Synthetic Lethality by Co-Inhibition of Androgen Receptor and Polyadenosine Diphosphate-Ribose in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) and polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose inhibitors (PARPi) are part of the standard of care in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). There is biological evidence that the association of ARPI and PARPi could have a synergistic effect; therefore, several ongoing clinical trials are investigating the efficacy of this combination with preliminary results that are not perfectly concordant in identifying patients who can obtain the most benefit from this therapeutic option. The purpose of this review is to describe the PARPi mechanisms of action and to analyze the biological mechanisms behind the interplay between the androgen receptor and the PARPi system to better understand the rationale of the ARPI + PARPi combinations. Furthermore, we will summarize the preliminary results of the ongoing studies on these combinations, trying to understand in which patients to apply. Finally, we will discuss the clinical implications of this combination and its possible future perspectives.

Impact of Neuroendocrine Differentiation (NED) on Enzalutamide and Abiraterone Efficacy in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC): A Retrospective Analysis.

Neuroendocrine differentiation (NED) represents a possible androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) resistance mechanism in metastatic castration resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC). As mCRPC with NED has been excluded from clinical trials evaluating ARPI efficacy, this study investigates the prognostic impact of NED in mCRPC patients treated with ARPIs. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 327 mCRPC patient data treated with Enzalutamide or Abiraterone in the first and second or successive lines of treatment. NED was assessed using prostate biopsy samples through immunohistochemical staining. Results: NED was confirmed in 32/327 (9.8%) mCRPC patients. In the overall population, mCRPC with NED showed worse PFS (4.38 vs. 11.48 months HR 2.505 [1.71-3.68] p < 0.05), disease control rate (DCR), and PSA response. In the first line setting, mCRPC with NED demonstrated worse PFS (8.5 vs. 14.9 months HR 2.13 [1.18-3.88], p < 0.05). Similarly, in the second or successive lines, mCRPC with NED showed worse PFS (4.0 vs. 7.5 months HR 2.43 [1.45-4.05] p < 0.05), DCR, PSA response and OS (12.53 vs. 18.03 months HR 1.86 [1.12-3.10] p < 0.05). The adverse impact of NED on PFS was consistence across all subgroups; we also noted a trend of worse PFS in patients with high vs. low NED. Conclusions: In our study, mCRPC with NED treated with Enzalutamide or Abiraterone showed worse clinical outcomes. NED assessment should be considered to optimize treatment decisions in the mCRPC setting.

Navigating the ICI Combination Treatment Journey: Patterns of Response and Progression to First-Line ICI-Based Combination Treatment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitors or other ICIs has significantly improved the prognosis for patients with mccRCC. This marks a major milestone in the treatment of mccRCC. Nonetheless, most patients will discontinue first-line therapy. In this narrative review, we analyze the different patterns of treatment discontinuation in the four pivotal phase III trials that have shown an improvement in overall survival in mccRCC first-line therapy, starting from 1 January 2017 to 1 June 2023. We highlight the different discontinuation scenarios and their influences on subsequent treatment options, aiming to provide more data to clinicians to navigate a complex decision-making process through a narrative review approach. We have identified several causes for discontinuations for patients treated with ICI-based combinations, such as interruption for drug-related adverse events, ICI treatment completion, treatment discontinuation due to complete response or maximum clinical benefit, or due to progression (pseudoprogression, systemic progression, and oligoprogression); for each case, an extensive analysis of the trials and current medical review has been conducted.

Hormonal Agents in Localized and Advanced Prostate Cancer: Current Use and Future Perspectives.

Prostate cancer (PC) is generally a hormone-dependent tumor. Androgen deprivation therapy ( has been the standard of care in metastatic disease for more than 80 years. Subsequent studies have highlighted the efficacy of ADT even in earlier disease settings such as in localized disease or in the case of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Improved knowledge of PC biology and ADT resistance mechanisms have led to the development of novel generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI). Initially used only in patients who became resistant to ADT, ARPI have subsequently shown to be effective when used in patients with metastatic hormone-naive disease and in recent years their effectiveness has also been evaluated in localized disease and in case of BCR. The objective of this review is to describe the current role of agents interfering with the androgen receptor in different stages of PC and to point out future perspectives.

How to Improve the Quality of Life of Patients with Prostate Cancer Treated with Hormone Therapy?

Prostate cancer (PC) is a hormone-sensitive tumor. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the cornerstone of systemic therapy for patients with intermediate or high-risk localized, recurrent, and metastatic prostate cancer. Although generally well tolerated, ADT can lead to short- and long-term adverse events that can worsen the quality of life of patients with PC. In the last decade, the introduction of novel generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) has resulted in an improvement in the prognosis of patients with metastatic PC when used in combination with ADT. The use of ARPI in increasingly early stages of the disease determines a longer exposure of patients to these treatments. Although ARPIs are normally well-tolerated drugs, they generally cause an increase in toxicity compared to ADT alone, being able to worsen some adverse events already induced by ADT or leading to the development of specific side effects. Although there are no specific treatments for all the adverse events induced by hormonal therapies, it is essential to know the possible toxicities induced by the different treatments and to start procedures to prevent and/or recognize and consequently treat them early in order to not compromise the quality of life of the patients with PC. The aim of this review is to describe the adverse events induced by hormonal therapies. We will first describe the side effects induced by both ADT and ARPI and then the specific adverse events of the different ARPIs. Furthermore, we will try to highlight the possible therapeutic options to prevent or mitigate the toxicity induced by hormone therapies in order to improve the quality of life of the patients with PC.