RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Adding apalutamide to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) resulted in a rapid (at 3- and 6-mo treatment) and deep prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline (to ≤0.2 ng/ml or ≥90% from baseline), improved overall survival, reduced risk of disease progression, and prolonged health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in SPARTAN and metastatic castration-sensitive PC (mCSPC) in TITAN. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of a rapid, deep PSA decline at 3 and 6 mo achieved with the addition of apalutamide to ADT with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in SPARTAN and TITAN. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A post hoc analysis of SPARTAN and TITAN PRO data was performed. INTERVENTION: Apalutamide versus placebo plus concurrent ADT. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: PROs were assessed using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P; SPARTAN and TITAN), Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF; TITAN), and Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI; TITAN) at baseline, prespecified cycles during treatment, and after progression for ≤1 yr. The association between a deep PSA decline at landmark 3 or 6 mo of apalutamide and the time to worsening of PROs was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier methodology and Cox proportional-hazard modeling. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 806 SPARTAN and 525 TITAN apalutamide-treated patients, the median treatment duration was 32.9 and 39.3 mo, respectively. Patients achieving a deep PSA decline at 3 mo had longer time to worsening in FACT-P total, FACT-P physical well-being, BPI-SF worst pain intensity, or BFI worst fatigue intensity. The 6-mo PSA decline results were similar. Limitations of patient characteristics in clinical studies should be considered. CONCLUSIONS: Attaining a deep and rapid PSA decline at 3 mo with apalutamide plus ADT was associated with longer preservation of overall HRQoL and physical well-being in nmCRPC and mCSPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Quality of life is maintained in individuals with advanced prostate cancer who achieve a deep prostate-specific antigen decline at 3 mo of apalutamide plus drugs that lower male sex hormones.
RESUMO
Niraparib (NIRA) is a highly selective inhibitor of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase, PARP1 and PARP2, which play a role in DNA repair. The phase II QUEST study evaluated NIRA combinations in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were positive for homologous recombination repair gene alterations and had progressed on 1 prior line of novel androgen receptor-targeted therapy. Results from the combination of NIRA with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone, which disrupts androgen axis signaling through inhibition of CYP17, showed promising efficacy and a manageable safety profile in this patient population.
Assuntos
Acetato de Abiraterona , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Masculino , Humanos , Acetato de Abiraterona/efeitos adversos , Prednisona/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The phase III SPARTAN study demonstrated that apalutamide significantly improves metastasis-free survival and overall survival vs. placebo in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). However, patients receiving apalutamide experienced falls more frequently vs. those receiving placebo (15.6% vs. 9.0%). METHODS: 806 patients with nmCRPC randomized to apalutamide in SPARTAN and treated with apalutamide in addition to ongoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were included in this post-hoc analysis investigating clinical variables associated with a subsequent fall. Time to a fall was assessed with Cox proportional-hazards models adjusted for baseline characteristics and time-varying factors. Statistical inference was based on final multivariable models. RESULTS: Falls were reported for 125/803 (15.6%) patients treated with apalutamide and ADT. Most falls were grade 1 or 2 and did not require hospitalization. Median time from randomization to first fall was 9.2 months (range 0.1-25.3 months). In the final multivariable model of both baseline and after-baseline covariates, baseline patient characteristics (older age, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, history of neuropathy, and α-blocker use before study treatment) remained significantly associated with fall; after-baseline clinical characteristics significantly associated with time to fall were development of neuropathy, arthralgia, and weight loss before fall. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis identified risk factors for fall among nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide. Clinical management can minimize these identified risks while enhancing patient outcomes. Preventive interventions should be considered when the identified baseline conditions and post-treatment neuropathy, arthralgia, or weight decrease are present, to reduce risk of fall. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01946204.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/epidemiologia , Antagonistas de Receptores de Andrógenos/efeitos adversos , Antagonistas de Androgênios/uso terapêutico , Acidentes por Quedas , Artralgia/induzido quimicamente , Artralgia/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The associations of metformin and statins with overall survival (OS) and prostate specific antigen response rate (PSA-RR) in trials in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether metformin or statins ± abiraterone acetate plus prednisone/prednisolone (AAP) influence OS and PSA-RR. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANT: COU-AA-301 and COU-AA-302 patients were stratified by metformin and statin use. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazards ratio (HR) stratified by concomitant medications, and a random effects model was used to pool HR. We compared PSA-RR using Chi χ2 test. RESULTS: In COU-AA-301-AAP, metformin was associated with improved PSA-RR (41.1% versus 28.6%) but not prolonged OS. In COU-AA-301-placebo-P, there was no association between metformin and prolonged OS or PSA-RR. In COU-AA-302-AAP, metformin was associated with prolonged OS (adjHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48-0.98) and improved PSA-RR (72.7% versus 60.0%). In COU-AA-302-P, metformin was associated with prolonged OS (adjHR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93). In pooled analysis, OS was prolonged among those treated with metformin (pooled HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.95).In COU-AA-301-AAP, statins were associated with an improved OS (adjHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.93), while there was no difference in COU-AA-301-P. There was no association with statins and OS in either COU-AA-302 groups. When pooling HR, OS was prolonged among those treated with statins (pooled HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.88). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of post-hoc sub-analyses, metformin and statins are associated with a prolonged OS and increased PSA-RR, particularly in combination with AAP.
Assuntos
Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases , Metformina , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Acetato de Abiraterona/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Castração , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Humanos , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Metformina/uso terapêutico , Prednisona/uso terapêutico , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Exposure-response analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between selected efficacy and safety endpoints and serum phosphate (PO4) concentrations, a potential biomarker of efficacy and safety, in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients with FGFR alterations treated with erdafitinib. METHODS: Data from two dosing regimens of erdafitinib in a phase 2 study (NCT02365597), 6 and 8-mg/day with provision for pharmacodynamically guided titration per serum PO4 levels, were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard or logistic regression models. Efficacy endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Safety endpoints were adverse events typical for FGFR inhibitors. RESULTS: Exposure-efficacy analyses on 156 patients (6-mg = 68; 8-mg = 88) showed that patients with higher serum PO4 levels within the first 6 weeks showed better OS (hazard ratio 0.57 [95% CI 0.46-0.72] per mg/dL of PO4; p = 0.01), PFS (hazard ratio 0.80 [0.67-0.94] per mg/dL of PO4; p = 0.01), and ORR (odds ratio 1.38 [1.02-1.86] per mg/dL of PO4; p = 0.04). Exposure-safety analyses on 177 patients (6-mg = 78; 8-mg = 99) showed that the incidence of selected adverse events associated with on-target off-tumor effects significantly rose with higher PO4. CONCLUSIONS: The exploratory relationship between serum PO4 levels and efficacy/safety outcomes supported the use of pharmacodynamically guided dose titration to optimize erdafitinib's therapeutic benefit/risk ratio. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02365597.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células de Transição/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/administração & dosagem , Pirazóis/administração & dosagem , Quinoxalinas/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias da Bexiga Urinária/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/efeitos adversos , Pirazóis/efeitos adversos , Quinoxalinas/efeitos adversos , Receptores de Fatores de Crescimento de Fibroblastos/metabolismo , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In SPARTAN, apalutamide improved metastasis-free and overall survival for patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) with a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of ≤10 mo. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at the final analysis of the SPARTAN study. INTERVENTION: Patients received apalutamide (240 mg/d) or placebo in 28-d cycles. All patients continued androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1207 patients with nmCRPC were randomized 2:1 to apalutamide or placebo. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: HRQoL was assessed using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at day 1 of cycle 1 (predose/baseline), cycles 2-6, every two cycles during cycles 7-13, every four cycles thereafter, at the end of treatment, and every 4 mo after progression to 1 yr. Results are presented using descriptive statistics. A mixed model for repeated measures was fitted to estimate the mean scores at each scheduled visit during treatment. RESULTS: At final analysis, with 52 mo follow-up for survival, the median treatment duration was 32.9 mo for apalutamide and 11.5 mo for placebo. Patients had good baseline HRQoL. At each scheduled collection during treatment, >90% per group completed the questionnaires. The change in FACT-P total score from baseline to cycles 21 and 25 significantly favored apalutamide over placebo (p = 0.0138 and 0.0009, respectively). The apalutamide group generally maintained favorable FACT-P (total and subscales) and EQ-5D-3L scores, while placebo scores tended to decline over time (starting in cycles 11-13 and pronounced by cycles 21-25). Notably, patient-reported fatigue did not worsen with apalutamide. Most patients reported being "not at all bothered" by side effects, and bother did not increase over time with apalutamide or placebo. Patients receiving apalutamide had minimal change in side-effect bother following symptomatic adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Final analysis of SPARTAN confirms that HRQoL is preserved in patients with nmCRPC receiving apalutamide plus ADT, but declines in patients receiving placebo plus ADT after approximately 1 yr. PATIENT SUMMARY: Responses from patients with prostate cancer who were included in the SPARTAN study indicated that treatment with apalutamide, even after the most extensive follow-up time possible, did not reduce their quality of life. These results, along with improved survival and longer time to the development of metastases (reported separately), confirm the benefits of apalutamide for patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Qualidade de Vida , Antagonistas de Androgênios , Androgênios/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , TioidantoínasRESUMO
A population pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) model was developed using data from 345 patients with cancer. The population PK-PD model evaluated the effect of erdafitinib total and free plasma concentrations on serum phosphate concentrations after once-daily oral continuous (0.5-12 mg) and intermittent (10-12 mg for 7 days on/7 days off) dosing, and investigated the potential covariates affecting erdafitinib-related changes in serum phosphate levels. Phosphate is used as a biomarker for erdafitinib's efficacy and safety: increases in serum phosphate were observed after dosing with erdafitinib, which were associated with fibroblast growth factor receptor target engagement via inhibition of renal fibroblast growth factor 23-mediated signaling. PK-PD model-based simulations were performed to assess the approved PD-guided dosing algorithm of erdafitinib (8 mg once-daily continuous dosing, with up-titration to 9 mg based on phosphate levels [<5.5 mg/dl] and tolerability at 14-21 days of treatment). The serum phosphate concentrations increased after the first dose and reached near maximal level after 14 days of continuous treatment. Serum phosphate increased with erdafitinib free drug concentrations: doubling the free concentration resulted in a 1.8-fold increase in drug-related phosphate changes. Dose adjustment after at least 14 days of dosing was supported by achievement of >95% maximal serum phosphate concentration. The peak-to-trough fluctuation within a dosing interval was limited for serum phosphate concentrations (5.68-5.65 mg/dl on Day 14), supporting phosphate monitoring at any time relative to dosing. Baseline phosphate was higher in women, otherwise, none of the investigated covariate-parameter relationships were considered clinically relevant. Simulations suggest that the starting dose of 8-mg with up-titration to 9-mg on Days 14-21 maximized the number of patients within the target serum phosphate concentrations (5.5-7 mg/dl) while limiting the number of treatment interruptions. The findings from the PK-PD model provided a detailed understanding of the erdafitinib concentration-related phosphate changes over time, which supports erdafitinib's dosing algorithm.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Pirazóis , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Fosfatos/uso terapêutico , Pirazóis/farmacocinética , Quinoxalinas/farmacocinéticaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The majority of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) will have disease progression of a uniformly fatal disease. mCRPC is driven by both activated androgen receptors and elevated intratumoural androgens; however, the current standard of care is therapy that targets a single androgen signalling mechanism. We aimed to investigate the combination treatment using apalutamide plus abiraterone acetate, each of which suppresses the androgen signalling axis in a different way, versus standard care in mCRPC. METHODS: ACIS was a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study done at 167 hospitals in 17 countries in the USA, Canada, Mexico, Europe, the Asia-Pacific region, Africa, and South America. We included chemotherapy-naive men (aged ≥18 years) with mCRPC who had not been previously treated with androgen biosynthesis signalling inhibitors and were receiving ongoing androgen deprivation therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and a Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form question 3 (ie, worst pain in the past 24 h) score of 3 or lower. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a centralised interactive web response system with a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size 4) to oral apalutamide 240 mg once daily plus oral abiraterone acetate 1000 mg once daily and oral prednisone 5 mg twice daily (apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone group) or placebo plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (abiraterone-prednisone group), in 28-day treatment cycles. Randomisation was stratified by presence or absence of visceral metastases, ECOG performance status, and geographical region. Patients, the investigators, study team, and the sponsor were masked to group assignments. An independent data-monitoring committee continually monitored data to ensure ongoing patient safety, and reviewed efficacy data. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was reported for all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is completed and no longer recruiting and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02257736. FINDINGS: 982 men were enrolled and randomly assigned from Dec 10, 2014 to Aug 30, 2016 (492 to apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone; 490 to abiraterone-prednisone). At the primary analysis (median follow-up 25·7 months [IQR 23·0-28·9]), median radiographic progression-free survival was 22·6 months (95% CI 19·4-27·4) in the apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone group versus 16·6 months (13·9-19·3) in the abiraterone-prednisone group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·69, 95% CI 0·58-0·83; p<0·0001). At the updated analysis (final analysis for overall survival; median follow-up 54·8 months [IQR 51·5-58·4]), median radiographic progression-free survival was 24·0 months (95% CI 19·7-27·5) versus 16·6 months (13·9-19·3; HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·60-0·83; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse event was hypertension (82 [17%] of 490 patients receiving apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone and 49 [10%] of 489 receiving abiraterone-prednisone). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 195 (40%) patients receiving apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone and 181 (37%) patients receiving abiraterone-prednisone. Drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events with fatal outcomes occurred in three (1%) patients in the apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone group (2 pulmonary embolism, 1 cardiac failure) and five (1%) patients in the abiraterone-prednisone group (1 cardiac failure and 1 cardiac arrest, 1 mesenteric arterial occlusion, 1 seizure, and 1 sudden death). INTERPRETATION: Despite the use of an active and established therapy as the comparator, apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone improved radiographic progression-free survival. Additional studies to identify subgroups of patients who might benefit the most from combination therapy are needed to further refine the treatment of mCRPC. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.
Assuntos
Acetato de Abiraterona/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Prednisona/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Tioidantoínas/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Antagonistas de Receptores de Andrógenos/uso terapêutico , Método Duplo-Cego , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/terapia , Humanos , Masculino , Metástase Neoplásica , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/mortalidade , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Inibidores da Síntese de Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
PURPOSE: Restrictive eligibility criteria induce differences between clinical trial and "real-world" treatment populations. Restrictions based on prior therapies are common; minimizing them when appropriate may increase patient participation in clinical trials. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A multi-stakeholder working group developed a conceptual framework to guide evaluation of prevailing practices with respect to using prior treatment as selection criteria for clinical trials. The working group made recommendations to minimize restrictions based on prior therapies within the boundaries of scientific validity, patient centeredness, distributive justice, and beneficence. RECOMMENDATIONS: (i) Patients are eligible for clinical trials regardless of the number or type of prior therapies and without requiring a specific therapy prior to enrollment unless a scientific or clinically based rationale is provided as justification. (ii) Prior therapy (either limits on number and type of prior therapies or requirements for specific therapies before enrollment) could be used to determine eligibility in the following cases: a) the agents being studied target a specific mechanism or pathway that could potentially interact with a prior therapy; b) the study design requires that all patients begin protocol-specified treatment at the same point in the disease trajectory; and c) in randomized clinical studies, if the therapy in the control arm is not appropriate for the patient due to previous therapies received. (iii) Trial designers should consider conducting evaluation separately from the primary endpoint analysis for participants who have received prior therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trial sponsors and regulators should thoughtfully reexamine the use of prior therapy exposure as selection criteria to maximize clinical trial participation.See related commentary by Giantonio, p. 2369.
Assuntos
Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/normas , Oncologia/normas , Pesquisa Biomédica , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/métodos , Gerenciamento Clínico , Humanos , Oncologia/métodos , Projetos de PesquisaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The phase 3 SPARTAN study evaluated apalutamide versus placebo in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and prostate-specific antigen doubling time of ≤10 mo. At primary analysis, apalutamide improved median metastasis-free survival (MFS) by 2 yr and overall survival (OS) data were immature. OBJECTIVE: We report the prespecified event-driven final analysis for OS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1207 patients with nmCRPC (diagnosed by conventional imaging) were randomised 2:1 to apalutamide (240mg/d) or placebo, plus on-going androgen deprivation therapy. After MFS was met and the study was unblinded, 76 (19%) patients still receiving placebo crossed over to apalutamide. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: OS and time to cytotoxic chemotherapy (TTChemo) were analysed by group-sequential testing with O'Brien-Fleming-type alpha spending function. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: At median 52-mo follow-up, 428 deaths had occurred. The median treatment duration was 32.9 mo for apalutamide group and 11.5 mo for placebo group. Median OS was markedly longer with apalutamide versus placebo, reaching prespecified statistical significance (73.9 vs 59.9 mo, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.64-0.96]; p=0.016). Apalutamide also lengthened TTChemo versus placebo (HR: 0.63 [95% CI, 0.49-0.81]; p=0.0002). Discontinuation rates in apalutamide and placebo groups due to progressive disease were 43% and 74%, and due to adverse events 15% and 8.4%, respectively. Subsequent life-prolonging therapy was received by 371 (46%) patients in the apalutamide arm and by 338 (84%) patients in the placebo arm including 59 patients who received apalutamide after crossover. Safety was consistent with previous reports; when adverse events were adjusted for treatment exposure, rash had the greatest difference of incidence between the apalutamide and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Extension of OS with apalutamide compared with placebo conferred impactful benefit in patients with nmCRPC. There was a 22% reduction in the hazard of death in the apalutamide group despite 19% crossover (placebo to apalutamide) and higher rates of subsequent therapy in the placebo group. PATIENT SUMMARY: With data presented herein, all primary and secondary study end points of SPARTAN were met; findings demonstrate the value of apalutamide as a treatment option for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/mortalidade , Tioidantoínas/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Estudos Cross-Over , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Unequivocal clinical progression (UCP)-a worsening of clinical status with or without radiographic progression (RAD)-represents a distinct mode of disease progression in metastatic prostate cancer. We evaluated the prevalence, risk factors and the impact of UCP on survival outcomes. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of the COU-AA-302, a randomised phase 3 study of abiraterone plus prednisone (AAP) versus prednisone was performed. Baseline characteristics were summarised. Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier method were used for survival and time to event analyses, respectively. Iterative multiple imputation method was used for correlation between clinicoradiographic progression-free survival (crPFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 736 patients with disease progression, 280 (38%) had UCP-only and 124 (17%) had UCP plus RAD. Prognostic index model high-risk group was associated with increased likelihood of UCP (p<0.0001). Median OS was 25.7 months in UCP-only and 33.0 months for RAD-only (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.66; p=0.0003). UCP adversely impacted OS in both treatment groups. Lowest OS was seen in patients with prostate specific antigen (PSA)-non-response plus UCP-only progression (median OS 22.6 months (95% CI 20.7 to 24.4)). Including UCP events lowered estimates of treatment benefit-median crPFS was 13.3 months (95% CI 11.1 to 13.8) versus median rPFS of 16.5 months (95% CI 13.8 to 16.8) in AAP group. Finally, crPFS showed high correlation with OS (r=0.67; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: UCP is a common and clinically relevant phenomenon in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with AAP or prednisone. UCP is prognostic and associated with inferior OS and post-progression survival. A combination of PSA-non-response and UCP identifies patients with poorest survival. When included in PFS analysis, UCP diminishes estimates of treatment benefit. Continued study of UCP in mCRPC is warranted.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Acetato de Abiraterona/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Humanos , Masculino , Prednisona/uso terapêutico , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: LATITUDE, a randomized, double-blind trial, compared abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus placebo (PBO) + ADT in high-risk metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the correlation of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics with overall survival (OS) and radiological progression-free survival (rPFS). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A post hoc analysis of data from 597 men receiving AAPâ¯+â¯ADT and 602 receiving PBOâ¯+â¯ADT. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The associations of PSA-related outcomes (rates of confirmed 50% [PSA50] and 90% [PSA90] decline from baseline PSA [Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria], rates of PSAâ¯<â¯0.2â¯ng/ml, median nadir PSA, time to PSA nadir [TPN], and time to PSA progression [TPP] with long-term outcomes [OS and rPFS]) were evaluated. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazard model. Correlations of TPP with coprimary endpoints rPFS and OS were evaluated using Kendall's tau (KT). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: AAPâ¯+â¯ADT significantly delayed median TPP versus PBOâ¯+â¯ADT (33.2 vs 7.4 mo; HR: 0.3, pâ¯<⯠0.001). TPP correlated with rPFS (KT = 0.921) and OS (KT = 0.666). In the AAP + ADT group, 91% had PSA50 and 79% had PSA90 responses (relative risk [RR]: 1.36 and 2.30, respectively; pâ¯<⯠0.001 for both comparisons vs PBO + ADT). Compared with nonresponders, PSA50 and PSA90 responders had reduced risk of death (RR: 0.44 and 0.12, respectively). At 6 mo, 40% receiving AAP + ADT and 6.5% receiving PBO + ADT achieved PSA ≤0.1 ng/ml, which was significantly associated with longer rPFS and OS. Median nadir PSA was 0.09 ng/ml with AAP + ADT versus 2.36 ng/ml with PBO + ADT. Median TPN (AAP + ADT, 6.4 mo; PBO + ADT, 3.8 mo) positively correlated with rPFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: Superior PSA response dynamics with AAPâ¯+â¯ADT versus ADTâ¯+â¯PBO strongly correlated with long-term outcomes of rPFS and OS in high-risk mCSPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found that low prostate-specific antigen levels (≤0.1â¯ng/ml) after 6 mo may indicate a good long-term response to treatment. Our results need confirmation.
Assuntos
Acetato de Abiraterona/administração & dosagem , Antagonistas de Androgênios/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Prednisona/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Correlação de Dados , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Masculino , Metástase Neoplásica , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Próstata/mortalidade , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: LATITUDE was the first phase 3 trial examining the survival benefit of adding abiraterone acetate (AA) + prednisone (P) to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in newly diagnosed metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). Due to significant improvement in overall survival after the first interim analysis, patients in the placebos + ADT arm could switch to AA + P + ADT during an open-label extension. As in other studies where switching is allowed, statistical adjustments are needed to assess the real benefit of new drugs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis to estimate the true survival benefit of AA + P + ADT in patients with newly diagnosed mCSPC by applying statistical adjustments commonly used to adjust for treatment switching. RESULTS: Of 112 patients still receiving placebos + ADT at the first interim analysis, 72 switched to AA + P + ADT during the open-label extension. Final analysis was conducted after median follow-up of 51.8 months. Compared to the placebos + ADT arm, the risk of death in the AA + P + ADT arm was 34% lower [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.663 (95% confidence interval 0.566-0.778)] by unadjusted intent-to-treat analysis, 37% lower [HR = 0.629 (95% confidence interval 0.526-0.753)] by rank preserving structure failure time modeling, and 38% lower [HR = 0.616 (95% confidence interval 0.524-0.724)] by inverse probability of censoring weights. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses adjusting for treatment switching using two different statistical approaches confirm the improved survival benefit of adding AA + P to ADT in patients with newly diagnosed mCSPC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01715285.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Substituição de Medicamentos/métodos , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/mortalidade , Acetato de Abiraterona/administração & dosagem , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ásia/epidemiologia , Canadá/epidemiologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Humanos , Agências Internacionais , América Latina/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Prednisona/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Taxa de Sobrevida , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Alterations in the gene encoding fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) are common in urothelial carcinoma and may be associated with lower sensitivity to immune interventions. Erdafitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of FGFR1-4, has shown antitumor activity in preclinical models and in a phase 1 study involving patients with FGFR alterations. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with prespecified FGFR alterations. All the patients had a history of disease progression during or after at least one course of chemotherapy or within 12 months after neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. Prior immunotherapy was allowed. We initially randomly assigned the patients to receive erdafitinib in either an intermittent or a continuous regimen in the dose-selection phase of the study. On the basis of an interim analysis, the starting dose was set at 8 mg per day in a continuous regimen (selected-regimen group), with provision for a pharmacodynamically guided dose escalation to 9 mg. The primary end point was the objective response rate. Key secondary end points included progression-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients in the selected-regimen group received a median of five cycles of erdafitinib. Of these patients, 43% had received at least two previous courses of treatment, 79% had visceral metastases, and 53% had a creatinine clearance of less than 60 ml per minute. The rate of confirmed response to erdafitinib therapy was 40% (3% with a complete response and 37% with a partial response). Among the 22 patients who had undergone previous immunotherapy, the confirmed response rate was 59%. The median duration of progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and the median duration of overall survival was 13.8 months. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher, which were managed mainly by dose adjustments, were reported in 46% of the patients; 13% of the patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The use of erdafitinib was associated with an objective tumor response in 40% of previously treated patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with FGFR alterations. Treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in nearly half the patients. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; BLC2001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02365597.).
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/administração & dosagem , Pirazóis/administração & dosagem , Quinoxalinas/administração & dosagem , Receptores de Fatores de Crescimento de Fibroblastos/antagonistas & inibidores , Receptores de Fatores de Crescimento de Fibroblastos/genética , Neoplasias Urológicas/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mutação , Metástase Neoplásica/tratamento farmacológico , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Proteínas Tirosina Quinases/antagonistas & inibidores , Pirazóis/efeitos adversos , Quinoxalinas/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Neoplasias Urológicas/genética , Neoplasias Urológicas/patologia , UrotélioRESUMO
AIM: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has long been the gold standard for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Clinical trials have demonstrated significant survival benefits when docetaxel (DOC) or abiraterone acetate (AA) and prednisone (P) are added to ADT, necessitating comparison of these combination treatments. METHODS: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of AA-/ADT-/DOC-containing treatment regimens in newly diagnosed patients with high-risk and/or high-volume mHSPC identified three RCTs (LATITUDE, CHAARTED and GETUG-AFU 15). Network meta-analyses (NMAs) using fixed effects Bayesian methods were performed to compare relative benefits of each treatment on overall survival (OS), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and quality of life (QoL) measured by the Brief Pain Inventory, and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate questionnaire. One trial, STAMPEDE, was assessed in exploratory OS analyses. RESULTS: The hazard ratio (HR) for OS ranged from 0.85 to 0.92, with the Bayesian probability of AA + P + ADT being better than DOC + ADT ranging between 72% and 87%. For rPFS, the HR ranged between 0.71 and 0.76 (Bayesian probability range: 93%-97%). Exploratory analyses including STAMPEDE found similar trends. AA + P + ADT also showed improved QoL compared with DOC + ADT for at least 1 year of therapy, with results being more pronounced at 3 months. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that AA + P + ADT is at least as effective as DOC + ADT in reducing the risk of death in men with mHSPC and better at preventing disease progression and improving QoL. The NMA provides useful insights to clinicians and other decision-makers on the relative efficacy of treatment options for men with mHSPC.
Assuntos
Acetato de Abiraterona/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Docetaxel/uso terapêutico , Prednisona/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias da Próstata/tratamento farmacológico , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Acetato de Abiraterona/farmacologia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacologia , Progressão da Doença , Docetaxel/farmacologia , Humanos , Masculino , Prednisona/farmacologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/mortalidade , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the LATITUDE trial, addition of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved overall survival compared with placebos plus ADT in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk, metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer. Understanding the effects of treatments on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is important for treatment decisions; therefore we aimed to analyse the effects of ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone versus ADT plus placebos on PROs and HRQOL in patients in the LATITUDE study. METHODS: In the multicentre, international, randomised, phase 3 LATITUDE trial, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had newly diagnosed, high-risk, metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer confirmed by bone scan (bone metastases) or by CT or MRI (visceral, soft tissue, or nodal metastases), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 2 or less. Patients from 235 clinical sites in 34 countries were randomly assigned (1:1) following a country-by-country scheme done by permuted block randomisation (with two blocks) and stratified by the presence of visceral metastasis and ECOG performance status to receive ADT plus 1000 mg oral abiraterone acetate and 5 mg oral prednisone once daily or ADT plus placebos. Selection of ADT, chemical or surgical, was at the investigator's discretion. The co-primary endpoints of the trial, overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival, have been published. PRO data were collected directly on electronic tablet devices at the clinical sites during screening and before any other visit procedure on day 1 of cycles 1-3, monthly during cycles 4-13, and then every 2 months until the end of treatment, by use of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate scale (FACT-P), and the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires. PRO analyses were an exploratory endpoint. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. Results from the first pre-planned interim analysis (Oct 31, 2016), are presented here. This ongoing study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01715285. FINDINGS: Between Feb 12, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 1199 patients were randomly assigned: 597 to ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone and 602 to ADT plus placebos. Median follow-up was 30·9 months (IQR 21·2-33·2) in the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group versus 29·7 months (1·4-43·5; 16·1-31·3) in the ADT plus placebos group. Median time to worst pain intensity progression assessed by the BPI-SF score was not reached in either group (ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone, not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 11·07 months [95% CI 9·23-18·43]; ADT plus placebos group, not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 5·62 [95% CI 4·63-7·39]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·52-0·77]; p<0·0001). Median time to worst fatigue intensity was not reached in either the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group (not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 18·4 months [95% CI 12·9-27·7]) or the ADT plus placebos group (not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 6·5 months [95% CI 5·6-9·2]; HR 0·65 [95% CI 0·53-0·81], p=0·0001). Median time to deterioration of functional status assessed by the FACT-P total score scale was 12·9 months (95% CI 9·0-16·6) in the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group versus 8·3 months (7·4-11·1) in the ADT plus placebos group (HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74-0·99]; p=0·032). INTERPRETATION: The addition of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to ADT in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer improved overall PROs by consistently showing a clinical benefit in the progression of pain, prostate cancer symptoms, fatigue, functional decline, and overall HRQOL. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.
Assuntos
Acetato de Abiraterona/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Androgênios/uso terapêutico , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Prednisona/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/mortalidade , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Humanos , Internacionalidade , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Invasividade Neoplásica/patologia , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Qualidade de Vida , Medição de Risco , Análise de Sobrevida , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X/métodos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study was designed to compare efficacy and safety of abiraterone acetate + prednisone (abiraterone) to prednisone alone in chemotherapy-naïve, asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients from China, Malaysia, Thailand and Russia. METHODS: Adult chemotherapy-naïve patients with confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) grade 0-1, ongoing androgen deprivation (serum testosterone <50 ng/dL) with prostate specific antigen (PSA) or radiographic progression were randomized to receive abiraterone acetate (1000 mg, QD) + prednisone (5 mg, BID) or placebo + prednisone (5 mg, BID), until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or consent withdrawal. Primary endpoint was improvements in time to PSA progression (TTPP). RESULTS: Totally, 313 patients were randomized (abiraterone: n = 157; prednisone: n = 156); and baseline characteristics were balanced. At clinical cut-off (median follow-up time: 3.9 months), 80% patients received treatment (abiraterone: n = 138, prednisone: n = 112). Median time to PSA progression was not reached with abiraterone versus 3.8 months for prednisone, attaining 58% reduction in PSA progression risk (HR = 0.418; p < 0.0001). Abiraterone-treated patients had higher confirmed PSA response rate (50% vs. 21%; relative odds = 2.4; p < 0.0001) and were 5 times more likely to achieve radiographic response than prednisone-treated patients (22.9% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.0369). Median survival was not reached. Most common (≥10% abiraterone vs. prednisone-treated) adverse events: bone pain (7% vs. 14%), pain in extremity (6% vs. 12%), arthralgia (10% vs. 8%), back pain (7% vs. 11%), and hypertension (15% vs. 14%). CONCLUSION: Interim analysis confirmed favorable benefit-to-risk ratio of abiraterone in chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC, consistent with global study, thus supporting use of abiraterone in this patient population.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) is associated with overall survival (OS) in chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Using readily assessable baseline clinical and laboratory parameters, we developed a prognostic index model for rPFS in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients without visceral disease who were treated with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone. METHODS: Data from the abiraterone acetate plus prednisone arm of COU-AA-302 were used. rPFS was defined based on modified Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria. Baseline variables were assessed for association with rPFS through univariate Cox modeling. The lower (LLN) and upper (ULN) limits of laboratory normal were used to dichotomize most laboratory parameters; baseline median was used to dichotomize prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Prognostic factors for rPFS were identified by multivariate Cox modeling. Model accuracy was estimated by the C-index. RESULTS: Presence of lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.76, P < .0001), lactate dehydrogenase > ULN (234 IU/L) (HR = 1.71, P = .0001), ≥ 10 bone metastases (HR = 1.71, P = .0015), hemoglobin ≤ LLN (12.7 g/dL) (HR = 1.47, P = .0030) and PSA > 39.5 ng/mL (HR = 1.42, P = .0078) were associated with poor outcome. Patients were categorized into 3 prognostic groups (good, n = 230; intermediate, n = 152; poor, n = 164) based on number of risk factors. Median rPFS was calculated (27.6, 16.6, and 8.3 months for good, intermediate, and poor, respectively). The C-index was 0.83 (95% confidence interval = 0.73-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic index model for rPFS reveals differential outcomes based on factors readily available in clinical practice. If validated, this model can be integrated into clinical practice and design of risk-stratified trials.