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

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

Talazoparib, a Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor, for Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer and DNA Damage Response Alterations: TALAPRO-1 Safety Analyses.

BACKGROUND: The phase II TALAPRO-1 study (NCT03148795) demonstrated durable antitumor activity in men with heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Here, we detail the safety profile of talazoparib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men received talazoparib 1 mg/day (moderate renal impairment 0.75 mg/day) orally until radiographic progression, unacceptable toxicity, investigator decision, consent withdrawal, or death. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated: incidence, severity, timing, duration, potential overlap of selected AEs, dose modifications/discontinuations due to AEs, and new clinically significant changes in laboratory values and vital signs. RESULTS: In the safety population (N = 127; median age 69.0 years), 95.3% (121/127) experienced all-cause treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Most common were anemia (48.8% [62/127]), nausea (33.1% [42/127]), decreased appetite (28.3% [36/127]), and asthenia (23.6% [30/127]). Nonhematologic TEAEs were generally grades 1 and 2. No grade 5 TEAEs or deaths were treatment-related. Hematologic TEAEs typically occurred during the first 4-5 months of treatment. The median duration of grade 3-4 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia was limited to 7-12 days. No grade 4 events of anemia or neutropenia occurred. Neither BRCA status nor alteration origin significantly impacted the safety profile. The median (range) treatment duration was 6.1 (0.4-24.9) months; treatment duration did not impact the incidence of anemia. Only 3 of the 15 (11.8% [15/127]) permanent treatment discontinuations were due to hematologic TEAEs (thrombocytopenia 1.6% [2/127]; leukopenia 0.8% [1/127]). CONCLUSION: Common TEAEs associated with talazoparib could be managed through dose modifications/supportive care. Demonstrated efficacy and a manageable safety profile support continued evaluation of talazoparib in mCRPC. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03148795.

Talazoparib monotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with DNA repair alterations (TALAPRO-1): an open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have antitumour activity against metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers with DNA damage response (DDR) alterations in genes involved directly or indirectly in homologous recombination repair (HRR). In this study, we assessed the PARP inhibitor talazoparib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers with DDR-HRR alterations. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 trial (TALAPRO-1), participants were recruited from 43 hospitals, cancer centres, and medical centres in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, South Korea, the UK, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they were men aged 18 years or older with progressive, metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancers of adenocarcinoma histology, measurable soft-tissue disease (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 [RECIST 1.1]), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, DDR-HRR gene alterations reported to sensitise to PARP inhibitors (ie, ATM, ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, FANCA, MLH1, MRE11A, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C), had received one or two taxane-based chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease, and progressed on enzalutamide or abiraterone, or both, for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers. Eligible patients were given oral talazoparib (1 mg per day; or 0·75 mg per day in patients with moderate renal impairment) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, investigator decision, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate, defined as best overall soft-tissue response of complete or partial response per RECIST 1.1, by blinded independent central review. The primary endpoint was assessed in patients who received study drug, had measurable soft-tissue disease, and had a gene alteration in one of the predefined DDR-HRR genes. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03148795, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2017, and March 20, 2020, 128 patients were enrolled, of whom 127 received at least one dose of talazoparib (safety population) and 104 had measurable soft-tissue disease (antitumour activity population). Data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 4, 2020. After a median follow-up of 16·4 months (IQR 11·1-22·1), the objective response rate was 29·8% (31 of 104 patients; 95% CI 21·2-39·6). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (39 [31%] of 127 patients), thrombocytopenia (11 [9%]), and neutropenia (ten [8%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 43 (34%) patients. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Talazoparib showed durable antitumour activity in men with advanced metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers with DDR-HRR gene alterations who had been heavily pretreated. The favourable benefit-risk profile supports the study of talazoparib in larger, randomised clinical trials, including in patients with non-BRCA alterations. FUNDING: Pfizer/Medivation.

Retrospective Assessment of a Serum Proteomic Test in a Phase III Study Comparing Erlotinib plus Placebo with Erlotinib plus Tivantinib (MARQUEE) in Previously Treated Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The VeriStrat test provides accurate predictions of outcomes in all lines of therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated the predictive and prognostic role of VeriStrat in patients enrolled on the MARQUEE phase III trial of tivantinib plus erlotinib (T+E) versus placebo plus erlotinib (P+E) in previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Pretreatment plasma samples were available for 996 patients and were analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry to generate VeriStrat labels (good, VS-G, or poor, VS-P). RESULTS: Overall, no significant benefit in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were observed for the addition of tivantinib to erlotinib. Regardless of treatment arm, patients who were classified as VS-G had significantly longer PFS (3.8 mo for T+E arm, 2.0 mo for P+E arm) and OS (11.6 mo for T+E, 10.2 mo for P+E arm) than patients classified as VS-P (PFS: 1.9 mo for both arms, hazard ratio [HR], 0.584; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.468-0.733; p < .0001 for T+E, HR, 0.686; 95% CI, 0.546-0.870; p = .0015 for P+E; OS: 4.0 mo for both arms, HR, 0.333; 95% CI, 0.264-0.422; p < .0001 for T+E; HR, 0.449; 95% CI, 0.353-0.576; p < .0001 for P+E). The VS-G population had higher OS than the VS-P population within Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS) categories. VS-G patients on the T+E arm had longer PFS, but not OS, than VS-G patients on the P+E arm (p = .0108). Among EGFR mutation-positive patients, those with VS-G status had a median OS more than twice that of any other group (OS: 31.6 mo for T+E and 22.8 mo for P+E), whereas VS-P patients had similar survival rates as VS-G, EGFR-wild type patients (OS: 13.7 mo for T+E and 6.5 mo for P+E). CONCLUSION: In these analyses, VeriStrat showed a prognostic role within EGOC PS categories and regardless of treatment arm and EGFR status, suggesting that VeriStrat could be used to identify EGFR mutation-positive patients who will have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study suggests that VeriStrat testing could enhance the prognostic role of performance status and smoking status and replicates findings from other trials that showed that the VeriStrat test identifies EGFR mutation-positive patients likely to have a poor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Although these findings should be confirmed in other populations, VeriStrat use could be considered in EGFR mutation-positive patients as an additional prognostic tool, and these results suggest that EGFR mutation-positive patients with VeriStrat "poor" classification could benefit from other therapeutic agents given in conjunction with TKI monotherapy.

Activity and safety of metronomic cyclophosphamide in the modern era of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

AIM: To evaluate activity of metronomic cyclophosphamide (mCTX) in heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. PATIENTS & METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of 74 mCRPC patients treated with at least one new agent after docetaxel failure, who received once-daily oral mCTX treatment at a fixed dose of 50 mg. RESULTS: The treatment was well tolerated. Sixteen percent of the patients experienced a major biochemical response. Median progression-free survival was 4.0 months, and median overall survival was 8.1 months. CONCLUSIONS: In the modern context of mCRPC, mCTX may represent a valuable and inexpensive alternative to new agents, which have shown similar activity in heavily pretreated patients.

Prognostic impact of pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with first-line docetaxel.

BACKGROUND: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a measure of systemic inflammatory response, has been associated with poor outcome in several solid tumors, including prostate cancer. We retrospectively investigated the prognostic role of pretreatment NLR in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with first-line docetaxel. METHODS: All CRPC patients treated with first-line docetaxel at two Italian institutions, with available data about baseline neutrophil and lymphocyte values, were included in this retrospective analysis. Patients were divided in two groups according to NLR ratio (low NLR: ≤3; high NLR: >3). Outcome measures were progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), measured from the start of docetaxel treatment. Univariate and multivariate analysis (adjusting for baseline prostate-specific antigen, alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase, hemoglobin, albumin, performance status, use of opioids and presence of visceral disease) were performed. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-nine patients treated between 2004 and 2016 were analyzed and 110 had information about pretreatment NLR. Forty-six patients (42%) had low NLR and 64 (58%) had high NLR. Median PFS was 8.8 months in patients with low NLR versus 7.3 months in those with high NLR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.69, p = .58]. Median OS was 34.9 months in patients with low NLR versus 20.2 months in those with high NLR (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.07-3.19, p = .02). At multivariate analysis, NLR confirmed an independent impact on OS (HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.50-6.65, p = .002). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective series, metastatic CRPC patients who started first-line docetaxel with a low pretreatment NLR had a significantly better survival. In addition to known prognostic factors, NLR can be useful to improve prognostic evaluation of patients in this setting.

Treatment options in first-line metastatic renal carcinoma: A meta-analysis of 2556 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors-based combinations in randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The average five-year survival of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is 71%. However, there is significant variability in patient prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been introduced into the treatment landscape of mRCC. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate progression-free and overall survival probabilities and identify possible outcome predictors of mRCC patients treated with ICI combination as first-line treatment. METHODS: Studies comparing the combination of ICI combinations versus standard of therapy for first-line treatment of advanced renal-cell carcinoma were searched in MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and the Cochrane Library from inception through September 2023. Data on patient populations and outcomes were extracted from each study by three independent observers and combined using the DerSimonian and Laird methods. RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria. Globally, 5121 patients were included in this meta-analysis: 2556 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and 2565 with sunitinib as control. The ICI combination was associated with improved PFS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.68; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.56-0.81, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, ICI combination was also associated with OS improvement (HR 0.85; 95 % CI, 0.78-0.92, p = 0.001). There is no statistical increase in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that PFS and OS are statistically increased in mRCC with ICI combination treatment by 32% and 15%, respectively.

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

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

Antiandrogens as Therapies for COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the breakthrough of the coronavirus 2 disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), represented one of the major issues of our recent history. Different drugs have been tested to rapidly find effective anti-viral treatments and, among these, antiandrogens have been suggested to play a role in mediating SARS-CoV-2 infection. Considering the high heterogeneity of studies on this topic, we decided to review the current literature. METHODS: We performed a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. A search strategy was conducted on PUBMED and Medline. Only original articles published from March 2020 to 31 August 2023 investigating the possible protective role of antiandrogens were included. In vitro or preclinical studies and reports not in the English language were excluded. The main objective was to investigate how antiandrogens may interfere with COVID-19 outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1755 records, we selected 31 studies, the majority of which consisted of retrospective clinical data collections and of randomized clinical trials during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we can state that antiandrogens do not seem to protect individuals from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity and, thus, their use should not be encouraged in this field.

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

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

TEAM Study: Upfront Docetaxel Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Real-World, Multicenter, Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) dramatically changed. PEACE-1 and ARASENS trials established triplet therapy efficacy. Identifying prognostic factors supporting treatment choice is pivotal. METHODS: TEAM is an observational, retrospective study to evaluate prognostic role of variables in mHSPC patients receiving upfront docetaxel in 11 Italian centers. Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS). RESULTS: From September 2014 to December 2020, 147 patients were included. Median PFS and OS were 11.6 and 37.4 months. At univariate analysis, PFS-related variables were Gleason Score (GS) (P = .001), opioid use (P = .004), bone metastases number (P < .001), baseline PSA (P = .006), Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .002), time between ADT and docetaxel start (P = .018), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001), and number of docetaxel cycles (P < .001). OS-related variables were PSA at diagnosis (P = .024), primary tumor treatment (P = .022), baseline pain (P = .015), opioid use (P < .001), bone metastases number (P < . 001), baseline Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .001), NLR ratio (P = .039), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001) and docetaxel cycles number (P < .001). At multivariate analysis, independent prognostic variables were GS, opioid use, baseline LDH and time between ADT and docetaxel initiation for PFS, and baseline Hb and LDH for OS. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving upfront docetaxel with high GS, high disease burden, pain or opioid use, baseline unfavorable laboratory values had worse outcomes. Patients had greater docetaxel benefit when initiated early after ADT start. These parameters could be taken into account when selecting candidates for triplet therapy.

Avelumab Plus Intermittent Axitinib in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. The Tide-A Phase 2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Combinations of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) against PD1/PD-L1 are the standard first-line therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), irrespective of the prognostic class. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and safety of withdrawing VEGFR-TKI but continuing anti-PD1/PD-L1 in patients who achieve a response to their combination. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a single-arm phase 2 trial in patients with treatment-naïve mRCC with prior nephrectomy, without symptomatic/bulky disease and no liver metastases. INTERVENTION: Enrolled patients received axitinib + avelumab; after 36 wk of therapy those who achieved a tumour response interrupted axitinib and continued avelumab maintenance until disease progression. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was the rate of patients without progression 8 wk after the axitinib interruption. The secondary endpoints were the median value for progression-free (mPFS) and overall (mOS) survival and the safety in the overall population. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Seventy-nine patients were enrolled and 75 were evaluated for efficacy. A total of 29 (38%) patients had axitinib withdrawn, as per the study design, with 72% of them having no progression after 8 wk and thus achieving the primary endpoint. The mPFS of the overall population was 24 mo, while the mOS was not reached. The objective response rate was 76% (12% complete response and 64% partial response), with 19% of patients having stable disease. In the patients who discontinued axitinib, the incidence of adverse events of any grade was 59% for grade 3 and 3% for grade 4. This study was limited by the lack of a comparative arm. CONCLUSIONS: The TIDE-A study demonstrates that the withdrawal of VEGFR-TKI with ICI maintenance is feasible for selected mRCC patients with evidence of a response to the VEGFR-TKI + ICI combination employed in first-line therapy. Axitinib interruption with avelumab maintenance leads to decreased side effects and should be investigated further as a new strategy to delay tumour progression. PATIENT SUMMARY: We evaluated whether certain patients with advanced kidney cancer treated with the fist-line combination of axitinib plus avelumab can interrupt the axitinib in case of a tumour response after 36 wk of therapy. We found that axitinib interruption improved the safety of the combination, while the maintenance with avelumab might delay tumour progression.

Noninvasive Detection of Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer through Targeted Cell-free DNA Methylation.

Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is a heterogeneous disease associated with phenotypic subtypes that drive therapy response and outcome differences. Histologic transformation to castration-resistant neuroendocrine prostate cancer (CRPC-NE) is associated with distinct epigenetic alterations, including changes in DNA methylation. The current diagnosis of CRPC-NE is challenging and relies on metastatic biopsy. We developed a targeted DNA methylation assay to detect CRPC-NE using plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA). The assay quantifies tumor content and provides a phenotype evidence score that captures diverse CRPC phenotypes, leveraging regions to inform transcriptional state. We tested the design in independent clinical cohorts (n = 222 plasma samples) and qualified it achieving an AUC > 0.93 for detecting pathology-confirmed CRPC-NE (n = 136). Methylation-defined cfDNA tumor content was associated with clinical outcomes in two prospective phase II clinical trials geared towards aggressive variant CRPC and CRPC-NE. These data support the application of targeted DNA methylation for CRPC-NE detection and patient stratification. SIGNIFICANCE: Neuroendocrine prostate cancer is an aggressive subtype of treatment-resistant prostate cancer. Early detection is important, but the diagnosis currently relies on metastatic biopsy. We describe the development and validation of a plasma cell-free DNA targeted methylation panel that can quantify tumor fraction and identify patients with neuroendocrine prostate cancer noninvasively. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 384.

How Does Environmental and Occupational Exposure Contribute to Carcinogenesis in Genitourinary and Lung Cancers?

Environmental and occupational exposures have been associated with an increased risk of different types of cancers, although the exact mechanisms of higher carcinogenesis risk are not always well understood. Lung cancer is the leading cause of global cancer mortality, and, also, genitourinary neoplasms are among the main causes of cancer-related deaths in Western countries. The purpose of this review is to describe the main environmental and occupational factors that increase the risk of developing lung and genitourinary cancers and to investigate carcinogenesis mechanisms that link these agents to cancer onset. Further objectives are to identify methods for the prevention or the early detection of carcinogenic agents and, therefore, to reduce the risk of developing these cancers or to detect them at earlier stages.

Role of radium-223 discontinuation due to adverse events in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. A retrospective monocentric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radium 223 (Ra-223) was approved for the treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with bone-only disease, following demonstration of significant improvement in overall survival (OS). To date, there are no validated prognostic factors useful in predicting outcome of mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223. Our retrospective study aims to evaluate the prognostic role of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events in mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223, and to identify which factors correlate with the toxicity onset. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223 from September 2013 to December 2019 at our institute. Patients were divided in 2 groups according to the reason of Ra-223 therapy discontinuation: toxicity versus other causes. Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: In the overall population (75 patients) median PFS and OS were 5.46 months and 11.15 months respectively. Patients who discontinued treatment due to toxicity had a lower median PFS (3.49 vs 5.89 months, HR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.14-3.12, p = 0.014) and OS (8.59 vs 14.7 months HR: 3.33, 95% CI: 1.85-6.01, p < 0.001) than patients who discontinued therapy due to other causes. The risk of Ra-223 discontinuation due to toxicity correlates with the number of previous treatments (p = 0.002), previous chemotherapy treatment (p = 0.039), baseline LDH (p = 0.012), Hb (p = 0.021) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation due to toxicity is associated with worse outcomes in mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223. To reduce the risk of developing toxicities that may compromise treatment efficacy, Ra-223 should be used early in mCRPC patients.

Therapeutic sequencing in advanced renal cell carcinoma: How to choose considering clinical and biological factors.

In the last fifteen years a better understanding of the biological processes promoting tumour growth and progression led to an impressive revolution in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatment landscape. Angiogenesis plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of RCC. These biological evidences led to targeted therapies interfering with vascular endothelial growth factor and mammalian target of rapamycin pathway. Another big step in the RCC therapeutic landscape was recently made because of the understanding of the interplay between angiogenesis and immune cells. Dual immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and ICIs plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) combinations have been approved considering overall survival benefit compared to targeted therapies as first line treatment. We summarize the activity and the biological rationale of ICIs combinations as mRCC first line therapy. Additionally, we review the clinical and biological criteria useful to guide clinicians in the choice of treatment sequencing focusing on ICIs combinations resistance mechanisms.

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

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

Safety profile of darolutamide versus placebo: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Darolutamide is an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) used in patients with prostate cancer (PC). In pivotal trials, it has demonstrated a favorable toxicity profile. There are no head-to-head comparison studies between the different ARPIs, but the efficacy of these drugs seems to be similar making the toxicity profile a key element for treatment selection. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of all clinical trials assessing treatment with darolutamide for patients with PC using placebo as the control using the PubMed/Medline and Cochrane library databases. We also performed a meta-analysis to compare the safety of darolutamide versus placebo evaluating adverse events (AE) leading to treatment discontinuation and the rate of the AE reported as "AE of interest" in the ARAMIS trial. The comparison among darolutamide and the placebo group in terms of safety and tolerability was performed using odds ratio (OR) as meta-analytic outcome. RESULTS: We identified three articles comprising 2902 patients for the systematic review and meta-analysis (1652 treated with darolutamide and 1250 with placebo). Darolutamide did not increase AE leading to treatment discontinuation compared to placebo (pooled OR: 1.176, 95% CI 0.918-1.507, p = 0.633). Regarding the "AE of interest" there was no difference between darolutamide and placebo in terms of asthenia, cardiac arrhythmia, cardiac disorder, coronary artery disorder, depression mood disorder, falls, fatigue, heart failure, hot flushes, hypertension, mental-impairment disorder, rash, seizure and weight loss. The only "AE of interest" with a statistically significant difference in favor of placebo was bone fractures (pooled OR: 1.523, 95% CI 1.081-2.146). CONCLUSIONS: In our systematic review and meta-analysis, darolutamide showed a toxicity profile comparable to placebo with the exception of bone fractures. In the absence of head-to-head comparison studies between the different ARPIs, the results of our research suggest a preferred use of darolutamide in the approved settings.

Darolutamide Maintenance in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer With Nonprogressive Disease After Taxane Treatment (SAKK 08/16).

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of darolutamide maintenance after successful taxane chemotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) 08/16 is a randomized phase II study. Patients with mCRPC who received prior androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and subsequently had nonprogressive disease on a taxane were randomly assigned to darolutamide 600 mg twice a day or placebo twice a day. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) at 12 weeks. Secondary end points were rPFS, event-free survival, overall survival (OS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 50% response rate, and adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 92 patients were recruited by 26 centers. Prior taxane was docetaxel in 93% and cabazitaxel in 7%. Prior ARPI was abiraterone in 60%, enzalutamide in 31%, and both in 9%. rPFS at 12 weeks was significantly improved with darolutamide (64.7% v 52.2%; P = .127). Median rPFS on darolutamide was 5.5 versus 4.5 months on placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.91]; P = .017), and median event-free survival was 5.4 versus 2.9 months (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.73]; P = .001). PSA 50% response rate was improved (22% v 4%; P = .014). Median OS for darolutamide was 24 versus 21.3 months for placebo (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.3 to 1.26]; P = .181). Treatment-related adverse events were similar in both arms. CONCLUSION: SAKK 08/16 met its primary end point, showing that switch maintenance with darolutamide after prior taxane chemotherapy and at least one ARPI resulted in a statistically significant but clinically modest rPFS prolongation with good tolerability. The median OS with darolutamide maintenance appears promising. Should these findings be confirmed in a larger trial, maintenance treatment could be a novel strategy in managing patients with mCRPC, especially those who responded well to prior ARPI.