Effect of Metformin vs Placebo on Invasive Disease-Free Survival in Patients With Breast Cancer: The MA.32 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Metformin, a biguanide commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes, has been associated with potential beneficial effects across breast cancer subtypes in observational and preclinical studies. Objective: To determine whether the administration of adjuvant metformin (vs placebo) to patients with breast cancer without diabetes improves outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: MA.32, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, conducted in Canada, Switzerland, US, and UK, enrolled 3649 patients with high-risk nonmetastatic breast cancer receiving standard therapy between August 2010 and March 2013, with follow-up to October 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized (stratified for hormone receptor [estrogen receptor and/or progesterone receptor {ER/PgR}] status, positive vs negative; body mass index, ≤30 vs >30; human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [ERBB2, formerly HER2 or HER2/neu], positive vs negative; and any vs no chemotherapy) to 850 mg of oral metformin twice a day (n = 1824) or oral placebo twice a day (n = 1825) for 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Of the 8 secondary outcomes, overall survival, distant relapse-free survival, and breast cancer-free interval were analyzed. Results: Of the 3649 randomized patients (mean age, 52.4 years; 3643 women [99.8%]), all (100%) were included in analyses. After a second interim analysis, futility was declared for patients who were ER/PgR-, so the primary analysis was conducted for 2533 patients who were ER/PgR+. The median duration of follow-up in the ER/PgR+ group was 96.2 months (range, 0.2-121 months). Invasive disease-free survival events occurred in 465 patients who were ER/PgR+. The incidence rates for invasive disease-free survival events were 2.78 per 100 patient-years in the metformin group vs 2.74 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84-1.21; P = .93), and the incidence rates for death were 1.46 per 100 patient-years in the metformin group vs 1.32 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.86-1.41; P = .47). Among patients who were ER/PgR-, followed up for a median of 94.1 months, incidence of invasive disease-free survival events was 3.58 vs 3.60 per 100 patient-years, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.30; P = .92). None of the 3 secondary outcomes analyzed in the ER/PgR+ group had statistically significant differences. Grade 3 nonhematological toxic events occurred more frequently in patients taking metformin than in patients taking placebo (21.5% vs 17.5%, respectively, P = .003). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the metformin vs placebo groups were hypertension (2.4% vs 1.9%), irregular menses (1.5% vs 1.4%), and diarrhea (1.9% vs 7.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with high-risk operable breast cancer without diabetes, the addition of metformin vs placebo to standard breast cancer treatment did not significantly improve invasive disease-free survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01101438.

Optimal sequencing of enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone and enzalutamide are both used for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We aimed to determine the best sequence in which to use both drugs, as well as their second-line efficacy. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2, crossover trial done in six cancer centres in British Columbia, Canada, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with newly-diagnosed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer without neuroendocrine differentiation and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 2 or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated random number table to receive either abiraterone acetate 1000 mg orally once daily plus prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily until PSA progression followed by crossover to enzalutamide 160 mg orally once daily (group A), or the opposite sequence (group B). Treatment was not masked to investigators or participants. Primary endpoints were time to second PSA progression and PSA response (≥30% decline from baseline) on second-line therapy, analysed by intention-to-treat in all randomly assigned patients and in patients who crossed over, respectively. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02125357. FINDINGS: Between Oct 21, 2014, and Dec 13, 2016, 202 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either group A (n=101) or group B (n=101). At the time of data cutoff, 73 (72%) patients in group A and 75 (74%) patients in group B had crossed over. Time to second PSA progression was longer in group A than in group B (median 19·3 months [95% CI 16·0-30·5] vs 15·2 months [95% CI 11·9-19·8] months; hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·45-0·97, p=0·036), at a median follow-up of 22·8 months (IQR 10·3-33·4). PSA responses to second-line therapy were seen in 26 (36%) of 73 patients for enzalutamide and three (4%) of 75 for abiraterone (χ2 p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events throughout the trial were hypertension (27 [27%] of 101 patients in group A vs 18 [18%] of 101 patients in group B) and fatigue (six [10%] vs four [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 15 (15%) of 101 patients in group A and 20 (20%) of 101 patients in group B. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Enzalutamide showed activity as a second-line novel androgen receptor pathway inhibitor, whereas abiraterone acetate did not, leading to a longer time to second PSA progression for the sequence of abiraterone followed by enzalutamide than with the opposite treatment sequence. Our data suggest that using a sequencing strategy of abiraterone acetate followed by enzalutamide provides the greatest clinical benefit. FUNDING: Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Prostate Cancer Canada, Movember Foundation, Prostate Cancer Foundation, Terry Fox New Frontiers Program, BC Cancer Foundation, Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, Janssen, and Astellas.

Evolution of Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in ctDNA during Sequential Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibition.

PURPOSE: Cross-resistance renders multiple lines of androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibitors increasingly futile in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to determine acquired genomic contributors to cross-resistance. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We collected 458 serial plasma cell-free DNA samples at baseline and progression timepoints from 202 patients with mCRPC receiving sequential AR signaling inhibitors (abiraterone and enzalutamide) in a randomized phase II clinical trial (NCT02125357). We utilized deep targeted and whole-exome sequencing to compare baseline and posttreatment somatic genomic profiles in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). RESULTS: Patient ctDNA abundance was correlated across plasma collections and independently prognostic for sequential therapy response and overall survival. Most driver alterations in established prostate cancer genes were consistently detected in ctDNA over time. However, shifts in somatic populations after treatment were identified in 53% of patients, particularly after strong treatment responses. Treatment-associated changes converged upon the AR gene, with an average 50% increase in AR copy number, changes in AR mutation frequencies, and a 2.5-fold increase in the proportion of patients carrying AR ligand binding domain truncating rearrangements. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that the dominant AR genotype continues to evolve during sequential lines of AR inhibition and drives acquired resistance in patients with mCRPC.

Health-related Quality of Life for Abiraterone Plus Prednisone Versus Enzalutamide in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from a Phase II Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone and enzalutamide are associated with side effects that may impair health-related quality of life (HRQoL). OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported HRQoL, depression symptoms, and cognitive function for abiraterone versus enzalutamide. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We randomized 202 patients in a phase II study of abiraterone versus enzalutamide for first-line treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02125357). INTERVENTION: Patients completed Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) questionnaires, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) cognitive assessments at baseline and on treatment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: To compare the change in FACT-P scores over time between treatment arms, we used a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM). For FACT-P domains where there was an interaction between the treatment arm and age, we constructed separate models for patients aged <75 and ≥75yr. We compared the proportion of patients with clinically meaningful change from baseline for FACT-P, and the proportion of patients with an abnormal score and median change from baseline for PHQ-9 and MoCA using Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In the MMRM analysis, there was a positive test for interaction in the treatment arm by age for total FACT-P (p=0.048). FACT-P change from baseline over time was better for abiraterone than for enzalutamide in the ≥75-yr model (p=0.003), with no difference in the <75-yr model (p>0.9). A higher proportion of patients experienced clinically meaningful worsening with enzalutamide for the physical and functional well-being domains (37% vs 21%, p=0.013; 39% vs 23%, p=0.015). The distribution of change in PHQ-9 scores from baseline favored abiraterone at weeks 4, 8, and 12. These analyses were not prespecified, and results should be considered to be hypothesis generating. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported outcomes favored abiraterone compared with enzalutamide with differences in FACT-P HRQoL and PHQ-9 depression scores. Differences in the total FACT-P scores were seen only in the elderly patient subgroup. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we examined the change in patient-reported quality-of-life scores from the start of treatment over time for patients treated with abiraterone versus enzalutamide for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We found that elderly patients treated with abiraterone had better quality of life over time, with no difference between treatments for the younger subgroup of patients.

Circulating Tumor DNA Genomics Correlate with Resistance to Abiraterone and Enzalutamide in Prostate Cancer.

Primary resistance to androgen receptor (AR)-directed therapies in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is poorly understood. We randomized 202 patients with treatment-naïve mCRPC to abiraterone or enzalutamide and performed whole-exome and deep targeted 72-gene sequencing of plasma cell-free DNA prior to therapy. For these agents, which have never been directly compared, time to progression was similar. Defects in BRCA2 and ATM were strongly associated with poor clinical outcomes independently of clinical prognostic factors and circulating tumor DNA abundance. Somatic alterations in TP53, previously linked to reduced tumor dependency on AR signaling, were also independently associated with rapid resistance. Although detection of AR amplifications did not outperform standard prognostic biomarkers, AR gene structural rearrangements truncating the ligand binding domain were identified in several patients with primary resistance. These findings establish genomic drivers of resistance to first-line AR-directed therapy in mCRPC and identify potential minimally invasive biomarkers.Significance: Leveraging plasma specimens collected in a large randomized phase II trial, we report the relative impact of common circulating tumor DNA alterations on patient response to the most widely used therapies for advanced prostate cancer. Our findings suggest that liquid biopsy analysis can guide the use of AR-targeted therapy in general practice. Cancer Discov; 8(4); 444-57. ©2018 AACR.See related commentary by Jayaram et al., p. 392This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 371.

Effect of metformin vs placebo on and metabolic factors in NCIC CTG MA.32.

BACKGROUND: Metformin may improve metabolic factors (insulin, glucose, leptin, highly sensitive C-reactive protein [hs-CRP]) associated with poor breast cancer outcomes. The NCIC Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) MA.32 investigates effects of metformin vs placebo on invasive disease-free survival and other outcomes in early breast cancer. Maintaining blinding of investigators to outcomes, we conducted a planned, Data Safety Monitoring Committee-approved, analysis of the effect of metformin vs placebo on weight and metabolic factors at six months, including examination of interactions with baseline body mass index (BMI) and insulin, in the first 492 patients with paired blood samples. METHODS: Eligible nondiabetic subjects with T1-3, N0-3, M0 breast cancer who had completed surgery and (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy (if given) provided fasting plasma samples at random assignment and at six months. Glucose was measured locally; blood was aliquoted, frozen, and stored at -80°C. Paired plasma aliquots were analyzed for insulin, hs-CRP, and leptin. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated and comparisons analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank test. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Mean age was 52.1±9.5 years in the metformin group and 52.6 ± 9.8 years in the placebo group. Arms were balanced for estrogen/progesterone receptor, BMI, prior (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, and stage. At six months, decreases in weight and blood variables were statistically significantly greater in the metformin arm (vs placebo) in univariate analyses: weight -3.0%, glucose -3.8%, insulin -11.1%, homeostasis model assessment -17.1%, leptin -20.2%, hs-CRP -6.7%; all P values were less than or equal to .03. There was no statistically significant interaction of change in these variables with baseline BMI or insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin statistically significantly improved weight, insulin, glucose, leptin, and CRP at six months. Effects did not vary by baseline BMI or fasting insulin.