Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer who have high-risk biochemical recurrence have an increased risk of progression. The efficacy and safety of enzalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy and enzalutamide monotherapy, as compared with androgen-deprivation therapy alone, are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with prostate cancer who had high-risk biochemical recurrence with a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 9 months or less. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive enzalutamide (160 mg) daily plus leuprolide every 12 weeks (combination group), placebo plus leuprolide (leuprolide-alone group), or enzalutamide monotherapy (monotherapy group). The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, as assessed by blinded independent central review, in the combination group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. A key secondary end point was metastasis-free survival in the monotherapy group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. Other secondary end points were patient-reported outcomes and safety. RESULTS: A total of 1068 patients underwent randomization: 355 were assigned to the combination group, 358 to the leuprolide-alone group, and 355 to the monotherapy group. The patients were followed for a median of 60.7 months. At 5 years, metastasis-free survival was 87.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.0 to 90.6) in the combination group, 71.4% (95% CI, 65.7 to 76.3) in the leuprolide-alone group, and 80.0% (95% CI, 75.0 to 84.1) in the monotherapy group. With respect to metastasis-free survival, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.61; P<0.001); enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87; P = 0.005). No new safety signals were observed, with no substantial between-group differences in quality-of-life measures. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone with respect to metastasis-free survival; enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone. The safety profile of enzalutamide was consistent with that shown in previous clinical studies, with no apparent detrimental effect on quality of life. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; EMBARK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02319837.).

The impact of enzalutamide on quality of life in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer based on prior therapy, risk, and symptom subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved radiographic progression-free survival versus ADT alone in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in ARCHES (NCT02677896). While health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was generally maintained in the intent-to-treat population, we further analyzed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in defined subgroups. METHODS: ARCHES was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Patients with mHSPC received enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus ADT (n = 574) or placebo plus ADT (n = 576). Questionnaires, including the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate, Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, and EuroQol 5-Dimension, 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), were completed at baseline, Week 13, and every 12 weeks until disease progression. PRO endpoints were time to first confirmed clinically meaningful deterioration (TTFCD) in HRQoL or pain. Subgroups included prognostic risk, pain/HRQoL, prior docetaxel, and local therapy (radical prostatectomy [RP] and/or radiotherapy [RT]). RESULTS: There were several between-treatment differences in TTFCD for pain and functioning/HRQoL PROs. Enzalutamide plus ADT delayed TTFCD for worst pain in the prior RT group (not reached vs. 14.06 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.56 [95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.94]) and pain interference in low-baseline-HRQoL group (19.32 vs. 11.20 months; HR: 0.64 [0.44-0.94]) versus placebo plus ADT. In prior/no prior RP, prior RT, prior local therapy, no prior docetaxel, mild baseline pain, and low-risk subgroups, TTFCD was delayed for the EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale. CONCLUSION: Enzalutamide plus ADT provides clinical benefits in defined patient subgroups versus ADT alone, while maintaining lack of pain and high HRQoL, with delayed deterioration in several HRQoL measures.

Efficacy of Enzalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer by Pattern of Metastatic Spread: ARCHES Post Hoc Analyses.

PURPOSE: Enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy has previously been shown to improve clinical outcomes in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (ARCHES; NCT02677896). Here, we assessed if and how the pattern of metastatic spread impacts efficacy of enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy in men enrolled in ARCHES. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus androgen deprivation therapy or placebo plus androgen deprivation therapy, stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel treatment. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival. Secondary end points included time to prostate specific antigen progression, initiation of new antineoplastic therapy, first symptomatic skeletal event and castration resistance. Post hoc analyses were performed by pattern of metastatic spread based on study entry imaging. RESULTS: Of the overall population with metastases identified at enrollment (1,146), the largest patient subgroups were those with bone metastases only (513) and those with bone plus lymph node metastases (351); there were fewer men with lymph node metastases only (154) and men with visceral±bone or lymph node metastases (128). Enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy reduced the risk of radiographic progression vs placebo plus androgen deprivation therapy in men with bone metastases only (HR 0.33) and bone plus lymph node metastases (HR 0.31). Similar improvements in secondary end points were also observed in these subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that treatment with enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy provides improvements in men with bone and/or lymph node metastases but may be less effective in men with visceral patterns of spread.

A randomized, double-blind, solifenacin succinate versus placebo control, phase 4, multicenter study evaluating urinary continence after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Bladder dysfunction influences recovery of urinary continence after radical prostatectomy. We performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study evaluating solifenacin vs placebo on return to continence in patients who were still incontinent 7 to 21 days after catheter removal after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A wireless personal digital assistant was given to patients the day of catheter removal. Encrypted answers were transmitted daily to dedicated servers. After a 7 to 21-day treatment-free washout period, patients requiring 2 to 10 pads per day for 7 consecutive days were randomized (1:1) to 5 mg solifenacin daily or placebo. The primary end point was time from first dose to continence defined as 0 pads per day or a dry security pad for 3 consecutive days. Secondary end points included proportion of patients continent at end of study, average change in pads per day number and quality of life assessments. RESULTS: A total of 1,086 screened patients recorded personal digital assistant information. Overall 640 patients were randomized to solifenacin vs placebo and 17 failed to take medication. There was no difference in time to continence (p=0.17). Continence was achieved by study end in 91 of 313 (29%) vs 66 of 309 (21%), respectively (p=0.04). Pads per day change from baseline was -3.2 and -2.9, respectively (p=0.03). Dry mouth was the only common adverse event seen in 6.1% and 0.6%, respectively. Constipation rates were similar. The overall rate of continence in the entire population from screening to end of study was 73%. CONCLUSIONS: There was no effect on primary outcome but some secondary end points benefited the solifenacin arm. The study provides level 1B clinical evidence for continence outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Enzalutamide in European and North American men participating in the AFFIRM trial.

OBJECTIVE: To explore any differences in efficacy and safety outcomes between European (EU) (n = 684) and North American (NA) (n = 395) patients in the AFFIRM trial (NCT00974311). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational AFFIRM trial in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after docetaxel. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral enzalutamide 160 mg/day or placebo. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in a post hoc analysis. RESULTS: Enzalutamide significantly improved OS compared with placebo in both EU and NA patients. The median OS in EU patients was longer than NA patients in both treatment groups. However, the relative treatment effect, expressed as hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval, was similar in both regions: 0.64 (0.50, 0.82) for EU and 0.63 (0.47, 0.83) for NA. Significant improvements in other end points further confirmed the benefit of enzalutamide over placebo in patients from both regions. The tolerability profile of enzalutamide was comparable between EU and NA patients, with fatigue and nausea the most common adverse events. Four EU patients (4/461 enzalutamide-treated, 0.87%) and one NA patient (1/263 enzalutamide-treated, 0.38%) had seizures. The difference in median OS was related in part to the timing of development of mCRPC and baseline demographics on study entry. CONCLUSION: This post hoc exploratory analysis of the AFFIRM trial showed a consistent OS benefit for enzalutamide in men with mCRPC who had previously progressed on docetaxel in both NA- and EU-treated patients, although the median OS was higher in EU relative to NA patients. Efficacy benefits were consistent across end points, with a comparable safety profile in both regions.

Temporal trends and racial disparities in global prostate cancer prevalence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 58 autopsy studies of latent prostate cancer from 1898-2013 were identified and analyzed accounting for histopathological methods, which may have varied over time. RESULTS: Prostate cancer is most prevalent in African descent men, less prevalent in European descent men, and least prevalent in Asian descent men. Fifty percent of Asian men have latent prostate tumors by 90. This 50% prevalence is reached by age 80 in Caucasians, and by age 60 in African descent men. While men are rarely diagnosed with prostate cancer before age 40, 4% of Asian men, 9% of Caucasian men, and 37% of African descent men have latent prostate cancer before age 40. However, prostate cancer is under-ascertained in Africa. An increase in prostate cancer prevalence was observed by observing historical trends in prostate cancer prevalence. This increase is only significant in men of European descent, who experienced a 0.3% increase in prostate cancer prevalence per calendar year since the 1930's (p = 0.043). Evaluation of incidence-prevalence-duration data suggest that men are living longer with prostate cancer in recent years, perhaps due to early detection and improved treatment. This information has relevance for the design of clinical trials of prostate cancer detection, chemoprevention and treatment, and has been incorporated into recent guidelines for the early detection of prostate cancer and biopsy recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer is common at all ages and varies by race, and prevalence is increasing over time. Autopsy-based prevalence data provide a means of examining historical trends and comparison of diverse demographic groups and help guide clinical practice and trial design for the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer.

Finding unrecognized information in overactive bladder clinical trial data: a new approach to understanding placebo and treatment effects.

AIMS: To identify combinations of variables among overactive bladder (OAB) clinical trial subjects that allow prediction of those who are more--or less--likely to respond strongly to placebo, or to medication. METHODS: Data from two Phase IIIb clinical trials of solifenacin in OAB were combined. Predictive models for placebo and treatment responses were constructed using baseline variables including individual items from the OAB questionnaire. These models were reduced to an essential subset of predictor variables. Two outcome measures are reported: urgency and incontinence. RESULTS: In placebo subjects, 14 selected variables permitted distinction between those who responded with significant reductions in urgency and those who did not. A subset of nine variables in treated subjects permitted distinction between those more--or less--likely to respond to medication. Data for urgency were combined from both placebo and actively treated subjects to identify those who had one of the previously identified clusters of variables. It was possible to predict, among all subjects, who would be likely to experience a strong placebo or active treatment response and who would not. This process was also applied to incontinence data. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a new process to help understand placebo and treatment responses and their relationships to baseline conditions. The effectiveness of these methods was indicated using data from two solifenacin clinical trials and would benefit from future validation using other data sets. Methods used here are suitable for predicting the placebo effect in other clinical trials.

Clinical Outcomes of Enzalutamide in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer in Patients Aged <75 and ≥75 Years: ARCHES Post Hoc Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In ARCHES, treatment intensification of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with enzalutamide versus placebo improved clinical outcomes in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Understanding the benefits and tolerability of enzalutamide for men aged ≥75 yr may inform disease management. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether age is associated with clinical outcomes in mHSPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A post hoc analysis of the multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 ARCHES trial in 1150 men with mHSPC (median follow-up [mo]: <75 yr, 44.6; ≥75 yr, 44.3) was performed. INTERVENTION: Randomization 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg/d) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT; stratification by disease volume and prior docetaxel use. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), safety, and other secondary endpoints were compared between age groups (<75 and ≥75 yr) and treatment arms (Cox proportional hazard models). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Men aged <75 versus ≥75 yr had longer OS (enzalutamide plus ADT: hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.91; p = 0.02; placebo plus ADT: HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.60-1.09; p = 0.13) and rPFS (enzalutamide plus ADT: HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.58-1.04; p = 0.12; placebo plus ADT: HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.74-1.30; p = 0.007). Enzalutamide improved OS (<75 yr: HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.47-0.79; ≥75 yr: HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.54-1.09) and secondary efficacy endpoints without evidence of statistical heterogeneity, and was generally well tolerated in both age groups, with minimal quality-of-life impact. Older versus younger patients experienced more frequent dose interruptions (20.2% vs 10.9%) and treatment-emergent adverse events (95.2% vs 89.1%). Post hoc examination and small sample size preclude definitive conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Enzalutamide plus ADT improved efficacy outcomes and was generally well tolerated despite shorter treatment exposure in older patients, indicating enzalutamide's utility in patients with mHSPC aged <75 and ≥75 yr. PATIENT SUMMARY: Enzalutamide is a drug approved to treat men with prostate cancer. In this report, we compared patients aged <75 and ≥75 yr treated with enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy to determine whether age affected how long they lived without the cancer spreading to other parts of their body. We found that, although younger patients had more favorable survival outcomes, enzalutamide was associated with longer survival and reduced disease spread in both age groups.

The Efficacy of Enzalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Oligometastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of ARCHES.

BACKGROUND: Few phase 3 studies have evaluated optimal systemic treatment strategies for patients with oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC), who may be at risk of undertreatment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes for patients with oligometastatic and polymetastatic HSPC treated with enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus placebo plus ADT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a post hoc analysis of data for 927 patients with nonvisceral metastatic HSPC in the ARCHES trial (NCT02677896). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg/d orally) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT with HSPC categorized as oligometastatic (1-5 metastases) or polymetastatic (≥6 metastases). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The treatment effect on radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and secondary efficacy endpoints was evaluated in terms of the number of metastases. Safety was assessed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to generate hazard ratios (HRs). The Brookmeyer and Crowley method was used to generate 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for Kaplan-Meier median values. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Enzalutamide plus ADT improved rPFS (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.16-0.46; p < 0.001), OS (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.87; p < 0.005), and secondary endpoints in patients with oligometastatic or polymetastatic disease (rPFS: HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.23-0.46; p < 0.001; OS: HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.74; p < 0.001). Safety profiles were generally similar across subgroups. Limitations include the small numbers of patients with fewer than three metastases. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis demonstrated the utility of enzalutamide, irrespective of metastatic burden or type of oligometastatic disease, and suggests that earlier treatment intensification with systemic potent androgen receptor inhibition is advantageous. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study considered two treatment options for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in patients with one to five metastases or six or more metastases. Treatment with enzalutamide plus ADT improved survival and other outcomes over ADT alone, whether patients had few or many metastases.

Effect of enzalutamide on PK of P-gp and BCRP substrates in cancer patients: CYP450 induction may not always predict overall effect on transporters.

Drug-drug interaction (DDI) is an important consideration for clinical decision making in prostate cancer treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of enzalutamide, an oral androgen receptor inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of digoxin (P-glycoprotein [P-gp] probe substrate) and rosuvastatin (breast cancer resistance protein [BCRP] probe substrate) in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This was a phase I, open-label, fixed-sequence, crossover study (NCT04094519). Eligible men with mCRPC received a single dose of transporter probe cocktail containing 0.25 mg digoxin and 10 mg rosuvastatin plus enzalutamide placebo-to-match on day 1. On day 8, patients started 160 mg enzalutamide once daily through day 71. On day 64, patients also received a single dose of the cocktail. The primary end points were digoxin and rosuvastatin plasma maximum concentration (Cmax ), area under the concentration-time curve from the time of dosing to the last measurable concentration (AUClast ), and AUC from the time of dosing extrapolated to time infinity (AUCinf ). Secondary end points were enzalutamide and N-desmethyl enzalutamide (metabolite) plasma Cmax , AUC during a dosing interval, where tau is the length of the dosing interval (AUCtau ), and concentration immediately prior to dosing at multiple dosing (Ctrough ). When administered with enzalutamide, there was a 17% increase in Cmax , 29% increase in AUClast , and 33% increase in AUCinf of plasma digoxin compared to digoxin alone, indicating that enzalutamide is a "mild" inhibitor of P-gp. No PK interaction was observed between enzalutamide and rosuvastatin (BCRP probe substrate). The PK of enzalutamide and N-desmethyl enzalutamide were in agreement with previously reported data. The potential for transporter-mediated DDI between enzalutamide and digoxin and rosuvastatin is low in men with prostate cancer. Therefore, concomitant administration of enzalutamide with medications that are substrates for P-gp and BCRP does not require dose adjustment in this patient population.

Enzalutamide versus bicalutamide in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a prespecified subgroup analysis of the STRIVE trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 2, randomized, double-blind STRIVE trial, enzalutamide significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer progression or death versus bicalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and nonmetastatic CRPC (nmCRPC). The objective of this protocol-specified subgroup analysis of STRIVE was to investigate the benefit of enzalutamide versus bicalutamide specifically in patients with nmCRPC. METHODS: Patients (N = 139) were stratified by disease stage and randomized to enzalutamide 160 mg/day plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT; n = 70) or bicalutamide 50 mg/day plus ADT (n = 69). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of patients with nmCRPC were comparable between groups. At a median of 17 months follow-up, enzalutamide reduced the risk of progression or death by 76% versus bicalutamide in patients with nmCRPC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% CI 0.14-0.42). Enzalutamide reduced risk of prostate-specific antigen progression by 82% versus bicalutamide in patients with nmCRPC (HR, 0.18; 95% CI 0.10-0.34). The most frequently reported adverse events by patients receiving enzalutamide were fatigue (36.2%), hot flush (20.3%), decreased appetite (17.4%), dizziness (17.4%), and nausea (17.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This STRIVE subgroup analysis of patients with nmCRPC illustrates the benefit of enzalutamide in reducing the risk of progression or death versus bicalutamide in patients with nmCRPC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01664923.

Improved Survival With Enzalutamide in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.In primary analysis, enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC); however, overall survival data were immature. In the phase III, double-blind, global ARCHES trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02677896), 1,150 patients with mHSPC were randomly assigned 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg once daily) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT, stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel use. Here, we report the final prespecified analysis of overall survival (key secondary end point) and an update on rPFS, other secondary end points, and safety. After unblinding, 180 (31.3%) progression-free patients randomly assigned to placebo plus ADT crossed over to open-label enzalutamide plus ADT. As of May 28, 2021 (median follow-up, 44.6 months), 154 of 574 patients randomly assigned to enzalutamide plus ADT and 202 of 576 patients randomly assigned to placebo plus ADT had died. Enzalutamide plus ADT reduced risk of death by 34% versus placebo plus ADT (median not reached in either group; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.81; P < .001). Enzalutamide plus ADT continued to improve rPFS and other secondary end points. Adverse events were generally consistent with previous reports of long-term enzalutamide use. In conclusion, enzalutamide plus ADT significantly prolongs survival versus placebo plus ADT in patients with mHSPC.

Efficacy of enzalutamide in subgroups of men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer based on prior therapy, disease volume, and risk.

BACKGROUND: While enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly reduces the risk of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and improves overall survival in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the efficacy in clinically relevant subgroups of patients based on prior local and systemic therapy, disease volume, and risk has not been analyzed to date. These post hoc analyses of the phase 3 ARCHES trial (NCT02677896) evaluated the efficacy of enzalutamide plus ADT according to prior local and systemic treatment, disease volume, and risk, assessed at trial baseline. METHODS: In ARCHES, a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, 1150 patients with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to receive enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT, stratified by prior docetaxel therapy and disease volume. Primary endpoint was rPFS. Secondary endpoints included time to prostate-specific antigen progression, symptomatic skeletal events, and prostate-specific antigen and radiographic responses. Analyses of clinical endpoints were completed by prior local therapy, prior docetaxel exposure, CHAARTED (NCT00309985)-defined disease volume, and LATITUDE (NCT01715285)-defined risk groups. RESULTS: Patients were randomized to enzalutamide plus ADT (n = 574) and placebo plus ADT (n = 576). Enzalutamide plus ADT significantly improved rPFS (hazard ratio: 0.39; p < 0.0001), with similar improvements reported in all subgroups based on prior local and docetaxel treatment, disease volume, and risk. Treatment benefits were observed with enzalutamide plus ADT in multiple secondary clinical endpoints in the overall population and all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Enzalutamide plus ADT demonstrated clinical benefit across all patients with mHSPC, irrespective of prior local and systemic treatment, disease volume, and risk.

Updating the prostate cancer risk indicator for contemporary biopsy schemes.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The prostate cancer risk indicator is a validated tool for predicting the chance of a screen detected prostate cancer to be classified as indolent, partially based on lateralized sextant biopsies. Our objective is to extract correction factors for adjustment of the model, addressing contemporary extended biopsy schemes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-mortem 18-core biopsy results of men who died of unrelated causes, but were diagnosed with prostate cancer post-mortem were used to provide details on prostate biopsies and whole mount specimens. For each of the 18-core biopsies showing cancer, Gleason score, number of positive cores, location in the gland and percentage of cancer involvement were determined and correlated to final pathology. Total length of cancer tissue in a 6-core scheme was related to the length in 12 and 18-core schemes to compute correction factors. Furthermore, upgrading on extended biopsies and final pathology was evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 33 autopsied men were included. The 18 and 12-core biopsies showed 192.72 mm and 143.76 mm of prostate cancer, compared to 70.80 mm with lateralized sextant biopsy, resulting in correction factors of 2.72 and 2.03 for 18 and 12-core schemes respectively. Upgrading in Gleason score on extended biopsy regimens compared to lateralized sextant biopsy occurred in 33% (11/33) of the cases. CONCLUSION: Based on autopsy data, the present correction factors provide a support in the adjustment of the prostate cancer risk indicator towards more extended contemporary biopsy schemes, eventually leading to a more accurate prediction of the probability of indolent cancers and assisting patients and clinicians to make appropriate choices in daily practice.

A phase 3 randomised study of enzalutamide plus leuprolide and enzalutamide monotherapy in high-risk non-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer with rising PSA after local therapy: EMBARK study design.

INTRODUCTION: Limited data from controlled clinical trials are available for men who experience biochemical recurrence after definitive therapy for prostate cancer. In the absence of overt metastases, patients with non-metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (nmCSPC) often receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). There is no standard-of-care consensus on optimal ADT timing, although most men are treated prior to metastases, especially those with high-risk features (Gleason score 8-10 or prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) <9-12 months). Given data that ADT plus novel hormonal agents improve survival in men with metastatic CSPC, there is a desire to evaluate these agents earlier in the disease course. The main objective of EMBARK is the comparative assessment of enzalutamide plus leuprolide (luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRHa)) or enzalutamide monotherapy versus monotherapy LHRHa to improve metastasis-free survival (MFS) in patients with high-risk nmCSPC PSA recurrence after definitive therapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: EMBARK is a randomised, phase 3 study of high-risk patients with nmCSPC, a PSADT of ≤9 months and a screening PSA of ≥2 ng/mL above the nadir after radiotherapy (RT) or ≥1 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy (RP) with or without postoperative RT. Men (n=1050) are randomised 1:1:1 to enzalutamide 160 mg/day plus LHRHa or placebo plus LHRHa (double-blind arms) or enzalutamide monotherapy (open-label arm). Treatment is suspended at week 37 if PSA concentrations are <0.2 ng/mL and reinstated if levels rise to ≥2.0 ng/mL with RP or ≥5.0 ng/mL without RP. Patients with PSA ≥0.2 ng/mL at week 37 continue until treatment discontinuation criteria are met. The primary endpoint is MFS comparing enzalutamide plus LHRHa versus placebo plus LHRHa. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is conducted under the guiding principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be disseminated at research conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02319837.

Pathological characteristics of prostate cancer in elderly men.

PURPOSE: Recent guidelines recommend that men older than 75 years should not be screened for prostate cancer. However, increased life expectancy and the development of less invasive treatments have led to an interest in characterizing prostate cancer in elderly men. We determined how prostate cancer pathological characteristics differ in men older vs younger than 70 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied differences in prostate cancer pathological characteristics in autopsied glands from men 70 years old or older and compared findings to those in men younger than 70 years. All men died of causes unrelated to prostate cancer. Prostates were whole mounted at 4 mm intervals. Histological analysis was done to identify and characterize each cancer focus observed. Tumor volume was measured by computerized planimetry. Cancer was defined as clinically significant or insignificant based on established histological characteristics. RESULTS: Of 211 prostates evaluated 74 were from men 70 years old or older. We identified cancer in 33 men (45%) in this age group vs in 26 of 137 (19%) younger than 70 years (p <0.001). Men older than 70 years had significantly larger cancer and more clinically significant cancer (64% vs 23%, p <0.005). Older men had more advanced stage cancer and greater Gleason scores (p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In an autopsy study of men with no history of prostate cancer those older than 70 years were more likely to have larger and higher grade prostate cancer than younger men.

Saturation biopsies on autopsied prostates for detecting and characterizing prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a 36-core saturation biopsy scheme on autopsied prostate glands to estimate the detection rate based on the true cancer prevalence, and to compare the cancer features on biopsy with whole-mount pathological analysis, as saturation biopsies have been proposed as a tool to increase the prostate cancer detection rate, and as a staging tool to identify potentially insignificant cancers before surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We took 36-core needle biopsies in 48 autopsied prostates from men who had no history of prostate cancer. The first 18 cores corresponded to an extended biopsy protocol including six cores each in the mid peripheral zone (PZ), lateral PZ and central zone. Six additional cores were then taken in each of these three locations. We compared the histological characteristics of step-sectioned prostates with the biopsy findings. Tumours were considered clinically insignificant if they were organ-confined with an index tumour volume of <0.5 mL and Gleason score of

MnSOD genotype and prostate cancer risk as a function of NAT genotype and smoking status.

BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoke contains carcinogenic aromatic and heterocyclic amines that are metabolized by N-acetyltransferase (NAT). These carcinogens also produce reactive oxygen species that are metabolized by manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). The association between prostate cancer (PCA) and the polymorphism of MnSOD and NAT, and cigarette smoking was investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DNA samples from 187 PCA patients and 175 age-matched controls were genotyped for MnSOD, NAT1 and NAT2 by PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and DNA sequencing. RESULTS: MnSOD AA genotype, as compared to MnSOD VV and VA, was associated with PCA (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.66. There was no association of PCA with NAT or smoking. Results of exploratory analyses of the data suggest that the association of PCA and MnSOD exists only in the subpopulation of rapid NAT1 genotypes and smokers. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates the association of PCA and MnSOD. Oxidative stress and cigarette smoking may play an important role in the carcinogenesis of the prostate in those who have MnSOD AA and rapid NAT1 genotypes.

Inspiring urology trainees to enter academic careers.

The physician-scientist in academic medical centers has been called as 'an endangered species'. Adverse socioeconomic pressures, lack of dedicated research time, and increasing difficulties in obtaining grant support, make it more and more difficult to attract talented individuals for this career path, and consequently to recruit and retain them in the urology departments. The challenges facing the young academic faculty, physician-scientists, and the research trainees represent a danger to the future of academic medicine. Only a concerted effort to balance the financial disincentives, providing a protected time, a nurturing environment, and the emphasis on outstanding mentors and role models, can secure the continued research and academic success of urology programs. The disproportionate representation of women and the minorities among academic faculty must be recognized and addressed.