Characterization of Wnt Signaling Pathway Aberrations in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Wnt-signaling pathway (WSP) alterations have been identified in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are implicated in disease progression and hormonal resistance. We utilized a multi-institutional dataset to characterize molecular alterations in the canonical and non-canonical WSP in PCa. Patients with PCa who underwent tissue-based genomic sequencing were investigated. Tumors with somatic activating mutations in CTNNB1 or RSPO2, or inactivating mutations in either APC or RNF43 were characterized as having aberrant canonical Wnt signaling (WSP-activated). Overall survival (OS) analyses were restricted to microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors lacking RNF43 G659fs* mutations. We also investigated non-canonical WSP by evaluation of ROR1, ROR2, and WNT5 in WSP-activated versus WSP wild-type (WSP-WT) tumors. Of 4,138 PCa samples, 3,684 were MSS. Among MSS tumors, 42.4% were from metastatic sites, of which 19.1% were WSP-activated, and 57.6% from the prostate, of which 10.1% were WSP-activated. WSP-activated tumors were more prevalent in metastatic sites than in primary PCa. WSP-activated PCa exhibited more SPOP mutations and higher expression of canonical WSP activators than WSP-WT tumors. ROR1 gene expression was elevated in WSP-activated tumors from both primary and metastatic sites. M2 macrophages predominated the tumor microenvironment in WSP-activated tumors. There was no significant difference in OS between WSP-activated and WSP-WT PCa patients. WSP-activated PCa demonstrated a more immunosuppressed tumor microenvironment and a pronounced upregulation of ROR1 gene expression, underscoring its potential involvement in the crosstalk between canonical and non-canonical Wnt signaling pathways. Implications: Our findings may provide rationale for developing novel therapeutic strategies targeting Wnt-activated PCa.

Advanced renal cell carcinoma management: the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG) consensus update.

PURPOSE: Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive disease with a high mortality rate. Management has drastically changed with the new era of immunotherapy, and novel strategies are being developed; however, identifying systemic treatments is still challenging. This paper presents an update of the expert panel consensus from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group on advanced renal cell carcinoma management in Brazil. METHODS: A panel of 34 oncologists and experts in renal cell carcinoma discussed and voted on the best options for managing advanced disease in Brazil, including systemic treatment of early and metastatic renal cell carcinoma as well as nonclear cell tumours. The results were compared with the literature and graded according to the level of evidence. RESULTS: Adjuvant treatments benefit patients with a high risk of recurrence after surgery, and the agents used are pembrolizumab and sunitinib, with a preference for pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant treatment is exceptional, even in initially unresectable cases. First-line treatment is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the choice of treatment is based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMCD) risk score. Patients at favourable risk receive ICIs in combination with TKIs. Patients classified as intermediate or poor risk receive ICIs, without preference for ICI + ICIs or ICI + TKIs. Data on nonclear cell renal cancer treatment are limited. Active surveillance has a place in treating favourable-risk patients. Either denosumab or zoledronic acid can be used for treating metastatic bone disease. CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are the standards of care for advanced disease. The utilization and sequencing of these therapeutic agents hinge upon individual risk scores and responses to previous treatments. This consensus reflects a commitment to informed decision-making, drawn from professional expertise and evidence in the medical literature.

Outcomes of Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma With Non-Clear Cell Histology Treated With Systemic Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and RCC with sarcomatoid differentiation have been under-represented in clinical trials. This study evaluates the outcomes and treatment patterns of patients with non-clear cell RCC and RCC with sarcomatoid features compared to those with clear cell RCC receiving systemic therapy. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of patients with advanced or metastatic RCC receiving systemic therapy was conducted. Patients were divided into groups based on histology: nonclear cell RCC, clear cell RCC, and RCC with and without sarcomatoid features. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) for each group calculated from the date of diagnosis of advanced or metastatic RCC to the date of last follow-up or death. Additionally, an exploratory analysis was conducted by nonclear cell type and type of first-line treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 251 patients were included, with most treated before 2018. First-line therapies included vascular endothelial growth factor monotherapy (68.5%), immunotherapy monotherapy (7.6%), immunotherapy combination therapy (16.7%), or other treatments (7.2%). Overall survival was shorter for patients with nonclear cell RCC compared to clear cell RCC (39.2 months vs. 81.1 months, hazard ratio (HR), 1.60, 95% Confidence Interval 1.0, 2.6, P = .04). Additionally, OS for patients with sarcomatoid differentiation was shorter compared to patients without sarcomatoid differentiation (43.4 vs. 75.0 months, HR 1.5, 95% CI 0.8, 2.6, P = .20). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate inferior outcomes among patients with advanced or metastatic nonclear cell RCC and RCC with sarcomatoid differentiation receiving systemic treatment. Further prospective studies are warranted testing immunotherapy combinations and novel treatments in patients with nonclear cell RCC.

New drug approvals in prostate cancer and their effect on the treatment landscape.

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed non-skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in men in the United States. Over the past decade, the treatment landscape for advanced prostate cancer has rapidly shifted. For decades, androgen deprivation therapy has been the cornerstone of systemic treatment for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, more recently, we have seen the emergence of doublet and triplet combinations in the mHSPC setting. At the same time, there is an expanding list of treatments for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), including hormonal treatments, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, bone-targeted agents, radioligand therapy, and targeted therapy. The shifting of the treatment landscape for advanced prostate cancer has raised many questions regarding patient selection, therapy choice, and sequencing of different approved agents, particularly in the mCRPC setting with the earlier use of chemotherapy and androgen receptor signaling inhibitors. Since then, multiple trials have been conducted to improve the management of mHSPC and delay its progression to mCRPC. This review article discusses various clinical trials that focus on novel therapeutic targets for prostate cancer and how the initiation of newer clinical trials has affected older therapies and trials.

"Non-metastatic, Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic and Treatment Recommendations by an Expert Panel from Brazil".

INTRODUCTION: Non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is an important clinical stage of prostate cancer, prior to morbidity and mortality from clinical metastases. In particular, the introduction of novel androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSi) has changed the therapeutic landscape in nmCRPC. Given recent developments in this field, we update our recommendations for the management of nmCRPC. METHODS: A panel of 51 invited medical oncologists and urologists convened in May of 2021 with the aim of discussing and providing recommendations regarding the most relevant issues concerning staging methods, antineoplastic therapy, osteoclast-targeted therapy, and patient follow-up in nmCRPC. Panel members considered the available evidence and their practical experience to address the 73 multiple-choice questions presented. RESULTS: Key recommendations and findings include the reliance on prostate-specific antigen doubling time for treatment decisions, the absence of a clear preference between conventional and novel (i.e., positron-emission tomography-based) imaging techniques, the increasing role of ARSis in various settings, the general view that ARSis have similar efficacy. Panelists highlighted the slight preference for darolutamide, when safety is of greater concern, and a continued need to develop high-level evidence to guide the intensity of follow-up in this subset of prostate cancer. DISCUSSION: Despite the limitations associated with a consensus panel, the topics addressed are relevant in current practice, and the recommendations can help practicing clinicians to provide state-of-the-art treatment to patients with nmCRPC in Brazil and other countries with similar healthcare settings.

Photobiomodulation as a treatment for dermatitis caused by chemoradiotherapy for squamous cell anal carcinoma: case report and literature review.

In-field dermatitis is a severe and common adverse effect of radiation therapy, that can cause significant pain and treatment interruptions in patients with squamous cell anal carcinoma (SCAC) being treated with radical chemoradiation protocols. There are no established therapies for the treatment of radiation induced dermatitis. Photobiomodulation (PBM) is an effective and low-cost treatment for radiation induced mucositis, but have recently been explored to treat in-field dermatitis. We present a case report of the successful use of PBM for the treatment of dermatitis in the anal area in a patient with SCAC treated with concomitant chemoradiation with curative intent and follow with a literature review of the recent advances and possibilities of the use of PBM as a promising strategy. PBM therapy proved to be efficient in the radiodermatitis treatment, both in relieving the symptoms and controlling dermatitis, in addition to improving the patient's quality of life.

A phase 2 randomized clinical trial of abiraterone plus ADT, apalutamide, or abiraterone and apalutamide in patients with advanced prostate cancer with non-castrate testosterone levels (LACOG 0415).

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with apalutamide, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel are the standard treatments for advanced castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC). We investigated ADT-free alternatives for advanced CSPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: LACOG 0415 is a phase 2, open-label, non-comparative, randomized trial. Patients with advanced CSPC were randomized (1:1:1) to receive goserelin plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (ADT plus AAP arm), apalutamide (APA arm), or apalutamide plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (APA plus AAP arm). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with PSA of ≤0.2 ng/mL at week 25 in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were performed in all patients with at least one dose of the study drug. RESULTS: Of 128 randomized patients, 120 patients were evaluable for PSA response at week 25; 17.2% had a high-risk biochemical recurrence, 8.6% had locally advanced disease, and 74.2% had distant metastases. At week 25, PSA of ≤0.2 ng/mL was observed in 75.6% (95%CI 59.7%-87.6%), 60.0% (95%CI 43.3%-75.1%), and 79.5% (95%CI 63.5%-90.7%) of patients in ADT plus AAP, APA, and APA plus AAP arms, respectively. PSA decline of ≥80% was observed in 100%, 90.0%, and 97.4%, respectively. Grade 3-4 AEs were observed in 31.0%, 21.4% and 36.4%, respectively. Testosterone levels increased significantly in the APA arm and decreased significantly in ADT plus AAP and APA plus AAP arms. CONCLUSIONS: ADT-free alternatives provide a high PSA response in advanced CSPC, although the APA arm did not reach the expected rate of PSA of ≤0.2 ng/mL at week 25. These results warrant further investigation of ADT-free treatments as alternatives in advanced CSPC. SOURCE STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02867020.

Prognostic factors in patients with advanced differentiated thyroid cancer treated with multikinase inhibitors - a single Brazilian center experience

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the real-world experience multikinase inhibitors (MKI) in the treatment advanced differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) refractory to radioactive iodine (RAIR) therapy. Subjects and methods: We reviewed the records of all patients with MKI-treated DTC from 2010 to 2018. Progression free survival (PFS), response rates (RR) and adverse events (AE) profiles were assessed. Clinical parameters were compared between groups with different outcomes (disease progression and death) to identify possible prognostic factors and benefit from treatment. Results: Forty-four patients received MKI for progressive RAIR DTC. Median PFS was 24 months (10.2-37.7) and median overall survival (OS) was 31 months. Best overall response was complete response in one patient (4.5%), partial response in nine (20.4%), stable disease in twenty-two (50%), and progressive disease (PD) in twelve (27.3%). Seventy-two point 7 percent patients had clinical benefit and AE were mild in most cases (82.7%). Progressive patients were more likely to have FDG positive target lesion than those who did not progress (p = 0.033) and higher maximum SUV on target lesions (p = 0.042). Presence of lung-only metastasis and lower thyroglobulin (Tg) during treatment was associated with stable disease (p = 0.015 and 0,049, respectively). Patients with shorter survival had larger primary tumor size (p = 0.015) and higher maximum SUV on target lesions (p = 0.023). Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate safety and effectiveness of MKI in patients with advanced RAIR DTC. We were able to identify as possible prognostic markers of better outcomes: absence of FDG uptake on target lesions, lower maximum SUV on PET-CT, presence of lung-only metastasis and lower Tg during treatment.

Prognostic factors in patients with advanced differentiated thyroid cancer treated with multikinase inhibitors - a single Brazilian center experience.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the real-world experience multikinase inhibitors (MKI) in the treatment advanced differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) refractory to radioactive iodine (RAIR) therapy. METHODS: We reviewed the records of all patients with MKI-treated DTC from 2010 to 2018. Progression free survival (PFS), response rates (RR) and adverse events (AE) profiles were assessed. Clinical parameters were compared between groups with different outcomes (disease progression and death) to identify possible prognostic factors and benefit from treatment. RESULTS: Forty-four patients received MKI for progressive RAIR DTC. Median PFS was 24 months (10.2-37.7) and median overall survival (OS) was 31 months. Best overall response was complete response in one patient (4.5%), partial response in nine (20.4%), stable disease in twenty-two (50%), and progressive disease (PD) in twelve (27.3%). Seventy-two point 7 percent patients had clinical benefit and AE were mild in most cases (82.7%). Progressive patients were more likely to have FDG positive target lesion than those who did not progress (p = 0.033) and higher maximum SUV on target lesions (p = 0.042). Presence of lung-only metastasis and lower thyroglobulin (Tg) during treatment was associated with stable disease (p = 0.015 and 0,049, respectively). Patients with shorter survival had larger primary tumor size (p = 0.015) and higher maximum SUV on target lesions (p = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate safety and effectiveness of MKI in patients with advanced RAIR DTC. We were able to identify as possible prognostic markers of better outcomes: absence of FDG uptake on target lesions, lower maximum SUV on PET-CT, presence of lung-only metastasis and lower Tg during treatment.

Consensus on the Treatment and Follow-Up for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Global Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: To present a summary of the recommendations for the treatment and follow-up for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) as acquired through a questionnaire administered to 99 physicians working in the field of prostate cancer in developing countries who attended the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries. METHODS: A total of 106 questions out of more than 300 questions addressed the use of imaging in staging mCRPC, treatment recommendations across availability and response to prior drug treatments, appropriate drug treatments, and follow-up, and those same scenarios when limited resources needed to be considered. Responses were compiled and the percentages were presented by clinicians to support each response. Most questions had five to seven relevant options for response including abstain and/or unqualified to answer, or in the case of yes or no questions, the option to abstain was offered. RESULTS: Most of the recommendations from this panel were in line with prior consensus, including the preference of a new antiandrogen for first-line therapy of mCRPC. Important aspects highlighted in the scenario of limited resources included the option of docetaxel as treatment preference as first-line treatment in several scenarios, docetaxel retreatment, consideration for reduced doses of abiraterone, and alternative schedules of an osteoclast-targeted therapy. CONCLUSION: There was wide-ranging consensus in the treatment for men with mCRPC in both optimal and limited resource settings.

Consensus on the Treatment and Follow-Up for the Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries.

PURPOSE: To present a summary of the recommendations for the treatment and follow-up for the biochemical recurrence of castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) as acquired through a questionnaire administered at the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries. METHODS: A total of 27 questions were identified as relating to this topic. Responses from the clinician were tallied and are presented in percentage format. Topics included the use of imaging in staging, treatment recommendations across different patient scenarios of life expectancy and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time, and follow-up for nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa. RESULTS: A consensus agreed that in optimal conditions, positron emission tomography-computed tomography with prostate-specific membrane antigen would be used although in limited resource situations the combined use of CT of the abdomen and pelvic (or pelvic MRI), a bone scan, and a CT of the thorax or chest x-ray was recommended. In cases when PSA levels double in < 10 months, more than 90% of clinicians agreed on the use of apalutamide or enzalutamide, regardless of life expectancy. With a doubling time of more than 10 months, > 54% of experts recommended no treatment independent of life expectancy. More than half of the experts, regardless of resources, recommended follow-up with a physical examination and PSA levels every 3-6 months and imaging only in the case of symptoms. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for biochemical recurrence of castration-resistant PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data.

Sequential therapies for advanced urothelial cancer: Hope meets new challenges.

A dramatic change in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinomas (UC) occurred in the last 3 years, initially with the development of several check-point inhibitors, for second and first-line therapy. More recently, the approval of anti-FGFR (Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor) and anti-nectin-4 inhibitors based on phase 2 studies in refractory disease, and the preliminary results of 3 randomized phase 3 trials combining chemotherapy and immunotherapy in first-line as well as using maintenance immunotherapy after chemotherapy induction, created a new paradigm in the treatment of metastatic disease. In this review, we will explore the new classes of agents and how they could be incorporated in the clinical practice as well as the results of recently presented randomized studies, guiding oncologists on the possible sequences for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Consensus on diagnosis and management of non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer in Brazil: focus on patient, selection, treatment efficacy, side effects and physician's perception according to patient comorbidities

ABSTRACT Background: Non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (M0 CRPC) has seen important developments in drugs and diagnostic tools in the last two years. New hormonal agents have demonstrated improvement in metastasis free survival in M0 CRPC patients and have been approved by regulatory agencies in Brazil. Additionally, newer and more sensitive imaging tools are able to detect metastasis earlier than before, which will impact the percentage of patients staged as M0 CRPC. Based on the available international guidelines, a group of Brazilian urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on the diagnosis and treatment of M0 CRPC in Brazil. These results are reviewed and summarized and associated recommendations are provided. Objective: To present survey results on management of M0 CRPC in Brazil. Design, setting, and participants: A panel of six Brazilian prostate cancer experts determined 64 questions concerning the main areas of interest: 1) staging tools, 2) treatments, 3) side effects of systemic treatment/s, and 4) osteoclast-targeted therapy. A larger panel of 28 Brazilian prostate cancer experts answered these questions in order to create country-specific recommendations discussed in this manuscript. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. These answers are the panelists' opinions, not a literature review or meta-analysis. Therapies not yet approved in Brazil were excluded from answer options. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two non-answers. Results were tabulated in real time. Conclusions: The results and recommendations presented can be used by Brazilian physicians to support the management of M0 CRPC patients. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data, however, for Brazil, guidelines for diagnosis and management of M0 CRPC patients have not been developed. This document will serve as a point of reference when confronting this disease stage.

Consensus on diagnosis and management of non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer in Brazil: focus on patient, selection, treatment efficacy, side effects and physician's perception according to patient comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (M0 CRPC) has seen important developments in drugs and diagnostic tools in the last two years. New hormonal agents have demonstrated improvement in metastasis free survival in M0 CRPC patients and have been approved by regulatory agencies in Brazil. Additionally, newer and more sensitive imaging tools are able to detect metastasis earlier than before, which will impact the percentage of patients staged as M0 CRPC. Based on the available international guidelines, a group of Brazilian urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on the diagnosis and treatment of M0 CRPC in Brazil. These results are reviewed and summarized and associated recommendations are provided. OBJECTIVE: To present survey results on management of M0 CRPC in Brazil. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A panel of six Brazilian prostate cancer experts determined 64 questions concerning the main areas of interest: 1) staging tools, 2) treatments, 3) side effects of systemic treatment/s, and 4) osteoclast-targeted therapy. A larger panel of 28 Brazilian prostate cancer experts answered these questions in order to create country-specific recommendations discussed in this manuscript. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. These answers are the panelists' opinions, not a literature review or meta-analysis. Therapies not yet approved in Brazil were excluded from answer options. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two non-answers. Results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSIONS: The results and recommendations presented can be used by Brazilian physicians to support the management of M0 CRPC patients. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data, however, for Brazil, guidelines for diagnosis and management of M0 CRPC patients have not been developed. This document will serve as a point of reference when confronting this disease stage.

Second brazilian consensus on the treatment of advanced prostate cancer: a SBOC-SBU-SBRT panel review

ABSTRACT Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer deaths. In Brazil, it is likewise the second most common cancer among men, second only to non-melanoma skin cancers. The aim of this consensus is to align different opinions and interpretations of the medical literature in a practical and patient-oriented approach. The first Brazilian Consensus on the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer was published in 2017, with the goal of reducing the heterogeneity of therapeutic conduct in Brazilian patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We acknowledge that in Brazil the incorporation of different technologies is a big challenge, especially in the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), which allows for the disparity in the options available to patients treated in different institutions. In order to update the recommendations and to make them objective and easily accessible, once more a panel of specialists was formed in order to discuss and elaborate a new Brazilian Consensus on Advanced Prostate Cancer. This Consensus was written through a joint initiative of the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology (SBOC) and the Brazilian Society of Urology (SBU) to support the clinical decisions of physicians and other health professionals involved in the care of patients with prostate cancer.

Second brazilian consensus on the treatment of advanced prostate cancer - a SBOC-SBU-SBRT panel review.

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer and the fi fth leading cause of cancer deaths. In Brazil, it is likewise the second most common cancer among men, second only to non-melanoma skin cancers. The aim of this consensus is to align different opinions and interpretations of the medical literature in a practical and patient-oriented approach. The fi rst Brazilian Consensus on the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer was published in 2017, with the goal of reducing the heterogeneity of therapeutic conduct in Brazilian patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We acknowledge that in Brazil the incorporation of different technologies is a big challenge, especially in the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), which allows for the disparity in the options available to patients treated in different institutions. In order to update the recommendations and to make them objective and easily accessible, once more a panel of specialists was formed in order to discuss and elaborate a new Brazilian Consensus on Advanced Prostate Cancer. This Consensus was written through a joint initiative of the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology (SBOC) and the Brazilian Society of Urology (SBU) to support the clinical decisions of physicians and other health professionals involved in the care of patients with prostate cancer.

The LACOG-0415 phase II trial: abiraterone acetate and ADT versus apalutamide versus abiraterone acetate and apalutamide in patients with advanced prostate cancer with non-castration testosterone levels.

BACKGROUND: Testosterone suppression is the standard treatment for advanced prostate cancer, and it is associated with side-effects that impair patients' quality of life, like sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis, weight gain, and increased cardiovascular risk. We hypothesized that abiraterone acetate with prednisone (AAP) and apalutamide, alone or in combination, can be an effective hormonal therapy also possibly decreasing castration-associated side effects. METHODS: Phase II, open-label, randomized, efficacy trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) and Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) versus apalutamide versus the combination of AAP (without ADT) and apalutamide. Key eligibility criteria are confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma; biochemical relapse after definitive treatment (PSA ≥ 4 ng/ml and doubling time less than 10 months, or PSA ≥ 20 ng/ml); newly diagnosed locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer; asymptomatic to moderately symptomatic regarding bone symptoms. Patients with other histology besides adenocarcinoma or previous use of hormonal therapy or chemotherapy were excluded. DISCUSSION: There is an urgent need to study and validate regimens such as new hormonal agents that may add benefit to castration with an acceptable safety profile. We aim to evaluate if apalutamide in monotherapy or in combination with AAP is an effective and safety hormonal treatment that can spare patients of androgen deprivation therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on October 16, 2017, under Identifier: NCT02867020.

Impact of 68GA-PSMA PET / CT on treatment of patients with recurrent / metastatic high risk prostate cancer - a multicenter study

ABSTRACT Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the clinical impact of 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT in the setting of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 125 prostate cancer patients submitted to the 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT due to biochemical recurrence. The parameters age, Gleason score, PSA levels, and the highest SUVmax were correlated to potential treatment changes. The highest SUVmax values were correlated with age and Gleason score. The median follow-up time was 24 months. Results: 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT led to a treatment change in 66 / 104 (63.4%) patients (twenty-one patients were lost to follow-up). There was a significant change of treatment plan in patients with a higher Gleason score (P = 0.0233), higher SUVmax (p = 0.0306) and higher PSA levels (P < 0.0001; median PSA = 2.55 ng / mL). Conclusion: 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence has a high impact in patient management.

Impact of 68GA-PSMA PET / CT on treatment of patients with recurrent / metastatic high risk prostate cancer - a multicenter study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the clinical impact of 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT in the setting of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 125 prostate cancer patients submitted to the 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT due to biochemical recurrence. The parameters age, Gleason score, PSA levels, and the highest SUVmax were correlated to potential treatment changes. The highest SUVmax values were correlated with age and Gleason score. The median follow-up time was 24 months. RESULTS: 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT led to a treatment change in 66 / 104 (63.4%) patients (twenty-one patients were lost to follow-up). There was a significant change of treatment plan in patients with a higher Gleason score (P = 0.0233), higher SUVmax (p = 0.0306) and higher PSA levels (P < 0.0001; median PSA = 2.55 ng / mL). CONCLUSION: 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence has a high impact in patient management.