IR to HR (due to mpMRI) versus the patients who remained in the IR (20%, vs. 1.81% p = 0.059). Multivariate analysis showed that locoregional relapse was strongly associated with distant relapse (OR = 9.28; 95%CI: 2.60-33.31). There were no cases of acute grade 3 toxicity. Late grade 3 genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and sexual toxicity were 2.8%, 0.7%, and 1.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This is the first study with a 10-year median follow-up of patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy according to the risk groups established by mpMRI. Our findings show that mpMRI is a key tool to diagnose and establish risk groups in these patients, to optimize their treatment.

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as Prognostic Factors in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is based on neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with fluoropyrimidines. There are different biomarkers used as prognostic factors in these tumors. Some studies advocate the use of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) as prognostic factors in this clinical scenario. The aim of the study was to evaluate NLR and PLR as prognostic factors of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) and as predictive factors of pathologic complete response (pCR) using Ryan tumor regression scoring system on surgical specimens, in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma who received nCRT and radical surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (T3-T4, N1-N3, M0 according to the TNM classification, AJCC 8th edition) who received nCRT based on fluoropyrimidines and radical surgery. Complete blood cell count before nCRT was obtained to calculate NLR and PLR. We made subgroups of patients according to NLR and PLR. We obtained the cut-off point for these ratios based on receiver operating characteristic analysis. We analyzed OS and DFS using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models. The relationships between NLR/PLR and pCR, along with other clinical-pathological characteristics, were evaluated by Pearson's χ2 or Fisher's exact test as appropriate. Multivariate analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: Between February 2012 and February 2017, 100 consecutive patients were treated according to the reported schedules. Median age was 76 years (68-83). All patients received radiotherapy up to 50.4 Gy and 5-FU-based chemotherapy. 100% completed nCRT and surgery, 38% had elevated basal NLR (cut-off >1.95), and 50% had elevated basal PLR (cut-off >133). After a median follow-up of 72 months (55-88), a lower DFS was obtained in the high NLR subgroup (log-rank, Mantel-Cox 5.165, p = 0.023) and in the high PLR subgroup (log-rank, Mantel-Cox 13.971, p = 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that PLR (p = 0.006) was a strong significant predictor of DFS. A lower OS was observed in the high NLR and PLR subgroup without significant differences (log-rank, Mantel-Cox 1.245, p = 0.265; 0.578, p = 0.447). No significant differences were obtained in any of the subgroup analysis regarding pCR rates. CONCLUSION: In light of our results, both NLR and PLR could be considered prognostic factors for DFS in patients with LARC that receive treatment with nCRT followed by surgery.

Oligometastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. Why Radiotherapy?

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been considered for years the standard initial treatment for patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC). Recently published results support the use of taxanes, second-generation antiandrogens or radiotherapy to the primary tumor as part of the treatment in these patients, considering ADT alone as suboptimal. Metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) is used as part of the treatment for oligometastatic patients in different tumor types. In oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer the role of MDT is being studied with promising results. In the present review we assess the available evidence for radiotherapy to the primary tumor in newly diagnosed mPC and for MDT in oligometastatic prostate cancer, as well as future directions in this clinical setting.

Role of Radiotherapy and Hormone Therapy in Patients with Node-Positive Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: New-generation imaging techniques and the increasing use of surgery in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) allow us to detect many cases of nodal disease at initial diagnosis or after resection. The treatment of PCa with pathologic regional nodes has evolved from the exclusive use of systemic therapy to its combination with locoregional treatment. It can also represent a benefit in the overall survival. However, the evidence from randomised studies is limited. Thus, we review the most relevant results in this scenario. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Clinical-Trials.gov and Web of Science on January 2023 to review node-positive PCa by considering the relevant literature on this topic published with no restrictions on date and language. The search keywords used were "Prostatic Neoplasms" (MeSh) and "Node-positive" (Text Word) and "Radiotherapy" (MeSh) and ("Androgen Antagonists" (MeSh) or "Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal" (MeSh)), which are indexed within the Medical Subject Headings database. RESULTS: The management of node-positive PCa has no clear definitive consensus at the initial disease diagnosis or after surgery. However, in this review, we summarise the existing literature for the management of these patients in both scenarios, considering imaging tests, radiotherapy, hormone therapy and second-generation hormonal treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of radiotherapy and androgen-deprivation therapy is the treatment of choice. The addition of second-generation hormone therapy, plus the intensification of radiotherapy schedules, will likely change the treatment paradigm for these patients.

Dose-escalated neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced oesophageal or oesophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma.

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with CROSS-protocol is the standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate an improvement in complete pathological response (ypCR) after a dose-escalation neoadjuvant protocol compared to standard treatment. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and acute gastrointestinal toxicity. Material and methods: We prospectively evaluated patients with locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The radiation dose was 41.4 Gy in 23 fractions or 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with weekly administration of six intravenous cycles of carboplatin AUC 2 mg/mL and intravenous paclitaxel 50 mg/m2 followed by surgery. Results: Between December 2015 and July 2020, 21 patients were treated according to the reported radiation schedules. Median age was 61 years (57-67). 20 (95.2%) tumors were located at the esophagogastric junction and 1 (4.8%) in the middle esophagus. Five (23.8%) were stage II and 16 (76.2%) stage III. Twelve (57.1%) patients received 41.4 Gy (standard group) and 9 (42.9%) received 50.4 Gy (intensification group), with 5 (41.67%) and 5 (55.6%) presenting ypCR in the standard and intensification group, respectively (p = 0.67). After a median follow-up of 17 months (8-30), DFS in the standard group was 17.78 months [95% (CI, confidence interval): 12.9-22.6] and 45.5 months (95% CI: 24.4-66.05) in the intensification group (p = 0.299). Grade III acute gastrointestinal toxicity was 16% and 33.33%, respectively (p = 0.552). Postoperative toxicity events ≥ Grade III were 5 (41.7%) and 4 (44.4%), respectively (p = 0.623). Conclusions: In our study we found a trend towards a higher complete pathological response-rate and disease-free survival in the intensification group compared to the standard group, with no differences in gastrointestinal toxicity. Well-designed randomized and controlled trials are needed to obtain conclusive data.