The effect of chemotherapy on the exposure-response relation of abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

AIMS: To assess whether the exposure-response relation for abiraterone is different in pre-chemotherapy patients compared to post-chemotherapy patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: Data were collected from three clinical studies in mCRPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the relation between abiraterone exposure and survival (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]). An interaction term was used to test whether chemotherapy pretreatment was an effect modifier. To investigate the effect of the previously defined exposure threshold of 8.4 ng/mL on survival, Kaplan-Meier analysis was used. RESULTS: In total, 98 mCRPC patients were included, of which 78 were pre-chemotherapy and 20 were post-chemotherapy patients. Chemotherapy pretreatment in mCRPC setting appears to be an effect modifier. In pre-chemotherapy patients, no significant association between abiraterone exposure and survival was observed (HR 0.68 [95% CI 0.42-1.10], P = .12 and HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.46-1.60], P = .61, PFS and OS, respectively) and no longer survival was seen for patients with an abiraterone exposure above the predefined threshold. In contrast, a significant association was seen in post-chemotherapy patients (HR 0.30 [95% CI 0.12-0.74], P = .01 and HR 0.38 [95% CI 0.18-0.82] P = .01, PFS and OS, respectively), with an increased survival when exposed above this threshold. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy pretreatment in mCRPC setting modifies the abiraterone exposure-response relation. No relation between abiraterone exposure and survival was seen for pre-chemotherapy patients. Therefore, potentially lower doses can be used in this setting to prevent overtreatment and reduce financial toxicity.

A Prospective Randomised Trial to Determine the Effect of a Reduced Versus Standard Dose of Enzalutamide on Side Effects in Frail Patients with Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Enzalutamide is a potent androgen receptor signalling inhibitor, effectively used for the treatment of different stages of prostate cancer. Side effects occur frequently at the registered dose, whilst a lower dose might be equally effective. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the effect of a reduced dose of enzalutamide on side effects in frail patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: This multicentre randomised trial compared the standard enzalutamide dose of 160 mg once daily (OD) with a reduced dose of 120 mg OD in frail patients with prostate cancer. Fatigue, cognitive side effects, and depressive symptoms were measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) questionnaire, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function (FACT-Cog) questionnaire, and Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (GDS-15). Linear mixed-effect models were used to study differences in side effects over time between both groups. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 52 patients were included in the analysis (25 reduced dose and 27 standard dose). Patients treated with the reduced dose had significantly lower fatigue after 24 wk than those with the standard dose (difference FACIT-Fatigue 6.2; 95% confidence interval 1.4-11.0; p = 0.01). Patients treated with the reduced dose showed stable fatigue, cognitive side effects, and depressive symptoms over time, whilst patients with the standard dose showed significantly worse side effects after 24 wk than at baseline. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A reduced dose of enzalutamide results in less fatigue, cognitive side effects, and depressive symptoms in frail patients with prostate cancer than the standard dose, without any indication of interference with efficacy endpoints. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the side effects of enzalutamide at two dose levels. We found that, in frail patients, three tablets a day result in less fatigue than four tablets a day. Patients treated with four tablets a day showed an increase in fatigue, cognitive side effects, and depression. We conclude that a lower dose of three tablets can be used to alleviate side effects without indications for less efficacy.

PARPing up the right tree; an overview of PARP inhibitors for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are transforming the current treatment landscape of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. By reanalysing published data on olaparib, talazoparib, rucaparib and niraparib, we provide a concise overview of responses by molecular subgroup. As monotherapy, all PARPi showed comparable efficacy and the same hierarchy in responsiveness: patients with tumours harbouring aberrations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCAm) evidently demonstrate superior responses when compared to aberrations in other homologous recombination repair (HRR) related genes. Niraparib seems to cause more grade ≥3 adverse events in comparison to other PARPi. PARPi have also been combined with androgen-receptor signalling inhibitors (ARSI) for both patients with tumours harbouring aberrations in HRR genes (HRRm), and molecularly unselected patients. Compared to wildtype, BRCAm patients responded best, followed by HRRm. Olaparib-abiraterone, niraparib-abiraterone, and talazoparib-enzalutamide all prolonged progression-free survival compared to an ARSI alone in HRRm patients. In the non-HRRm subgroup, only olaparib-abiraterone and talazoparib-enzalutamide were effective. Results for the combination of rucaparib with enzalutamide are yet to be reported. The rate of grade ≥3 adverse events for the combination regimens is 10-30% higher when compared to an ARSI alone. Given the limited efficacy in unselected patients, these PARPi-ARSI combinations may be best reserved for selected patients.

Pharmacokinetic boosting of olaparib: A randomised, cross-over study (PROACTIVE-study).

BACKGROUND: Pharmacokinetic (PK) boosting is the intentional use of a drug-drug interaction to enhance systemic drug exposure. PK boosting of olaparib, a CYP3A-substrate, has the potential to reduce PK variability and financial burden. The aim of this study was to investigate equivalence of a boosted, reduced dose of olaparib compared to the non-boosted standard dose. METHODS: This cross-over, multicentre trial compared olaparib 300 mg twice daily (BID) with olaparib 100 mg BID boosted with the strong CYP3A-inhibitor cobicistat 150 mg BID. Patients were randomised to the standard therapy followed by the boosted therapy, or vice versa. After seven days of each therapy, dense PK sampling was performed for noncompartmental PK analysis. Equivalence was defined as a 90% Confidence Interval (CI) of the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of the boosted versus standard therapy area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-12 h) within no-effect boundaries. These boundaries were set at 0.57-1.25, based on previous pharmacokinetic studies with olaparib capsules and tablets. RESULTS: Of 15 included patients, 12 were eligible for PK analysis. The GMR of the AUC0-12 h was 1.45 (90% CI 1.27-1.65). No grade ≥3 adverse events were reported during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Boosting a 100 mg BID olaparib dose with cobicistat increases olaparib exposure 1.45-fold, compared to the standard dose of 300 mg BID. Equivalence of the boosted olaparib was thus not established. Boosting remains a promising strategy to reduce the olaparib dose as cobicistat increases olaparib exposure Adequate tolerability of the boosted therapy with higher exposure should be established.