Apalutamide efficacy, safety and wellbeing in older patients with advanced prostate cancer from Phase 3 randomised clinical studies TITAN and SPARTAN.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved outcomes in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) and non-metastatic castration-resistant PC (nmCRPC) in the Phase 3 randomised TITAN and SPARTAN studies, respectively, and maintained health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Apalutamide treatment effect by patient age requires assessment. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis assessed patients receiving 240 mg/day apalutamide (525 TITAN and 806 SPARTAN) or placebo (527 TITAN and 401 SPARTAN) with ongoing ADT, stratified by age groups. Prostate-specific antigen declines, radiographic progression-free survival, metastasis-free survival, overall survival (OS), HRQoL and safety were assessed using descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional-hazards model and mixed-effects model for repeated measures. RESULTS: Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) generally favoured apalutamide plus ADT versus ADT alone across all endpoints regardless of age; e.g., OS values were 0.57 (0.40-0.80), 0.70 (0.54-0.91) and 0.74 (0.40-1.39) (TITAN) and 0.39 (0.19-0.78), 0.89 (0.69-1.16) and 0.81 (0.58-1.15) (SPARTAN) in patients aged <65, 65-79 and ≥80 years. Regardless of age, apalutamide also maintained HRQoL and was tolerated well with a potential trend in rates of adverse events increasing with age. Limitations include post-hoc nature and variability in sample size of age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Apalutamide plus ADT was an effective and well-tolerated option maintaining HRQoL in patients with mCSPC and nmCRPC regardless of age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: TITAN (NCT02489318); SPARTAN (NCT01946204).

Targeted Investigational Treatment Analysis of Novel Anti-androgen (TITAN) study: ultralow prostate-specific antigen decline with apalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between achievement of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels ≤0.2 ng/mL (henceforth 'ultralow') and clinical outcomes in patients in the 'Targeted Investigational Treatment Analysis of Novel Anti-androgen' (TITAN) study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02489318) with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients in the TITAN study with mCSPC were randomised to 240 mg/day apalutamide (n = 525) or placebo (n = 527) plus androgen-deprivation therapy. This post hoc analysis assessed the achievement of a PSA level of 0.2->0.02 ng/mL ('ultralow one' [UL1]) and ≤0.02 ng/mL ('ultralow two' [UL2]) vs >0.2 ng/mL with apalutamide treatment and its association with radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), time to castration-resistant PC (TTCRPC), and time to PSA progression (TTPP). The landmark analysis and Kaplan-Meier methods were used. RESULTS: By 3 months, more patients achieved UL1 and UL2 with apalutamide (38% and 23%) vs placebo (15% and 5%). In the apalutamide-treated patients, UL2 vs PSA >0.2 ng/mL at landmark 3 months was associated with significantly longer rPFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.54), OS (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.43), TTCRPC (HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.11-0.38), and TTPP (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04-0.27; nominal P values all <0.001); this association was also observed but less pronounced for UL1. Similar findings were observed at 6 months. Early onset of decline to UL2 by 3 months was associated with improved survival vs PSA >0.2 ng/mL anytime (HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.06-0.22; P < 0.001) in apalutamide-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of TITAN, patients with the deepest PSA decline derived the greatest benefit. These results extend our findings of apalutamide efficacy in the overall TITAN population, underscoring the clinical value of PSA kinetics as a marker for treatment efficacy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with metastatic prostate cancer that is sensitive to ongoing hormonal treatment benefited significantly from the addition of apalutamide compared with placebo. Those who achieved rapid and deep PSA reduction had the greatest survival benefit.

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline with apalutamide therapy is associated with longer survival and improved outcomes in individuals with metastatic prostate cancer: a plain language summary of the TITAN study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from an additional (or post hoc) analysis of the TITAN study. The TITAN study looked at whether the prostate cancer treatment apalutamide could be used to treat individuals with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (or mCSPC). A total of 1052 participants with mCSPC were included in the TITAN study. Treatment with apalutamide was compared with treatment with placebo. All participants received androgen deprivation therapy (or ADT), which is a type of hormone therapy that has been part of the main treatment for mCSPC for many years. The results showed that apalutamide plus ADT increased the length of time that participants remained alive compared with placebo plus ADT. Apalutamide plus ADT also controlled the growth of the cancer for a longer length of time compared with placebo plus ADT. Additionally, participants who received apalutamide plus ADT experienced a greater reduction in the blood levels of prostate-specific antigen (or PSA), called a deep PSA decline, compared with those who received placebo plus ADT. An additional (or post hoc) analysis was carried out to understand whether a decrease in blood PSA levels, in response to treatment, was associated with improved outcomes, including longer survival time. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS?: In participants who received apalutamide plus ADT, a deep PSA decline in response to treatment was associated with longer survival time and improved outcomes. WHAT DO THESE RESULTS MEAN FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MCSPC?: These results demonstrate that individuals with mCSPC can benefit from treatment with apalutamide plus ADT. The association seen between deep PSA decline and the longer survival time and improved outcomes highlights how PSA measurements can be used to help monitor cancer disease evolution in response to treatment. Monitoring PSA levels will assist doctors and other healthcare professionals to understand how effectively a treatment is working for a patient and to tailor their treatment approach to improve PSA decline.

Barriers and Enablers to Implementing Peer Specialists in Veterans Health Administration Primary Care: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Peer specialists (PSs) are increasingly deployed in a variety of settings to provide patient-centered care. In the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), efforts are underway to integrate PSs into primary care settings. Little is known about the barriers and enablers to implementing PS services in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To characterize barriers and enablers to implementing PSs in primary care. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: PSs and their supervisors from 25 VHA primary care settings. APPROACH: PSs and supervisors were interviewed about their experiences integrating PSs in primary care. Rapid analysis was conducted to identify barriers and enablers to PS integration, as well as to examine the role of external facilitation in implementation experiences. KEY RESULTS: Fifty-two interviews were completed (25 PSs from 19 sites and 27 supervisors from 24 sites). Barriers and enablers to PS integration in VHA primary care settings included PS role clarity and constraints, provider buy-in, supervision, leadership support, and primary care culture. The barriers and enablers were consistent across both external facilitation and control sites. CONCLUSIONS: Results describe how the characteristics of the innovation, the recipients, and the context impact successful implementation of PSs in primary care settings. The identification of barriers and enablers holds promise for improving future efforts to embed PSs in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT02732600 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02732600 ).

Apalutamide for Metastatic, Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide is an inhibitor of the ligand-binding domain of the androgen receptor. Whether the addition of apalutamide to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) would prolong radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival as compared with placebo plus ADT among patients with metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer has not been determined. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer to receive apalutamide (240 mg per day) or placebo, added to ADT. Previous treatment for localized disease and previous docetaxel therapy were allowed. The primary end points were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 525 patients were assigned to receive apalutamide plus ADT and 527 to receive placebo plus ADT. The median age was 68 years. A total of 16.4% of the patients had undergone prostatectomy or received radiotherapy for localized disease, and 10.7% had received previous docetaxel therapy; 62.7% had high-volume disease, and 37.3% had low-volume disease. At the first interim analysis, with a median of 22.7 months of follow-up, the percentage of patients with radiographic progression-free survival at 24 months was 68.2% in the apalutamide group and 47.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for radiographic progression or death, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.60; P<0.001). Overall survival at 24 months was also greater with apalutamide than with placebo (82.4% in the apalutamide group vs. 73.5% in the placebo group; hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89; P = 0.005). The frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 42.2% in the apalutamide group and 40.8% in the placebo group; rash was more common in the apalutamide group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer, overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival were significantly longer with the addition of apalutamide to ADT than with placebo plus ADT, and the side-effect profile did not differ substantially between the two groups. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; TITAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02489318.).

Safety and efficacy of apalutamide in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving androgen deprivation therapy: Final report for the Japanese subpopulation analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III TITAN study.

OBJECTIVES: The TITAN study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational trial that evaluated apalutamide with androgen deprivation therapy in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. At the first interim analysis in the Japanese subpopulation (median follow-up 25.7 months), there was an improvement in overall survival and radiological progression-free survival with apalutamide versus placebo. Here, we report the final analysis results for the Japanese subpopulation. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive apalutamide 240 mg or placebo. After the first interim analysis, protocol treatment was unblinded, and crossover was allowed. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in the preplanned, event-driven final analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were Japanese (apalutamide n = 28; placebo n = 23). After a median follow-up of 46.0 months, the median overall survival was not reached neither in the apalutamide nor the placebo group; the hazard ratio was 0.45, favoring apalutamide, which was consistent with the overall population. Hazard ratios for time to cytotoxic chemotherapy (0.39), time to pain progression (0.87), and time to chronic opioid use (0.82) also favored apalutamide and were comparable with those of the overall population. Time to prostate-specific antigen progression and progression-free survival 2, respectively, was favored in the apalutamide group (0.21 and 0.44). Apalutamide was associated with higher incidences of rash and fracture in the Japanese subpopulation compared with the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of apalutamide with androgen deprivation therapy in Japanese patients was consistent with efficacy demonstrated in the overall population. No new safety concerns emerged with long-term follow-up.

Apalutamide plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone versus placebo plus abiraterone and prednisone in metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (ACIS): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multinational, phase 3 study.

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.

Measures of longitudinal adherence to fecal-based colorectal cancer screening: Literature review and recommended approaches.

The success of fecal occult blood-based colorectal cancer screening programs is dependent on repeating screening at short intervals (ie, every 1-2 years). We conducted a literature review to assess measures that have been used to assess longitudinal adherence to fecal-based screening. Among 46 citations identified and included in this review, six broad classifications of longitudinal adherence were identified: (a) stratified single-round attendance, (b) all possible adherence permutations, (c) consistent/inconsistent/never attendance, (d) number of times attended, (e) program adherence and (f) proportion of time covered. Advantages and disadvantages of these measures are described, and recommendations on which measures to use based on data availability and scientific question are also given. Stratified single round attendance is particularly useful for describing the yield of screening, while programmatic adherence measures are best suited to evaluating screening efficacy. We recommend that screening programs collect detailed longitudinal, individual-level data, not only for the screening tests themselves but additionally for diagnostic follow-up and surveillance exams, to allow for maximum flexibility in reporting adherence patterns using the measure of choice.

Explaining Service Use and Residential Stability in Supported Housing: Problems, Preferences, Peers.

BACKGROUND: The behavioral model of health service use identified health needs, service preferences (predispositions), and service availability (enabling factors) as important predictors, but research has not conceptualized consistently each type of influence nor identified their separate effects on use of substance abuse and mental health services or their value in predicting service outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To test hypotheses predicting use of substance abuse and mental health services and residential stability and evaluate peer specialists' impact. RESEARCH DESIGN: Randomized trial of peer support added to standard case management in VA-supported housing program (Housing and Urban Development-VA Supportive Housing program). SUBJECTS: One hundred sixty-six dually diagnosed Veterans in Housing and Urban Development-VA Supportive Housing program in 2 cities. MEASURES: Average VA service episodes for substance abuse and mental illness; residential instability; preferences for alcohol, drug, and psychological services; extent of alcohol, drug, and psychological problems; availability of a peer specialist. RESULTS: Self-assessed health needs, mediated by service preferences, and assignment to a peer specialist predicted use of VA behavioral health services and residential stability, as did chronic medical problems, sex, and race. CONCLUSIONS: The behavioral model identifies major predictors of health service use and residential stability, but must recognize the mediating role of service preferences, the differing effects of alcohol and drug use, the unique influences of social background, and the importance of clinical judgment in needs assessment. Service availability and residential stability can be increased by proactive efforts involving peer specialists even in a health care system that provides services without a financial barrier.

Apalutamide for metastatic, castration-sensitive prostate cancer in the Japanese population: A subgroup analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 TITAN study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of apalutamide + androgen deprivation therapy versus androgen deprivation therapy alone in Japanese patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer from the phase 3, randomized, global TITAN study. METHODS: Men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer randomly (1:1) received 240 mg apalutamide + androgen deprivation therapy or matching placebo + androgen deprivation therapy. The primary efficacy endpoints were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. Secondary efficacy endpoints were time to cytotoxic chemotherapy, pain progression, chronic opioid use, and skeletal-related events. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 1052 patients included in the TITAN study, 51 (4.85%) were Japanese (apalutamide group, n = 28; placebo group, n = 23). In all, 81.8% of patients in the apalutamide and 71.8% in the placebo group did not experience radiographic progression or death, and the hazard ratio for radiographic progression-free survival favored treatment with apalutamide (hazard ratio 0.712, 95% confidence interval 0.205-2.466; P = 0.59). At 24 months, 85.7% of patients in the apalutamide group and 81.5% in the placebo group were alive, and the hazard ratio for overall survival favored apalutamide (hazard ratio 0.840, 95% confidence interval 0.210-3.361; P = 0.805). In the interim analysis, the median radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached in the apalutamide group and time to cytotoxic chemotherapy was delayed following apalutamide treatment. The safety profile of apalutamide in the Japanese subpopulation was comparable with that of the global population, except for skin rash. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present analyses suggest that apalutamide + androgen deprivation therapy in Japanese patients had favorable efficacy compared with androgen deprivation therapy alone, and these findings are comparable to those in the overall population. Apalutamide + androgen deprivation therapy can be considered as one of the therapeutic options for a broad spectrum of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer regardless of prior treatment and disease extent in Japanese patients.

Health service preferences among veterans in supported housing in relation to needs expressed and services used.

BACKGROUND: Understanding consumer service preferences is important for recovery-oriented care. AIMS: To test the influence of perceived service needs on importance attached to treatment for alcohol, drug, mental health, and physical health problems and identify the influence of service needs and preferences on service use. METHODS: Formerly homeless dually diagnosed Veterans in supported housing were surveyed in three waves for 1 year, with measures of treatment interests, health problems, social support, clinician-assessed risk of housing loss, and sociodemographics. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify independent influences on preferences in each wave. Different health services at the VA were distinguished in administrative records and baseline predictors for services used throughout the project were identified with multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: Self-assessed problem severity was associated with the importance of treatment for alcohol, drug, mental health, and physical health problems. Social support also had some association with treatment interest for alcohol abuse, as did baseline clinician risk rating at the project's end. Preferences, but not perceived problem severity, predicted the use of the corresponding health services. CONCLUSIONS: The health beliefs model of service interests was supported, but more integrated service delivery models may be needed to strengthen the association of health needs with service use.

Impact of Peer Specialist Services on Residential Stability and Behavioral Health Status Among Formerly Homeless Veterans With Cooccurring Mental Health and Substance Use Conditions.

OBJECTIVES: This study tested the impacts of peer specialists on housing stability, substance abuse, and mental health status for previously homeless Veterans with cooccurring mental health issues and substance abuse. METHODS: Veterans living in the US Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Administration Supported Housing (HUD-VASH) program were randomized to peer specialist services that worked independently from HUD-VASH case managers (ie, not part of a case manager/peer specialist dyad) and to treatment as usual that included case management services. Peer specialist services were community-based, using a structured curriculum for recovery with up to 40 weekly sessions. Standardized self-report measures were collected at 3 timepoints. The intent-to-treat analysis tested treatment effects using a generalized additive mixed-effects model that allows for different nonlinear relationships between outcomes and time for treatment and control groups. A secondary analysis was conducted for Veterans who received services from peer specialists that were adherent to the intervention protocol. RESULTS: Treated Veterans did not spend more days in housing compared with control Veterans during any part of the study at the 95% level of confidence. Veterans assigned to protocol adherent peer specialists showed greater housing stability between about 400 and 800 days postbaseline. Neither analysis detected significant effects for the behavioral health measures. CONCLUSIONS: Some impact of peer specialist services was found for housing stability but not for behavioral health problems. Future studies may need more sensitive measures for early steps in recovery and may need longer time frames to effectively impact this highly challenged population.

Overall survival and histology-specific subgroup analyses from a phase 3, randomized controlled study of trabectedin or dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma.

BACKGROUND: We performed a randomized phase 3 study of trabectedin versus dacarbazine in previously-treated patients with liposarcoma/leiomyosarcoma (LPS/LMS). METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to trabectedin (n = 384) or dacarbazine (n = 193) administered intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary objective was overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives were progression-free survival, objective response rate, safety, and patient-reported outcomes, all previously reported and demonstrating superior disease control with trabectedin. Results of the final OS analysis in preplanned subgroups of patients with LPS/LMS are presented. RESULTS: At the time of the final OS analysis, 577 patients had been assigned randomly, including 423 (73%) with LMS and 154 (27%) with LPS. The median duration of treatment exposure was higher in the trabectedin arm compared with the dacarbazine arm (4 vs 2 cycles), as was the proportion of patients receiving an extended number of therapy courses (≥6 cycles: 42% vs 22%). This pattern was consistent across histological subgroups: the median number of treatment cycles (4 vs 2 for both subgroups) and proportion of patients with ≥6 treatment cycles (LMS, 43% vs 24%; LPS, 40% vs 16%). Despite improved disease control by trabectedin, no improvement in OS was observed; the final median OS for trabectedin versus dacarbazine was 13.7 versus 13.1 months (P = .49). Sensitivity analyses of OS suggest confounding by post-study anticancer therapies, which were utilized in most patients in both treatment arms (71% vs 69%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The final OS results demonstrated comparable survival between LPS/LMS patients receiving trabectedin or dacarbazine, which is consistent with the interim analysis results. Both LPS and LMS demonstrated improved disease control with trabectedin.

An evidence-based co-occurring disorder intervention in VA homeless programs: outcomes from a hybrid III trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based treatment for co-occurring disorders is needed within programs that serve homeless Veterans to assist with increasing engagement in care and to prevent future housing loss. A specialized co-occurring disorders treatment engagement intervention called Maintaining Independence and Sobriety Through Systems Integration, Outreach and Networking - Veterans Edition (MISSION-Vet) was implemented within the Housing and Urban Development - Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) Programs with and without an implementation strategy called Getting To Outcomes (GTO). While implementation was modest for the GTO group, no one adopted MISSION in the non-GTO group. This paper reports Veteran level outcome data on treatment engagement and select behavioral health outcomes for Veterans exposed to the MISSION-Vet model compared to Veterans without access to MISSION-Vet. METHODS: This hybrid Type III trial compared 81 Veterans in the GTO group to a similar group of 87 Veterans with mental health and substance use disorders from the caseload of staff in the non-GTO group. Comparisons were made on treatment engagement, negative housing exits, drug and alcohol abuse, inpatient hospitalizations, emergency department visits and income level over time, using mixed-effect or Cox regression models. RESULTS: Treatment engagement, as measured by the overall number of case manager contacts with Veterans and others (e.g. family members, health providers), was significantly higher among Veterans in the GTO group (B = 2.30, p = .04). Supplemental exploratory analyses between Veterans who received "higher" and "lower" intensity MISSION-Vet services in the GTO group failed to show differences in alcohol and drug use, inpatient hospitalization and emergency department use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite modest MISSION-Vet fidelity among staff treating Veterans in the GTO group, differences were found in treatment engagement. However, this study failed to show differences in alcohol use, drug use, mental health hospitalizations and negative housing exits over time among those Veterans receiving higher intensity MISSION-Vet services versus low intensity services. This project suggests that MISSION-Vet could be used in HUD-VASH to increase engagement among Veterans struggling with homelessness, a group often disconnected from care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, registration number: NCT01430741 , registered July 26, 2011.

Efficacy and safety of trabectedin or dacarbazine in patients with advanced uterine leiomyosarcoma after failure of anthracycline-based chemotherapy: Subgroup analysis of a phase 3, randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Trabectedin demonstrated significantly improved disease control in leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma patients in a global phase 3 trial (NCT01343277). A post hoc analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of trabectedin or dacarbazine in women with uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS), the largest subgroup of enrolled patients (40%). METHODS: Of 577 patients randomized 2:1 to receive trabectedin 1.5mg/m2 by 24-hour IV infusion or dacarbazine 1g/m2 by 20-120-minute IV infusion once every three weeks, 232 had uLMS (trabectedin: 144; dacarbazine: 88). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR: complete responses+partial responses+stable disease [SD] for at least 18weeks), duration of response (DOR), and safety. RESULTS: PFS for trabectedin was 4.0months compared with 1.5months for dacarbazine (hazard ratio [HR]=0.57; 95% CI 0.41-0.81; P=0.0012). OS was similar (trabectedin 13.4months vs. dacarbazine 12.9months, HR=0.89; 95% CI 0.65-1.24; P=0.51) between groups. ORR was 11% with trabectedin vs. 9% with dacarbazine (P=0.82). CBR for trabectedin was 31% vs. 18% with dacarbazine (P=0.05); median DOR was 6.5months for trabectedin vs. 4.1months for dacarbazine (P=0.32). Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events observed in ≥10% of patients in the trabectedin group included transient aminotransferase (aspartate/alanine) elevations, anemia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc subset analysis of patients with uLMS who had received prior anthracycline therapy, trabectedin treatment resulted in significantly longer PFS versus dacarbazine, with an acceptable safety profile. There was no difference in OS.

Influential Factors Impacting Treatment Decision-making and Decision Regret in Patients with Localized or Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review.

CONTEXT: Treatment decision-making (TDM) for patients with localized (LPC) or locally advanced (LAPC) prostate cancer is complex, and post-treatment decision regret (DR) is common. The factors driving TDM or predicting DR remain understudied. OBJECTIVE: Two systematic literature reviews were conducted to explore the factors associated with TDM and DR. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Three online databases, select congress proceedings, and gray literature were searched (September 2022). Publications on TDM and DR in LPC/LAPC were prioritized based on the following: 2012 onward, ≥100 patients, journal article, and quantitative data. The Preferred Reporting Items Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed. Influential factors were those with p < 0.05; for TDM, factors described as "a decision driver", "associated", "influential", or "significant" were also included. The key factors were determined by number of studies, consistency of evidence, and study quality. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seventy-five publications (68 studies) reported TDM. Patient participation in TDM was reported in 34 publications; overall, patients preferred an active/shared role. Of 39 influential TDM factors, age, ethnicity, external factors (physician recommendation most common), and treatment characteristics/toxicity were key. Forty-nine publications reported DR. The proportion of patients experiencing DR varied by treatment type: 7-43% (active surveillance), 12-57% (radical prostatectomy), 1-49% (radiotherapy), 28-49% (androgen-deprivation therapy), and 21-47% (combination therapy). Of 42 significant DR factors, treatment toxicity (sexual/urinary/bowel dysfunction), patient role in TDM, and treatment type were key. CONCLUSIONS: The key factors impacting TDM were physician recommendation, age, ethnicity, and treatment characteristics. Treatment toxicity and TDM approach were the key factors influencing DR. To help patients navigate factors influencing TDM and to limit DR, a shared, consensual TDM approach between patients, caregivers, and physicians is needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at factors influencing treatment decision-making (TDM) and decision regret (DR) in patients with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer. The key factors influencing TDM were doctor's recommendation, patient age/ethnicity, and treatment side effects. A shared, consensual TDM approach between patients and doctors was found to limit DR.

Apalutamide and Goserelin for Androgen Receptor-Positive Salivary Gland Carcinoma: A Phase 2 Nonrandomized Clinical Trial, YATAGARASU.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of apalutamide plus goserelin for androgen receptor (AR)-positive, unresectable or recurrent/metastatic salivary gland carcinoma (URM-SGC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an open-label, single-arm, multicenter phase II study for patients with AR-positive URM-SGC. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR) by an independent central radiology review (ICRR) in the first 24 response evaluable patients who had been observed at least 24 weeks from study initiation (primary RE patients). The efficacy was to be declared when at least 8 of the 24 primary RE patients responded. RESULTS: 31 patients were enrolled. In the first 24 primary RE patients with a median follow-up of 7.4 months, confirmed ORR by ICRR was 25.0% (6/24 patients; 95%CI: 9.8%-46.7%; P =0.11 (one-sided)), which did not meet the predefined criteria of efficacy. Clinical benefit rate (ORR + rate of stable disease for at least 24 weeks) and median progression-free survival were 50.0% and 7.4 months, respectively. Both median duration of response and overall survival were not reached. Exploratory analyses showed a better ORR of 54.5% (6/11) in patients with AR-positivity ≥ 70% and no history of prior systemic therapy. Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 35.5% (11/31), which included skin rash, anemia, leukopenia, and cancer pain. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study did not meet the predefined efficacy criteria, apalutamide plus goserelin showed clinically meaningful efficacy in a subset of patients with AR-positive SGC and safety consistent with prior experience in prostate cancer.

Breast cancer knowledge & information seeking among African American women below screening age.

OBJECTIVES: African American women below screening age disproportionately face greater mortality from breast cancer relative to peers of other races and African American women of screening age. The current study examines breast cancer knowledge and health information seeking of African American women below screening age. METHODS: We collected survey data from 99 African American women below screening age on their breast cancer knowledge and health information seeking behaviors. As secondary analysis, we harmonized data from a previous study to compare breast cancer knowledge between African American women below and of (N = 209) screening age. RESULTS: The average woman below screening age correctly answered 2.84 (SD=1.08) of six breast cancer knowledge items, 2.67 (SD=1.01) of five mammogram items, 1.44 (SD=0.86) of three treatment items, and had lower knowledge (p < .001) in each area relative to screening age women. Women below screening age sought information primarily from medical providers and the internet. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy for eliminating early-onset breast cancer disparities impacting African American women is addressing the limited breast cancer knowledge in this age group. Practice Implications In addition to age-appropriate information for this group, guidance for medical providers would be beneficial, as providers are this group's most common source of health information.