Organoid cultures derived from patients with advanced prostate cancer.

The lack of in vitro prostate cancer models that recapitulate the diversity of human prostate cancer has hampered progress in understanding disease pathogenesis and therapy response. Using a 3D organoid system, we report success in long-term culture of prostate cancer from biopsy specimens and circulating tumor cells. The first seven fully characterized organoid lines recapitulate the molecular diversity of prostate cancer subtypes, including TMPRSS2-ERG fusion, SPOP mutation, SPINK1 overexpression, and CHD1 loss. Whole-exome sequencing shows a low mutational burden, consistent with genomics studies, but with mutations in FOXA1 and PIK3R1, as well as in DNA repair and chromatin modifier pathways that have been reported in advanced disease. Loss of p53 and RB tumor suppressor pathway function are the most common feature shared across the organoid lines. The methodology described here should enable the generation of a large repertoire of patient-derived prostate cancer lines amenable to genetic and pharmacologic studies.

Clinical Impact of a Rapid Genetic Testing Model for Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Genetic testing may alter clinical management for individuals with metastatic prostate cancer by identifying additional therapies. Traditional counseling models are unlikely to enable time-sensitive therapeutic decision-making. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and clinical impact of an alternative hereditary genetic testing model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of a multicenter, single-arm prospective trial, individuals with advanced prostate cancer were referred by their oncologist for testing of 14 genes associated with hereditary prostate cancer. Pretest education (brochure and video) was provided in the oncology clinic. Questionnaires assessing participant satisfaction with both pretest education and decision to undergo genetic testing were collected. A genetic counselor contacted participants by phone to obtain family history and discuss results. Medical records were queried to determine whether a change in clinical management was discussed. RESULTS: Of 501 participants consented to germline analysis, 51 (10.2%) had at least 1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant. Change in treatment was discussed with 22/48 (45.8%) of eligible participants who tested positive. Feasibility of this model was assessed by participant satisfaction and turnaround time. Average±SD satisfaction with the pretest education (15.5±2.2, 4-20 scale) and with the decision to undergo genetic testing (17.1±2.9, 4-20 scale) were both high. Results were returned 20 days (median) after sample collection. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist-initiated germline genetic testing in collaboration with a genetic counselor is a feasible approach to testing advanced prostate cancer patients with impactful clinical actionability. The testing model and educational material serve as resources to clinicians treating prostate cancer patients.

Niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA repair gene defects (GALAHAD): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers are enriched for DNA repair gene defects (DRDs) that can be susceptible to synthetic lethality through inhibition of PARP proteins. We evaluated the anti-tumour activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers and DRDs who progressed on previous treatment with an androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mixed histology accepted, with the exception of the small cell pure phenotype) and DRDs (assessed in blood, tumour tissue, or saliva), with progression on a previous next-generation androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 or Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were eligible. Enrolled patients received niraparib 300 mg orally once daily until treatment discontinuation, death, or study termination. For the final study analysis, all patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis population; patients with germline pathogenic or somatic biallelic pathogenic alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) or biallelic alterations in other prespecified DRDs (non-BRCA cohort) were included in the efficacy analysis population. The primary endpoint was objective response rate in patients with BRCA alterations and measurable disease (measurable BRCA cohort). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02854436. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2016, and June 26, 2020, 289 patients were enrolled, of whom 182 (63%) had received three or more systemic therapies for prostate cancer. 223 (77%) of 289 patients were included in the overall efficacy analysis population, which included BRCA (n=142) and non-BRCA (n=81) cohorts. At final analysis, with a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 6·6-13·3), the objective response rate in the measurable BRCA cohort (n=76) was 34·2% (95% CI 23·7-46·0). In the safety analysis population, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were nausea (169 [58%] of 289), anaemia (156 [54%]), and vomiting (111 [38%]); the most common grade 3 or worse events were haematological (anaemia in 95 [33%] of 289; thrombocytopenia in 47 [16%]; and neutropenia in 28 [10%]). Of 134 (46%) of 289 patients with at least one serious treatment-emergent adverse event, the most common were also haematological (thrombocytopenia in 17 [6%] and anaemia in 13 [4%]). Two adverse events with fatal outcome (one patient with urosepsis in the BRCA cohort and one patient with sepsis in the non-BRCA cohort) were deemed possibly related to niraparib treatment. INTERPRETATION: Niraparib is tolerable and shows anti-tumour activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DRDs, particularly in those with BRCA alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Clinical annotations for prostate cancer research: Defining data elements, creating a reproducible analytical pipeline, and assessing data quality.

BACKGROUND: Routine clinical data from clinical charts are indispensable for retrospective and prospective observational studies and clinical trials. Their reproducibility is often not assessed. We developed a prostate cancer-specific database for clinical annotations and evaluated data reproducibility. METHODS: For men with prostate cancer who had clinical-grade paired tumor-normal sequencing at a comprehensive cancer center, we performed team-based retrospective data collection from the electronic medical record using a defined source hierarchy. We developed an open-source R package for data processing. With blinded repeat annotation by a reference medical oncologist, we assessed data completeness, reproducibility of team-based annotations, and impact of measurement error on bias in survival analyses. RESULTS: Data elements on demographics, diagnosis and staging, disease state at the time of procuring a genomically characterized sample, and clinical outcomes were piloted and then abstracted for 2261 patients (with 2631 samples). Completeness of data elements was generally high. Comparing to the repeat annotation by a medical oncologist blinded to the database (100 patients/samples), reproducibility of annotations was high; T stage, metastasis date, and presence and date of castration resistance had lower reproducibility. Impact of measurement error on estimates for strong prognostic factors was modest. CONCLUSIONS: With a prostate cancer-specific data dictionary and quality control measures, manual clinical annotations by a multidisciplinary team can be scalable and reproducible. The data dictionary and the R package for reproducible data processing are freely available to increase data quality and efficiency in clinical prostate cancer research.

Analysis of AR-FL and AR-V1 in Whole Blood of Patients with Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer as a Tool for Predicting Response to Abiraterone Acetate.

PURPOSE: Reliable molecular diagnostic tools are still unavailable for making informed treatment decisions and monitoring the response in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer. We evaluated the significance of whole blood circulating androgen receptor transcripts of full length (AR-FL) and splice variants (AR-V1, AR-V3 and AR-V7) as biomarkers of abiraterone acetate treatment resistance in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After retrospective analysis in 112 prostate specimens AR-FL, AR-V1, AR-V3 and AR-V7 were evaluated in 185 serial blood samples, prospectively collected from 102 patients with castration resistant prostate cancer before and during abiraterone acetate therapy via reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: AR-FL was present in all samples while AR-V1, AR-V3, AR-V7 and at least 1 of them was detected in 17%, 55%, 65% and 81% of castration resistant prostate cancer blood samples, respectively. The highest amount of AR-V1 was found in blood of patients whose response time was short and medium in comparison to extended. Patients with a higher level of AR-FL and/or AR-V1 had the shortest progression-free survival and overall survival (p <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Blood circulating AR-FL or AR-V1 can serve as blood based biomarkers for identification of the primary resistance to abiraterone acetate and the tool to monitor de novo resistance development during abiraterone acetate treatment.

A phase I study of the antibody drug conjugate ASG-5ME, an SLC44A4-targeting antibody carrying auristatin E, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Background Antibody drug conjugates (ADC) offer the potential of maximizing efficacy while minimizing systemic toxicity. ASG-5ME, an SLC44A4-targeting antibody carrying monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE), a microtubule-disrupting agent, was investigated in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer. Methods The primary objective of this phase I study was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose. Secondary objectives were safety, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetic properties, immunogenicity, and the detection of SLC44A4 on circulating tumor cells. Patients (pts) were treated among 7 dose levels every 21 days. A dose expansion phase enrolled 20 additional pts. at the MTD. Results Twenty-six and 20 pts. were treated in dose escalation and dose expansion cohorts respectively. The MTD was 2.7 mg/kg. Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in 4 pts.: grade 3 fatigue (n = 1); grade 3 abdominal pain, diarrhea and fatigue (n = 1); grade 4 neutropenia and hyponatremia and grade 3 maculopapular rash, constipation and hypoxia (n = 1); grade 3 troponin elevation without cardiac sequelae (n = 1). Fatigue and diarrhea were the most prevalent adverse events (AEs) across all cycles. Two grade 5 AEs occurred in the dose expansion cohort, each after 1 dose: 1 pt. developed grade 3 hyperglycemia, renal insufficiency and leukopenia; 1 pt. developed grade 3 hyperglycemia complicated by bacteremia. Free MMAE levels did not accumulate with repeat dosing. Of evaluable pts., 52% had either stable disease or a partial response. Conclusions Further development of ASG-5ME is not being pursued due to its narrow therapeutic index. Some toxicities were potentially related to on-target effects on normal tissue expressing the SLC44A4 protein. However, other toxicities were consistent with studies of previous MMAE-containing ADCs. Unconjugated MMAE is a less likely etiology based on prior data.

Pharmacokinetics and Biodistribution of a [89Zr]Zr-DFO-MSTP2109A Anti-STEAP1 Antibody in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Patients.

A six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of prostate-1 (STEAP1) is a newly identified target in prostate cancer. The use of radio-labeled STEAP1-targeting antibodies with positron emission tomography (PET) may allow for detection of sites of metastatic prostate cancer and may refine patient selection for antigen-directed therapies. This was a prospective study in seven patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had at least one archival biopsy that was STEAP1-positive by immunohistochemistry. Patients received intravenous injections of ∼185 MBq and 10 mg of [89Zr]Zr-DFO-MSTP2109A, a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody directed against STEAP1. PET/CT images, blood samples, and whole-body counts were monitored longitudinally in six patients. Here, we report on safety, biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, dose estimates to normal tissues, and initial tumor targeting for this group of patients. There was no significant acute or subacute toxicity. Favorable biodistribution and enhanced lesion uptake (in both bone and soft tissue) were observed on imaging using a mass of 10 mg of DFO-MSTP2109A. The best lesion discrimination was seen at the latest imaging time, a median of 6 days postadministration. Pharmacokinetics showed a median serum T1/2 ß of 198 h, volume of central compartment of 3.54 L (similar to plasma volume), and clearance of 19.7 mL/h. The median biologic T1/2 for whole-body retention was 469 h. The highest mean absorbed doses to normal organs (mGy/MBq) were 1.18, 1.11, 0.78, 0.73, and 0.71 for liver, heart wall, lung, kidney, and spleen, respectively. Excellent targeting of metastatic prostate sites in both bone and soft tissue was observed, with an optimal imaging time of 6 days postadministration. The liver and heart were the normal organs that experienced the highest absorbed doses. The pharmacokinetics were similar to other antibodies without major cross-reactivity with normal tissues. A more detailed analysis of lesion targeting in a larger patient population with correlation to immunohistology and standard imaging modalities has been reported.

Clinical, Imaging, and Technical Factors Associated with Successful Genomic Profiling of Bone Biopsy Tissue in Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The source of tissue for genomic profiling of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is often limited to osseous metastases. To guide patient management, metastatic site selection and the technique for targeted bone biopsies are critical for identifying deleterious gene mutations. Our objective was to identify key parameters associated with successful large-panel DNA sequencing. METHODS: We analyzed parameters for 243 men with progressing mCRPC who underwent 269 bone biopsies for genomic profiling between 2014 and 2018. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for clinical, imaging (bone scan; fluorodeoxyglucose [FDG] positron emission tomography [PET]; computed tomography [CT]; magnetic resonance imaging), and technical (biopsy site, number of samples, needle gauge) features associated with successful genomic profiling. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 159 of 269 biopsies (59%) generated sufficient tumor material for a genomic profile. Seventy (26%) of the failures were histopathologically negative for mCRPC and 40 (15%) had insufficient tumor for genomic profiling. Of 199 mCRPC samples submitted for molecular testing, 159 (80%) yielded a genomic profile. On univariate analysis, PSA, serum acid phosphatase, number of biopsy samples, FDG PET positivity, CT attenuation, and CT morphology were significantly associated with genomic profiling success. On multivariate analysis, higher FDG maximum standardized uptake value (odds ratio [OR] 7.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.01-18.78; p < 0.001), higher number of biopsy samples (OR 4.73, 95% CI 1.49-15.02; p = 0.008), and lower mean CT attenuation (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.18-0.89; p = 0.025) were significantly associated with sequencing success. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In patients with mCRPC, bone biopsies from sites with metabolic activity and lower CT attenuation are associated with higher success rates for genomic profiling via a large-panel DNA sequencing platform. PATIENT SUMMARY: We identified factors associated with successful genetic testing of bone tissue for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Our findings may help in guiding the right scan technique and biopsy site for personalized treatment planning.

Xaluritamig, a STEAP1 × CD3 XmAb 2+1 Immune Therapy for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from Dose Exploration in a First-in-Human Study.

Xaluritamig (AMG 509) is a six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate 1 (STEAP1)-targeted T-cell engager designed to facilitate lysis of STEAP1-expressing cancer cells, such as those in advanced prostate cancer. This first-in-human study reports monotherapy dose exploration for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), primarily taxane pretreated. Ninety-seven patients received ≥1 intravenous dose ranging from 0.001 to 2.0 mg weekly or every 2 weeks. MTD was identified as 1.5 mg i.v. weekly via a 3-step dose. The most common treatment-related adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 72%), fatigue (45%), and myalgia (34%). CRS occurred primarily during cycle 1 and improved with premedication and step dosing. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and RECIST responses across cohorts were encouraging [49% PSA50; 24% objective response rate (ORR)], with greater frequency at target doses ≥0.75 mg (59% PSA50; 41% ORR). Xaluritamig is a novel immunotherapy for prostate cancer that has shown encouraging results supporting further development. SIGNIFICANCE: Xaluritamig demonstrated encouraging responses (PSA and RECIST) compared with historical established treatments for patients with late-line mCRPC. This study provides proof of concept for T-cell engagers as a potential treatment for prostate cancer, validates STEAP1 as a target, and supports further clinical investigation of xaluritamig in prostate cancer. See related commentary by Hage Chehade et al., p. 20. See related article by Nolan-Stevaux et al., p. 90. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 5.

Repurposing itraconazole as a treatment for advanced prostate cancer: a noncomparative randomized phase II trial in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The antifungal drug itraconazole inhibits angiogenesis and Hedgehog signaling and delays tumor growth in murine prostate cancer xenograft models. We conducted a noncomparative, randomized, phase II study evaluating the antitumor efficacy of two doses of oral itraconazole in men with metastatic prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 46 men with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) to receive low-dose (200 mg/day) or high-dose (600 mg/day) itraconazole until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (PPFS) rate at 24 weeks; a 45% success rate in either arm was prespecified as constituting clinical significance. Secondary endpoints included the progression-free survival (PFS) rate and PSA response rate (Prostate Cancer Working Group criteria). Exploratory outcomes included circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration, serum androgen measurements, as well as pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses. RESULTS: The high-dose arm enrolled to completion (n = 29), but the low-dose arm closed early (n = 17) because of a prespecified futility rule. The PPFS rates at 24 weeks were 11.8% in the low-dose arm and 48.0% in the high-dose arm. The median PFS times were 11.9 weeks and 35.9 weeks, respectively. PSA response rates were 0% and 14.3%, respectively. In addition, itraconazole had favorable effects on CTC counts, and it suppressed Hedgehog signaling in skin biopsy samples. Itraconazole did not reduce serum testosterone or dehydroepiandrostenedione sulfate levels. Common toxicities included fatigue, nausea, anorexia, rash, and a syndrome of hypokalemia, hypertension, and edema. CONCLUSION: High-dose itraconazole (600 mg/day) has modest antitumor activity in men with metastatic CRPC that is not mediated by testosterone suppression.

Prognostic value of blood mRNA expression signatures in castration-resistant prostate cancer: a prospective, two-stage study.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers are urgently needed to dissect the heterogeneity of prostate cancer between patients to improve treatment and accelerate drug development. We analysed blood mRNA expression arrays to identify patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with poorer outcome. METHODS: Whole blood was collected into PAXgene tubes from patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and patients with prostate cancer selected for active surveillance. In stage I (derivation set), patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer were used as cases and patients under active surveillance were used as controls. These patients were recruited from The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (Sutton, UK) and The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre (Glasgow, UK). In stage II (validation-set), patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer recruited from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (New York, USA) were assessed. Whole-blood RNA was hybridised to Affymetrix U133plus2 microarrays. Expression profiles were analysed with Bayesian latent process decomposition (LPD) to identify RNA expression profiles associated with castration-resistant prostate cancer subgroups; these profiles were then confirmed by quantative reverse transcriptase (qRT) PCR studies and correlated with overall survival in both the test-set and validation-set. FINDINGS: LPD analyses of the mRNA expression data divided the evaluable patients in stage I (n=94) into four groups. All patients in LPD1 (14 of 14) and most in LPD2 (17 of 18) had castration-resistant prostate cancer. Patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and those under active surveillance comprised LPD3 (15 of 31 castration-resistant prostate cancer) and LDP4 (12 of 21 castration-resistant prostate cancer). Patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer in the LPD1 subgroup had features associated with worse prognosis and poorer overall survival than patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer in other LPD subgroups (LPD1 overall survival 10·7 months [95% CI 4·1-17·2] vs non-LPD1 25·6 months [18·0-33·4]; p<0·0001). A nine-gene signature verified by qRT-PCR classified patients into this LPD1 subgroup with a very low percentage of misclassification (1·2%). The ten patients who were initially unclassifiable by the LPD analyses were subclassified by this signature. We confirmed the prognostic utility of this nine-gene signature in the validation castration-resistant prostate cancer cohort, where LPD1 membership was also associated with worse overall survival (LPD1 9·2 months [95% CI 2·1-16·4] vs non-LPD1 21·6 months [7·5-35·6]; p=0·001), and remained an independent prognostic factor in multivariable analyses for both cohorts. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that whole-blood gene profiling could identify gene-expression signatures that stratify patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer into distinct prognostic groups. FUNDING: AstraZeneca, Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Prostate Cancer Charity, Prostate Cancer Foundation.

Cancer Associated Macrophage-like Cells Are Prognostic for Highly Aggressive Prostate Cancer in Both the Non-Metastatic and Metastatic Settings.

Despite advancements in the early-stage detection and expansion of treatments for prostate cancer (PCa), patient mortality rates remain high in patients with aggressive disease and the overtreatment of indolent disease remains a major issue. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a standard PCa blood biomarker, is limited in its ability to differentiate disease subtypes resulting in the overtreatment of non-aggressive indolent disease. Here we assess engorged cancer-associated macrophage-like cells (CAMLs), a ≥50 µm, cancer-specific, polynucleated circulating cell type found in the blood of patients with PCa as a potential companion biomarker to PSA for patient risk stratification. We found that rising PSA is positively correlated with increasing CAML size (r = 0.307, p = 0.004) and number of CAMLs in circulation (r = 0.399, p < 0.001). Over a 2-year period, the presence of a single engorged CAML was associated with 20.9 times increased likelihood of progression (p = 0.016) in non-metastatic PCa, and 2.4 times likelihood of progression (p = 0.031) with 5.4 times likelihood of death (p < 0.001) in metastatic PCa. These preliminary data suggest that CAML cell monitoring, in combination with PSA, may aid in differentiating non-aggressive from aggressive PCas by adding biological information that complements traditional clinical biomarkers, thereby helping guide treatment strategies.

PSMA-positive Circulating Tumor Cell Detection and Outcomes with Abiraterone or Enzalutamide Treatment in Men with Metastatic Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: In men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radioligand therapy has drastically improved clinical outcomes. A liquid biopsy characterizing PSMA expression could be useful in guiding optimal therapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the prospective multicenter PROPHECY (Prospective CiRculating PrOstate Cancer Predictors in HighEr Risk mCRPC StudY) trial of men with mCRPC (n = 118) treated with abiraterone (abi) or enzalutamide (enza). Circulating tumor cells (CTC) were enriched (CTC/mL) and characterized for PSMA protein expression/heterogeneity at baseline and progression. We utilized proportional hazards modeling of the association between PSMA-positive (PSMA+) CTC enumeration with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Overall, 97 men with mCRPC had evaluable blood samples for baseline CTC PSMA detection; 78 men (80%) had detectable CTCs. Of these, 55% (43/78) of men had any PSMA CTC detection, 21% (16/78) had ≥2 PSMA+ CTCs/mL, and 19% (8/43) were 100% PSMA+. At progression on abi/enza, 88% (50/57) of men had detectable CTCs, 68% (34/50) had any PSMA CTCs, and 12% (4/34) had 100% PSMA+ CTCs. Among paired cases (n = 57), PSMA+ CTC detection increased slightly after abi/enza progression. Using an optimal cutoff of ≥2 PSMA+ CTCs/mL, median OS was 26, 21, and 11 months for men without CTCs, PSMA- CTCs, and PSMA+ CTCs. Adjusting for prior abi/enza therapy, Halabi clinical risk score, and CTC enumeration, the HRs for OS and PFS for PSMA+ CTC+ were 3.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1-7.8] and 2.3 (95% CI = 0.9-5.8). CONCLUSIONS: We observed PSMA CTC heterogeneity between and within patients with mCRPC over time during abi/enza progression. CTC PSMA enumeration was adversely prognostic independent of clinical factors and disease burden. Further validation is warranted in the context of PSMA-targeted therapies.

Evaluating Immune-Related Adverse Events Using PRO-CTCAE in a Phase II Study of Ipilimumab for Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

Introduction: Use of the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) during chemotherapy is associated with decreased hospitalization rates, improved quality of life, and longer survival. Limited data exist on the benefit of this symptom assessment tool for monitoring immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Methods: We incorporated irAE-related items from the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) PRO-CTCAE in a trial evaluating ipilimumab in combination with androgen deprivation therapy in 16 patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For comparison, NCI's CTCAE version 4.0 was used by clinicians. Results: IrAE-related PRO-CTCAE surveys and matched CTCAEs (184 pairs) reporting abdominal pain, diarrhea, fatigue, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, rash, and pruritus were collected at each treatment administration and during follow-up. Fatigue, diarrhea, rash, and pruritus were the symptoms most frequently reported by both patients and clinicians. Agreement was lowest for pruritus (κ = 0.10) and highest for rash (κ = 0.64). IrAEs were more commonly reported and of higher grade with PRO-CTCAE scores compared with CTCAE grades. Conclusion: PRO-CTCAEs focused on irAEs capture the patient's immunotherapy experience while complementing the clinician's toxicity assessment measures. Further study is needed to assess PRO-CTCAE's utility in identifying and managing irAEs.

Health-related quality of life in GALAHAD: A multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of niraparib for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA-repair gene defects.

BACKGROUND: Niraparib is a highly selective poly (adenosine diphosphateribose) polymerase-1 and poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase-2 inhibitor indicated for select patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. The phase 2 GALAHAD trial (NCT02854436) demonstrated that niraparib monotherapy is tolerable and efficacious in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, particularly those with breast cancer gene (BRCA) alterations who had progressed on prior androgen signaling inhibitor therapy and taxane-based chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To report the prespecified patient-reported outcomes analysis from GALAHAD. METHODS: Eligible patients with alterations to BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) and with pathogenic alterations in other HRR genes (other HRR cohort) were enrolled and received niraparib 300 mg once daily. Patient-reported outcome instruments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate and the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. Changes from baseline were compared using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. RESULTS: On average, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved in the BRCA cohort by cycle 3 (mean change = 6.03; 95% CI = 2.76-9.29) and was maintained above baseline until cycle 10 (mean change = 2.84; 95% CI = -1.95 to 7.63), whereas the other HRR cohort showed no early change in HRQoL from baseline (mean change = -0.07; 95% CI = -4.69 to 4.55) and declined by cycle 10 (mean change = -5.10; 95% CI = -15.3 to 5.06). Median time to deterioration in pain intensity and pain interference could not be estimated in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced mCRPC and BRCA alterations treated with niraparib experienced more meaningful improvement in overall HRQoL, pain intensity, and pain interference compared with those with other HRR alterations. In this population of castrate, heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC and HRR alterations, stabilization, and improvement in HRQoL may be relevant to consider when making treatment decisions. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Janssen Research & Development, LLC (no grant number). Dr Smith has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, Janssen, and Lilly; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Sandhu has received grants from Amgen, Endocyte, and Genentech; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Merck; and has received personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck Serono. Dr George has received personal fees from the American Association for Cancer Research, Axess Oncology, Capio Biosciences, Constellation Pharma, EMD Serono, Flatiron, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Michael J. Hennessey Association, Millennium Medical Publishing, Modra Pharma, Myovant Sciences, Inc., NCI Genitourinary, Nektar Therapeutics, Physician Education Resource, Propella TX, RevHealth, LLC, and UroGPO; has received grants and personal fees from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bayer and UroToday; has received grants from Calithera and Novartis; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Exelixis, Inc., Sanofi, and Janssen Pharma. Dr Chi has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, POINT Biopharma, Roche, and Sanofi; and has received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Saad has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen during the conduct of the study; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Bayer, Myovant, Sanofi, and Novartis. Dr Thiery-Vuillemin has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Astellas Pharma; and has received personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Olmos has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and has received nonfinancial support from Astellas Pharma, F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Genentech, and Ipsen. Dr Danila has received research support from the US Department of Defense, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, Stand Up to Cancer, Janssen Research & Development, Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Agensys, Genentech, and CreaTV. Dr Gafanov has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study. Dr Castro has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Janssen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Clovis. Dr Moon has received research funding from SeaGen, HuyaBio, Janssen, BMS, Aveo, Xencor, and has received personal fees from Axess Oncology, MJH, EMD Serono, and Pfizer. Dr Joshua has received nonfinancial support from Janssen; consulted or served in an advisory role for Neoleukin, Janssen Oncology, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Noxopharm, IQvia, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, and Eisai; and received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mayne Pharma, Roche/Genentech, Bayer, MacroGenics, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Corvus Pharmaceuticals. Drs Mason, Liu, Bevans, Lopez-Gitlitz, and Francis and Mr Espina are employees of Janssen Research & Development. Dr Mason owns stocks with Janssen. Dr Fizazi has participated in advisory boards and talks for Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, MSD, Novartis/AAA, Pfizer, and Sanofi, with honoraria to his institution (Institut Gustave Roussy); has participated in advisory boards for, with personal honoraria from, Arvinas, CureVac, MacroGenics, and Orion. Study registration number: NCT02854436.

Gene-based Confirmatory Germline Testing Following Tumor-only Sequencing of Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tumor-only genomic profiling is an important tool in therapeutic management of men with prostate cancer. Since clinically actionable germline variants may be reflected in tumor profiling, it is critical to identify which variants have a higher risk of being germline in origin to better counsel patients and prioritize genetic testing. OBJECTIVE: To determine when variants found on tumor-only sequencing of prostate cancers should prompt confirmatory germline testing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men with prostate cancer who underwent both tumor and germline sequencing at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from January 1, 2015 to January 31, 2020 were evaluated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Tumor and germline profiles were analyzed for pathogenic and likely pathogenic ("pathogenic") variants in 60 moderate- or high-penetrance genes associated with cancer predisposition. The germline probability (germline/germline + somatic) of a variant was calculated for each gene. Clinical and pathologic factors were analyzed as potential modifiers of germline probability. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 1883 patients identified, 1084 (58%) had a somatic or germline pathogenic variant in one of 60 cancer susceptibility genes, and of them, 240 (22%) had at least one germline variant. Overall, the most frequent variants were in TP53, PTEN, APC, BRCA2, RB1, ATM, and CHEK2. Variants in TP53, PTEN, or RB1 were identified in 746 (40%) patients and were exclusively somatic. Variants with the highest germline probabilities were in PALB2 (69%), MITF (62%), HOXB13 (60%), CHEK2 (55%), BRCA1 (55%), and BRCA2 (47%), and the overall germline probability of a variant in any DNA damage repair gene was 40%. Limitations were that most of the men included in the cohort had metastatic disease, and different thresholds for pathogenicity exist for somatic and germline variants. CONCLUSIONS: Of patients with pathogenic variants found on prostate tumor sequencing, 22% had clinically actionable germline variants, for which the germline probabilities varied widely by gene. Our results provide an evidenced-based clinical framework to prioritize referral to genetic counseling following tumor-only sequencing. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with advanced prostate cancer are recommended to have germline genetic testing. Genetic sequencing of a patient's prostate tumor may also identify certain gene variants that are inherited. We found that patients who had variants in certain genes, such as ones that function in DNA damage repair, identified in their prostate tumor sequencing, had a high risk for having an inherited cancer syndrome.

Automated Bone Scan Index to Optimize Prostate Cancer Working Group Radiographic Progression Criteria for Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by Prostate Cancer Working Group (PCWG) criteria is a radiographic endpoint. The automated bone scan index (aBSI) quantifies osseous disease burden on bone scintigraphy as a percentage of total skeletal weight. Using the aBSI, we sought to quantify increase in tumor burden represented by PCWG progression criteria, and to determine the interval increase that best associates with overall survival (OS). PATIENT AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of trials using androgen receptor axis-targeted drugs for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer patients (mCRPC). aBSI increase in bone disease was assessed from baseline scan to time-to-progression (per PCWG criteria). Threshold for time to aBSI increase were explored and the association between each time-to-threshold and OS was computed. RESULTS: A total of 169 mCPRC patients had bone scans available for aBSI analysis. Of these, 90 (53%) had progression in bone meeting PCWG criteria. Total aBSI increase in patients meeting PCWG criteria was 1.22 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.65-2.49), with a median relative increase of 109% (IQR: 40%-377%). Median aBSI at baseline was 3.1 (IQR: 1.3-7.1). The best association between OS and time-to-progression occurred with an absolute increase in aBSI equal to 0.6 (Kendall's tau 0.52). CONCLUSION: An absolute increase of 0.6 or more in aBSI from the first follow-up scan results in the highest association with OS in patients with mCRPC. The rPFS by PCWG, identified progression at nearly twice this tumor burden, suggesting that aBSI may be used to further develop the PCWG criteria without degrading its association with OS.

Differences in Prostate Cancer Genomes by Self-reported Race: Contributions of Genetic Ancestry, Modifiable Cancer Risk Factors, and Clinical Factors.

PURPOSE: Black men die from prostate cancer twice as often as White men, a disparity likely due to inherited genetics, modifiable cancer risk factors, and healthcare access. It is incompletely understood how and why tumor genomes differ by self-reported race and genetic ancestry. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Among 2,069 men with prostate cancer (1,841 self-reported White, 63 Asian, 165 Black) with access to clinical-grade sequencing at the same cancer center, prevalence of tumor and germline alterations was assessed in cancer driver genes reported to have different alteration prevalence by race. RESULTS: Clinical characteristics such as prostate-specific antigen and age at diagnosis as well as cancer stage at sample procurement differed by self-reported race. However, most genomic differences persisted when adjusting for clinical characteristics. Tumors from Black men harbored fewer PTEN mutations and more AR alterations than those from White men. Tumors from Asian men had more FOXA1 mutations and more ZFHX3 alterations than White men. Despite fewer TP53 mutations, tumors from Black men had more aneuploidy, particularly chromosome arm 8q gains, an adverse prognostic factor. Genetic ancestry was associated with similar tumor alterations as self-reported race, but also with modifiable cancer risk factors. Community-level average income was associated with chr8q gains after adjusting for race and ancestry. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor genomics differed by race even after accounting for clinical characteristics. Equalizing access to care may not fully eliminate such differences. Therapies for alterations more common in racial minorities are needed. Tumor genomic differences should not be assumed to be entirely due to germline genetics.