68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI versus MRI alone for evaluation of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a single-centre, single-arm, phase 2/3 imaging trial.

BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines include prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET for detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. However, targeting a single tumour characteristic might not be sufficient to reflect the full extent of disease. Gastrin releasing peptide receptors (GRPR) have been shown to be overexpressed in prostate cancer. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the GRPR-targeting radiopharmaceutical 68Ga-RM2 in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. METHODS: This single-centre, single-arm, phase 2/3 trial was done at Stanford University (USA). Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer, a Karnofsky performance status of 50 or higher, increasing prostate-specific antigen concentration 0·2 ng/mL or more after prostatectomy or 2 ng/mL or more above nadir after radiotherapy, and non-contributory conventional imaging (negative CT or MRI, and bone scan) were eligible. All participants underwent 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with PET-positive findings on 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI compared with MRI alone after initial therapy, at a per-patient and per-lesion level. The primary outcome would be considered met if at least 30% of patients had one or more lesions detected by 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI and the detection by 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI was significantly greater than for MRI. Each PET scan was interpreted by three independent masked readers using a standardised evaluation criteria. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02624518, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2015, and July 27, 2021, 209 men were screened for eligibility, of whom 100 were included in analyses. Median follow-up was 49·3 months (IQR 36·7-59·2). The primary endpoint was met; 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI was positive in 69 (69%) patients and MRI alone was positive in 40 (40%) patients (p<0·0001). In the per-lesion analysis 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI showed significantly higher detection rates than MRI alone (143 vs 96 lesions; p<0·0001). No grade 1 or worse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI showed better diagnostic performance than MRI alone in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Further prospective comparative studies with PSMA-targeted PET are needed to gain a better understanding of GRPR and PSMA expression patterns in these patients. FUNDING: The US Department of Defense.

A review of mitotane in the management of adrenocortical cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Mitotane (Lysodren, o,p'-DDD [1-(o-chlorophenyl)-1-(p-chlorophenyl)-2,2-dichloroethane)] is currently the only United States Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency-approved product for the treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma. OBSERVATIONS: Mitotane is challenging to administer; however, its toxicities (specifically adrenal insufficiency) are well known, and the management of adverse consequences has established approaches. While often viewed through the prism of a cytotoxic agent, it can also interfere with hormone production making it a valuable asset in managing functional ACC. A recently completed prospective trial has shed some light on its use in the adjuvant setting, but further clarity is needed. Many think mitotane has a role in the advanced or metastatic setting, although prospective data are lacking and retrospective analyses are often difficult to interpret. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: When used carefully and thoughtfully, especially in patients with hormonal excess, mitotane is an important component of the treatment armamentarium for ACC.

Same-day post-therapy imaging with a new generation whole-body digital SPECT/CT in assessing treatment response to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy (RLT) represents a significant advancement for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), demonstrating improvements in radiographic progression free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) with a low rate of associated side effects. Currently, most post-therapy SPECT/CT is conducted at 24 h after infusion. This study examines the clinical utility of a next-generation multi-detector Cadmium-Zinc-Telluride (CZT) SPECT/CT system (StarGuide) in same-day post-infusion assessment and early treatment response to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 68 men with progressive mCRPC treated with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 at our center from June 2022 to June 2023 were evaluated. Digital whole-body SPECT/CT imaging was performed after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617infusion (mean ± SD: 1.8 ± 0.6 h, range 1.1-4.9 h). Quantitative analysis of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 positive lesions was performed in patients who underwent at least 2 post-therapy SPECT/CT, using liver parenchyma uptake as reference. Metrics including [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 positive total tumor volume (Lu-TTV), SUVmax and SUVmean were calculated. These quantitative metrics on post-infusion SPECT/CT images after cycles 1, 2 and 3 were correlated with overall survival (OS), prostate specific antigen-progression free survival (PSA-PFS) as defined by prostate cancer working group 3 (PCWG3), and PSA decrease over 50% (PSA50) response rates. RESULTS: 56 patients (means age 76.2 ± 8.1 years, range: 60-93) who underwent at least 2 post-therapy SPECT/CT were included in the image analysis. The whole-body SPECT/CT scans (~ 12 min per scan) were well tolerated, with 221 same-day scans performed (89%). At a median of 10-months follow-up, 33 (58.9%) patients achieved PSA50 after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 treatment and median PSA-PFS was 5.0 months (range: 1.0-15 months) while median OS was not reached. Quantitative analysis of SPECT/CT images showed that 37 patients (66%) had > 30% reduction in Lu-TTV, associated with significantly improved overall survival (median not reached vs. 6 months, P = 0.008) and PSA-PFS (median 6 months vs. 1 months, P < 0.001). However, changes in SUVmax or SUVmean did not correlate with PSA-PFS or OS. CONCLUSION: We successfully implemented same-day post-therapy SPECT/CT after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 infusions. Quantitation of 1-2 h post-therapy SPECT/CT images is a promising method for assessing treatment response. However, the approach is currently limited by its suboptimal detection of small tumor lesions and the necessity of incorporating a third-cycle SPECT/CT to mitigate the effects of any potential treatment-related flare-up. Further investigation in a larger patient cohort and prospective validation is essential to confirm these findings and to explore the role of SPECT/CT as a potential adjunct to PSMA PET/CT in managing mCRPC.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.

Lay healthcare worker financial toxicity intervention: a pilot financial toxicity screening and referral program.

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity is a source of significant distress for patients with urologic cancers, yet few studies have addressed financial burden in this patient population. METHODS: We developed a financial toxicity screening program using a lay health worker (LHW) and social worker (SW) to assess and mitigate financial toxicity in a single academic medical clinic. As part of a quality improvement project, the LHW screened all newly diagnosed patients with advanced stages of prostate, kidney, or urothelial cancer for financial burden using three COST tool questions and referred patients who had significant financial burden to an SW who provided personalized recommendations. The primary outcome was feasibility defined as 80% of patients with financial burden completing the SW consult. Secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, change in COST Tool responses, and qualitative assessment of financial resources utilized. RESULTS: The LHW screened a total of 185 patients for financial toxicity; 82% (n = 152) were male, 65% (n = 120) White, and 75% (n = 139) reported annual household income >$100,000 US Dollars; 60% (n = 114) had prostate cancer. A total of 18 (9.7%) participants screened positive for significant financial burden and were referred to the SW for consultation. All participants (100%) completed and reported satisfaction with the SW consultation and had 0.83 mean lower scores on the COST Tool post-intervention assessment compared to pre-intervention (95% confidence interval [0.26, 1.41]). CONCLUSION: This multidisciplinary financial toxicity intervention using an LHW and SW was feasible, acceptable, and associated with reduced financial burden among patients with advanced stages of urologic cancers. Future work should evaluate the effect of this intervention among cancer patients in diverse settings.

Coaches Activating, Reaching, and Engaging Patients to Engage in Advance Care Planning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Advance care planning (ACP) remains low among patients with advanced cancer. Multilevel interventions compared with clinician-level interventions may be more effective in improving ACP. Objective: To evaluate whether a multilevel intervention could improve clinician-documented ACP compared with a clinician-level intervention alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial, performed from September 12, 2019, through May 12, 2021, included adults with advanced genitourinary cancers at an academic, tertiary hospital. Data analysis was performed by intention to treat from May 1 to August 10, 2023. Intervention: Participants were randomized 1:1 to a 6-month patient-level lay health worker structured ACP education along with a clinician-level intervention composed of 3-hour ACP training and integration of a structured electronic health record documentation template (intervention group) or to the clinician-level intervention alone (control group). Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was ACP documentation in the electronic health record by the oncology clinician within 12 months after randomization. Secondary, exploratory outcomes included shared decision-making, palliative care use, hospice use, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations within 12 months after randomization. Results: Among 402 participants enrolled in the study, median age was 71 years (range, 21-102 years); 361 (89.8%) identified as male. More intervention group participants had oncology clinician-documented ACP than control group participants (82 [37.8%] vs 40 [21.6%]; odds ratio [OR], 2.29; 95% CI, 1.44-3.64). At 12-month follow-up, more intervention than control group participants had palliative care (72 [33.2%] vs 25 [13.5%]; OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.91-5.28) and hospice use (49 [22.6%] vs 19 [10.3%]; OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.44-4.51). There were no differences in the proportion of participants between groups with an emergency department visit (65 [30.0%] vs 61 [33.0%]; OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.33) or hospitalization (89 [41.0%] vs 85 [46.0%]; OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.55-1.22). Intervention group participants had fewer hospitalizations than control group participants (mean [SD] number of hospitalizations per year, 0.87 [1.60] vs 1.04 [1.77]) and a lower risk of hospitalization (incidence rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65-0.98). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, a multilevel intervention improved oncology clinician-documented ACP compared with a clinician-level intervention alone for patients with genitourinary cancer. The intervention is one approach to effectively increase ACP among patients with cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03856463.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Cancer Who Are Ineligible for Cisplatin and Treated With First-Line Enfortumab Vedotin Alone or With Pembrolizumab.

PURPOSE: Locally advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC) affects patients' quality of life (QOL) and functioning. We describe the impact of first-line (1L) enfortumab vedotin (EV) alone or with pembrolizumab (P) on QOL/functioning/symptoms in patients with la/mUC who were cisplatin-ineligible from EV-103 Cohort K. METHODS: In this phase Ib/II trial, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to EV + P or EV monotherapy (mono). Exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) at baseline, once per week for cycles 1-3, and then in every cycle through the end of treatment. Changes in scores from baseline to week 24, reported as least squares mean (standard error), were assessed by mixed models for repeated measures. There were no formal statistical comparisons between treatment arms. RESULTS: Of 149 patients treated, 65 (EV + P) and 63 (EV mono) comprised the PRO analysis set. For EV + P, EORTC QLQ-C30 QOL was maintained through week 24 with improvements in emotional functioning, pain, and insomnia. Clinically meaningful improvements were seen in EORTC QLQ-C30 pain after EV + P at weeks 12 (-14.41 [3.14]) and 24 (-14.99 [3.56]) and BPI-SF worst pain at week 24 (-2.07 [0.37]). For EV mono, EORTC QLQ-C30 QOL remained stable with clinically meaningful improvements in EORTC QLQ-C30 pain (-12.55 [4.27]), insomnia (-14.46 [4.69]), and constipation (-10.09 [4.35]) at week 24. There were small-to-moderate improvements in BPI-SF worst pain at week 24. CONCLUSION: EV + P in patients with la/mUC who were cisplatin-ineligible was associated with preservation or improvement of QOL/functioning/symptoms. Improvement in pain was seen in both PRO instruments and treatment arms. These data complement clinical outcomes of 1L EV + P.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 1.

Purpose: Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy. Results: The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC. Conclusions: CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 2.

Background: Management strategies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have rapidly shifted in recent years. As novel imaging and therapeutic approaches have made their way to the clinic, providers are encountering increasingly challenging clinical scenarios, with limited guidance from the current literature. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) is a multidisciplinary meeting of prostate cancer experts intended to address the many challenges of prostate cancer management. At the first annual USPCC meeting, areas of controversy and consensus were identified during a 2-day meeting that included expert presentations, full-panel discussions, and postdiscussion responses to questions developed by the USPCC cochairs and session moderators. Results: This narrative review covers the USPCC expert discussion and perspectives relevant to mCRPC, including neuroendocrine/aggressive-variant prostate cancer (NEPC/AVPC). Areas of broad agreement identified among USPCC experts include the benefits of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, the use of radioligand therapy in patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive mCRPC, and the need for clinical trials that address real-world clinical questions, including the performance of novel therapies when compared with modern standard-of-care treatment. Ongoing areas of controversy and uncertainty included the appropriateness of PARP inhibitors in patients with non-BRCA1/2 mutations, the optimal definition of PSMA positivity, and systemic therapies for patients with NEPC/AVPC after progression on platinum-based therapies. Conclusions: The first annual USPCC meeting identified several areas of controversy in the management of mCRPC, highlighting the urgent need for clinical trials designed to facilitate treatment selection and sequencing in this heterogeneous disease state.