Evaluation of adherence to abiraterone therapy in prostate cancer patients based on a population pharmacokinetic model.

AIMS: Abiraterone treatment requires regular drug intake under fasting conditions due to pronounced food effect, which may impact patient adherence. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate adherence to abiraterone treatment in patients with prostate cancer. To achieve this aim, an abiraterone population pharmacokinetic model was developed and patients' adherence has been estimated by comparison of measured levels of abiraterone with population model-based simulations. METHODS: A total of 1469 abiraterone plasma levels from 83 healthy volunteers collected in a bioequivalence study were analysed using a nonlinear mixed-effects model. Monte Carlo simulation was used to describe the theoretical distribution of abiraterone pharmacokinetic profiles at a dose of 1000 mg once daily. Adherence of 36 prostate cancer patients treated with abiraterone was then evaluated by comparing the real abiraterone concentration measured in each patient during follow-up visit with the theoretical distribution of profiles based on simulations. Patients whose abiraterone levels were ˂5th or ˃95th percentile of the distribution of simulated profiles were considered to be non-adherent. RESULTS: Based on this evaluation, 13 patients (36%) have been classified as non-adherent. We observed significant association (P = .0361) between richness of the breakfast and rate of non-adherence. Adherent patients reported significantly better overall condition in self-assessments (P = .0384). A trend towards a higher occurrence of adverse effects in non-adherent patients was observed. CONCLUSIONS: We developed an abiraterone population pharmacokinetic model and proposed an advanced approach to medical adherence evaluation. Due to the need for administration under fasting conditions, abiraterone therapy is associated with a relatively high rate of non-adherence.

The drospirenone only pill as a contraceptive option for breastfeeding women: First data on users' acceptability and newborn development.

BACKGROUND: Progestin-only pills (POPs) have been used for contraception in breastfeeding women for years. The existing guidelines allow the use of these contraceptives. METHODS: Multicenter study with a single visit and retrospective data review. The study involved 100 women who used a drospirenone-only pill (DRSP) for contraception for at least 5 months during breastfeeding. The study aimed to analyze for those successful users the impact on new-born development, the bleeding profile and evaluate user satisfaction. RESULTS: Analysis of the newborns showed that their growth parameters length and weight, were within the expected range of standard development. The mean birth weight was 3368 g, with the lowest recorded weight being 2860 g and the highest 5040 g. The median length of the newborns was 55 cm, ranging from 35 to 65 cm. All new-borns demonstrated appropriate growth within the established percentiles. Acceptability with the bleeding profile was rated with a VAS score: the mean acceptability rating was 82.8. Women aged 35 years or older reported significantly higher acceptability compared to younger women (≥35 years: mean = 88.4, SD = 16.5; <35 years: mean = 80.3, SD = 20.2) (p = 0.02). Sixty-one patients (N = 61; 61.0%; 95% CI: 50.7 - 70.4%) expressed willingness to continue using DRSP after breastfeeding. CONCLUSION: Among those patients who continued the use of the DRSP only-pill for 5 months, this study shows no negative impact for new-borns, with no clinical influence observed on their growth. Additionally, those users expressed high satisfaction with the bleeding profile of the pill.Clinical trial registration number: DRKS00028438 .

Hypersensitivity reaction to Abiraterone, successful desensitization protocol in prostate cancer patient.

INTRODUCTION: In prostate cancer, androgens are key in the growth of both normal prostate and cancer cells. Abiraterone acetate inhibits CYP17, an important target in prostate cancer given its central role in the production of adrenal and tumor-derived androgens. Although abiraterone is generally well tolerated, common adverse effects such as hypertension, hypokalemia, and hepatotoxicity have been reported. CLINICAL CASE: We present the case of an 83-year-old Mexican man with high-volume EC IV prostate cancer resistant to castration, orchiectomy, and bone, liver, and lung metastases. First-line treatment with the CHAARTED scheme was indicated, by patient decision refuse chemotherapy treatment. On the fourth day of starting treatment, he developed pruritic erythematous macular skin lesions and urticaria on the posterior chest that resolved spontaneously. A generalized erythematous and pruritic maculopapular rash appeared 12 days after starting abiraterone, for which she was referred to allergies. MANAGEMENT AND RESULTS: An oral provocation test was performed for two days, presenting localized macular lesions eight hours after the administration of abiraterone. An oral desensitization protocol was carried out for ten days in which no hypersensitivity reactions were observed, thus achieving the successful administration of abiraterone.

The efficacy of levonorgestrelintrauterine system, drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II) and dydrogesterone in preventing the recurrence of endometrial polyps.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy of levonorgestrelintrauterine system, Drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II), and dydrogesterone in preventing the recurrence of endometrial polyps after hysteroscopic endometrial polypectomy. METHODS: One hundred seventy patients who underwent hysteroscopic endometrial polypectomy in the Gynecology Department of Tianmen First People's Hospital in Hubei Province from January 2022 to June 2023 were randomly divided into the levonorgestrelintrauterine system group, Drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II) group, dydrogesterone group, and a control group. The recurrence rates, endometrial thickness, and menstrual volume changes at 6 and 12 months post-operation were compared among these four groups. RESULTS: The recurrence rates in the levonorgestrelintrauterine system group, Drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II) group, and dydrogesterone group were lower than the control group, with statistical significance (P < 0.01), with the levonorgestrelintrauterine system group having the lowest recurrence rate. The endometrial thickness at 6 and 12 months post-operation in the levonorgestrelintrauterine system group, Drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II) group, and dydrogesterone group was thinner than that of the control group and thinner than pre-operation, with statistical significance (P < 0.01). The menstrual volume at 3 months post-operation in the levonorgestrelintrauterine system group, Drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II) group, and dydrogesterone group was significantly less than the control group, and less than the pre-operation volume. CONCLUSION: Dydrogesterone, drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II), and levonorgestrelintrauterine system all play a role in preventing the recurrence of endometrial polyps, but levonorgestrelintrauterine system is significantly better than dydrogesterone and Drospirenone & ethinylestradiol tablets (II) in terms of postoperative recurrence rate, endometrial thickness, menstrual changes, and compliance, and is worth promoting in clinical application.

Inhibition ratio (I.R.) and transformation index (T.I.): new indexes to compare the effectiveness and clinical behaviour of modern progestin-only pills (POP).

Progestin-only pills (POPs) have emerged as a crucial contraceptive option for women, particularly those contraindicated to oestrogens. This opinion paper introduces two new indices, the Inhibition Ratio (I.R.) (cyclical and daily) and the Transformation Index (T.I.), to evaluate and compare the efficacy and clinical behaviour of modern POPs. The I.R. quantifies the ratio between the progestin dosage in a POP and the minimum dose required to inhibit ovarian function, providing insights into contraceptive efficacy. The T.I., on the other hand, assesses its clinical impact by considering the ratio between the total progestin dose and the dose required to induce endometrial luteinising changes. Both indices thus offer valuable tools for comparing progestins even at significantly different dosages and regimens, providing information on clinical characteristics and drug effects. The newest formulations of POPs (Desogestrel 28 and Drospirenone 24 + 4) have demonstrated higher I.R. and T.I. in comparison to older versions, indicating significant improvements in contraceptive efficacy and clinical impact with better menstrual cycle control. We believe that using these indices will ensure a more informed and personalised choice of progestin not only for contraceptive purposes but also for therapeutic use in gynaecology. The future goal is to develop other progestins with even more advantageous I.R. and T.I., ensuring the best contraceptive efficacy with fewer side effects, even in women at risk (obese, etc.).

The Inhibition Ratio (I.R.) (cyclical and daily) and the Transformation Index (T.I.) are two new proposed indexes to evaluate and compare the efficacy and clinical behaviour of modern and future POPs.

Cabazitaxel versus Abiraterone or Enzalutamide in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel, as compared with an androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide), in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were previously treated with docetaxel and had progression within 12 months while receiving the alternative inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide) are unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients who had previously received docetaxel and an androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide) to receive cabazitaxel (at a dose of 25 mg per square meter of body-surface area intravenously every 3 weeks, plus prednisone daily and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) or the other androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (either 1000 mg of abiraterone plus prednisone daily or 160 mg of enzalutamide daily). The primary end point was imaging-based progression-free survival. Secondary end points of survival, response, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients underwent randomization. After a median follow-up of 9.2 months, imaging-based progression or death was reported in 95 of 129 patients (73.6%) in the cabazitaxel group, as compared with 101 of 126 patients (80.2%) in the group that received an androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.73; P<0.001). The median imaging-based progression-free survival was 8.0 months with cabazitaxel and 3.7 months with the androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor. The median overall survival was 13.6 months with cabazitaxel and 11.0 months with the androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.89; P = 0.008). The median progression-free survival was 4.4 months with cabazitaxel and 2.7 months with an androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.68; P<0.001), a prostate-specific antigen response occurred in 35.7% and 13.5% of the patients, respectively (P<0.001), and tumor response was noted in 36.5% and 11.5% (P = 0.004). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 56.3% of patients receiving cabazitaxel and in 52.4% of those receiving an androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Cabazitaxel significantly improved a number of clinical outcomes, as compared with the androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide), in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had been previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen-signaling-targeted agent (abiraterone or enzalutamide). (Funded by Sanofi; CARD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02485691.).

Redirecting abiraterone metabolism to fine-tune prostate cancer anti-androgen therapy.

Abiraterone blocks androgen synthesis and prolongs survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer, which is otherwise driven by intratumoral androgen synthesis. Abiraterone is metabolized in patients to Δ(4)-abiraterone (D4A), which has even greater anti-tumour activity and is structurally similar to endogenous steroidal 5α-reductase substrates, such as testosterone. Here, we show that D4A is converted to at least three 5α-reduced and three 5ß-reduced metabolites in human serum. The initial 5α-reduced metabolite, 3-keto-5α-abiraterone, is present at higher concentrations than D4A in patients with prostate cancer taking abiraterone, and is an androgen receptor agonist, which promotes prostate cancer progression. In a clinical trial of abiraterone alone, followed by abiraterone plus dutasteride (a 5α-reductase inhibitor), 3-keto-5α-abiraterone and downstream metabolites were depleted by the addition of dutasteride, while D4A concentrations rose, showing that dutasteride effectively blocks production of a tumour-promoting metabolite and permits D4A accumulation. Furthermore, dutasteride did not deplete the three 5ß-reduced metabolites, which were also clinically detectable, demonstrating the specific biochemical effects of pharmacological 5α-reductase inhibition on abiraterone metabolism. Our findings suggest a previously unappreciated and biochemically specific method of clinically fine-tuning abiraterone metabolism to optimize therapy.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for oligoprogressive lesions in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients during abiraterone/enzalutamide treatment.

BACKGROUND: Metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) utilizing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for oligoprogressive lesions could provide a delay in next-line systemic treatment (NEST) change while undergoing androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTA) treatment. We evaluated prognostic factors for prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) and progression-free survival (PFS) to characterize patients receiving treatment with ARTA who may benefit from MDT for oligoprogressive lesions. The impact of MDT on delaying NEST and the predictive factors for NEST-free survival (NEST-FS) were also assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinical data of 54 metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with 126 oligoprogressive lesions receiving abiraterone (1 g/day) or enzalutamide (160 mg/day) before or after systemic chemotherapy were analyzed. A median of three lesions (range: 1-5) were treated with MDT. The primary endpoints were PCSS and PFS. The secondary endpoints were time to switch to NEST and NEST-FS. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 19.1 months. Univariate analysis showed that the number of oligoprogressive lesions treated with SBRT and the time between the start of ARTA treatment and oligoprogression were significant prognostic factors for PCSS, and the timing of ARTA treatment (before or after chemotherapy) and the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response after MDT were significant prognostic factors for PFS. Multivariate analysis showed that early MDT for oligoprogressive lesions delivered less than 6 months after the beginning of ARTA and higher PSA levels after MDT were significant predictors of worse PCSS and PFS. The median total duration of ARTA treatment was 13.8 months. The median time between the start of ARTA treatment and the start of MDT for oligoprogressive lesions was 5.2 months, and MDT extended the ARTA treatment by 8.6 months on average. Thirty-two (59.3%) patients continued ARTA treatment after MDT. ARTA treatment after chemotherapy, early oligoprogression requiring MDT, and lower radiation doses for MDT were independent predictors of NEST-FS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: MDT for oligoprogressive lesions is effective and may provide several benefits compared to switching from ARTA treatment to NEST. Patients with early progression while on ARTAs and inadequate PSA responses after MDT have a greater risk of rapid disease progression and poor survival, which necessitates intensified treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of cabazitaxel for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer after docetaxel and androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor resistance.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel who had progression within 12 months while receiving an alternative inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide) from a US payer's perspective. METHODS: To conduct the cost-effectiveness analysis, a Markov decision model was established. Three health states (progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD) and death) were included, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was regarded as the primary endpoint. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $100,000.00/quality-adjusted life year (QALY), and discounted rates were set at 3% annually. Efficacy data were derived from the CARD trial and Weibull distribution curves were modeled to fit the survival curves. The robustness of the analysis was tested with a series of one-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Overall, the incremental effectiveness and cost of cabazitaxel versus androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitors (ASTIs) were 0.16 QALYs and $49,487.03, respectively, which yielded an ICER of $309,293.94/QALY. Our model was mostly sensitive to the duration of PFS in the cabazitaxel group, cost of cabazitaxel and utility of the PFS state. At a WTP threshold of $100,000.00/QALY, cabazitaxel was the dominant strategy in 0% of the simulations. CONCLUSIONS: Cabazitaxel is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment option compared with ASTIs in patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel who had progression within 12 months while receiving ASTIs.

Efficacy and tolerability of current treatments for hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients with visceral metastases.

Aim: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of the first-line treatment options for hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients with visceral metastases. Materials & methods: The records of 191 patients diagnosed with hormone-refractory prostate cancer with visceral metastases were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Docetaxel was administered to 61.2% (n = 117), abiraterone to 14.2% (n = 27) and enzalutamide to 9.4% (n = 18) as the first-line treatment. The median survival of the patients receiving docetaxel, abiraterone and enzalutamide as the first-line treatment during the hormone-refractory period was 15 (95% Cl: 12.9-17) months, 6 (95% Cl: 1.8-10.1) months and 11 (95% Cl: 0.9-23.1) months (p = 0.038), respectively. Conclusion: The present study established a statistically significant difference in favor of docetaxel in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival.

Lay abstract The optimal therapeutic option for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients with visceral metastases is unknown. We assessed the efficacy and tolerability of the first-line treatment options for CRPC patients with visceral metastasis. One hundred ninety-one patients diagnosed with CRPC with visceral metastases were included in the study. The present study established a statistically significant difference in favor of docetaxel in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival between first-line docetaxel, abiraterone and enzalutamide treatments in CRPC patients with visceral metastases. For patients who cannot undergo chemotherapy, enzalutamide, among novel androgen pathway inhibitors, may be the most appropriate option, given its numerical, although statistically insignificant, difference in overall survival and its fewer side effects compared with abiraterone.

Overall and bleeding-related discontinuation rates of a new oral contraceptive containing 4 mg drospirenone only in a 24/4 regimen and comparison to 0.075 mg desogestrel.

OBJECTIVES: Progestin-only pills do not increase the risk of venous thromboembolism, stroke, and myocardial infarction but are associated with poor cycle control. A novel estrogen-free pill containing only drospirenone (DRSP) to improve bleeding patterns and tolerability and reduce discontinuation rates has been introduced into the market. The present study aims to describe the improvement in the acceptability of this DRSP-only pill, e.g. regarding the bleeding profile and the reduction in discontinuation rates due to unacceptable bleeding compared to desogestrel (DSG). STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind, double-dummy prospective phase III study in healthy women aged 18-45 years evaluating a total of 858 women with 6691 DRSP and 332 women with 2487 DSG treatment cycles. RESULTS: Overall, 82 (9.6%) women in the DRSP group and 44 (13.3%) women in the DSG group experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) leading to premature termination of the trial meaning that 32% more women in the DRSP group finished the trial in comparison to the DSG group (based on the AUC of Kaplan-Meier's curves). Discontinuation rates due to abnormal bleeding were 3.7% for DRSP and 7.3% for DSG users. This is a 55.7% lower discontinuation rate in the DRSP group compared to the DSG group. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the improvement in acceptability and bleeding profile of women using the new DRSP-only oral contraceptive compared to DSG, providing a better quality of life and adherence to the contraceptive method as demonstrated by lower discontinuation rates of women using the estrogen-free DRSP-only pill.

Quality of life in patients with metastatic prostate cancer following treatment with cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide (CARD): an analysis of a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study.

BACKGROUND: In the CARD study, cabazitaxel significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. Here, we report the quality-of-life outcomes from the CARD study. METHODS: CARD was a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study involving 62 clinical sites across 13 European countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤2) with confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive voice-web response system to receive cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks, 10 mg daily prednisone, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus abiraterone (1000 mg orally once daily plus 5 mg prednisone twice daily) or enzalutamide (160 mg orally daily). Stratification factors were ECOG performance status, time to disease progression on the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor, and timing of the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival; here, we present more detailed analyses of pain (assessed using item 3 on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPI-SF]) and symptomatic skeletal events, alongside preplanned patient-reported outcomes, assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire and the EuroQoL-5 dimensions, 5 level scale (EQ-5D-5L). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Pain response was analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of BPI-SF item 3, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of either FACT-P or EQ-5D-5L (PRO population). Analyses of skeletal-related events were also done in the intention-to-treat population. The CARD study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02485691, and is no longer enrolling. FINDINGS: Between Nov 17, 2015, and Nov 28, 2018, of 303 patients screened, 255 were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel (n=129) or abiraterone or enzalutamide (n=126). Median follow-up was 9·2 months (IQR 5·6-13·1). Pain response was observed in 51 (46%) of 111 patients with cabazitaxel and 21 (19%) of 109 patients with abiraterone or enzalutamide (p<0·0001). Median time to pain progression was not estimable (NE; 95% CI NE-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·5 months (4·9-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·55, 95% CI 0·32-0·97; log-rank p=0·035). Median time to symptomatic skeletal events was NE (95% CI 20·0-NE) with cabazitaxel and 16·7 months (10·8-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·35-1·01; log-rank p=0·050). Median time to FACT-P total score deterioration was 14·8 months (95% CI 6·3-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·9 months (6·3-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·72, 95% CI 0·44-1·20; log-rank p=0·21). There was a significant treatment effect seen in changes from baseline in EQ-5D-5L utility index score in favour of cabazitaxel over abiraterone or enzalutamide (p=0·030) but no difference between treatment groups for change from baseline in EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (p=0·060). INTERPRETATION: Since cabazitaxel improved pain response, time to pain progression, time to symptomatic skeletal events, and EQ-5D-5L utility index, clinicians and patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer can be reassured that cabazitaxel will not reduce quality of life when compared with treatment with a second androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. FUNDING: Sanofi.

PSMA ADC monotherapy in patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer following abiraterone and/or enzalutamide: Efficacy and safety in open-label single-arm phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a well-established therapeutic and diagnostic target overexpressed in both primary and metastatic prostate cancers. PSMA antibody-drug conjugate (PSMA ADC) is a fully human immunoglobulin G1 anti-PSMA monoclonal antibody conjugated to monomethylauristatin E, which binds to PSMA-positive cells and induces cytotoxicity. In a phase 1 study, PSMA ADC was well tolerated and demonstrated activity as measured by reductions in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and circulating tumor cells (CTCs). To further assess PSMA ADC, we conducted a phase 2 trial in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) subjects who progressed following abiraterone/enzalutamide (abi/enz) therapy. METHODS: A total of 119 (84 chemotherapy-experienced and 35 chemotherapy-naïve) subjects were administered PSMA ADC 2.5 or 2.3 mg/kg IV q3w for up to eight cycles. Antitumor activity (best percentage declines in PSA and CTCs from baseline and tumor responses through radiological imaging), exploratory biomarkers, and safety (monitoring of adverse events [AEs], clinical laboratory tests, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status) were assessed. RESULTS: PSA declines ≥50% occurred in 14% of all treated (n = 113) and 21% of chemotherapy-naïve subjects (n = 34). CTC declines ≥50% were seen in 78% of all treated (n = 77; number of subjects with ≥5 CTCs at baseline and a posttreatment result) and 89% of chemotherapy-naïve subjects (n = 19); 47% of all treated and 53% of chemotherapy-naïve subjects had a transition from ≥5 to less than 5 CTCs/7.5 mL blood at some point during the study. PSA and CTC reductions were associated with high PSMA expression (CTCs or tumor tissue) and low neuroendocrine serum markers. In the chemotherapy-experienced group, the best overall radiologic response to PSMA ADC treatment was stable disease in 51 (60.7%) subjects; 5.7% of subjects in the chemotherapy-naïve group had partial responses. The most common treatment-related AEs ≥Common Terminology Criteria for AE (CTCAE) grade 3 were neutropenia, fatigue, electrolyte imbalance, anemia, and neuropathy. The most common serious AEs were dehydration, hyponatremia, febrile neutropenia, and constipation. Two subjects who received 2.5 mg/kg died of sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: PSMA ADC demonstrated some activity with respect to PSA declines, CTC conversions/reductions, and radiologic assessments in abi/enz treated mCRPC subjects. Clinically significant treatment-related AEs included neutropenia and neuropathy.

Systemic treatment for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer: Does seqence matter?

BACKGROUND: Optimal sequencing of systemic therapy in the management for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains poorly elucidated. The CHAARTED and STAMPEDE studies have proven that early chemotherapy in the hormone-sensitive setting yields a greater net survival advantage than docetaxel for mCRPC. In a retrospective study, we attempt to investigate the two most common treatment sequences for mCRPC and investigate whether earlier chemotherapy for mCRPC is consequential to survival outcomes. METHODS: We identified 112 patients with mCRPC treated at the Mayo Clinic between 2011 and 2017. We identified two cohorts, 80 patients (group A) received full course docetaxel chemotherapy followed by second generation hormone therapy (2nd gen androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]; Abiraterone or Enzalutamide) and 32 patients (group B) treated with 2nd gen ADT followed by docetaxel. The primary endpoint evaluated was 3-year cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: Mean prostate specific antigen at initiation of first treatment was 32.0 in group A and 21.7 in group B (P = .4). Bone metastases were more prevalent in group B (87% vs 58%, P = .01). All other clinicopathologic variables were statistically similar between group A and group B. Three-year cancer-specific survival was 87.4% vs 64.1% for group A and group B, respectively (P = .016). We report a univariate hazard ratio of 3.61 (95% CI, 1.74-9.5, 0 P = .01). Three-year overall survival was 82.4% and 60.8% for group A and group B, P = .01. These results held true when excluding patients with lymph node only metastasi. CONCLUSION: Our data indicates that sequence of systemic therapy may influence outcomes for mCRPC and that docetaxel should be considered before 2nd generation ADT. Our results support the importance of earlier chemotherapy in the castration resistant state.

Adherence and out-of-pocket costs among Medicare beneficiaries who are prescribed oral targeted therapies for advanced prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone and enzalutamide are high-cost oral therapies that increasingly are used to treat patients with advanced prostate cancer; these agents carry the potential for significant financial consequences to patients. In the current study, the authors investigated coping and material measures of the financial hardship of these therapies among patients with Medicare Part D coverage. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study on a 20% sample of Medicare Part D enrollees who underwent treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide between July 2013 and June 2015. The authors described the variability in adherence rates and out-of-pocket payments among hospital referral regions in the first 6 months of therapy and determined whether adherence and out-of-pocket payments were associated with patient factors and the socioeconomic characteristics of where a patient was treated. RESULTS: There were 4153 patients who filled abiraterone or enzalutamide prescriptions through Medicare Part D in 228 hospital referral regions. The mean adherence rate was 75%. The median monthly out-of-pocket payment for abiraterone and enzalutamide was $706 (range, $0-$3505). After multilevel, multivariable adjustment for patient and regional factors, adherence was found to be lower in patients who were older (69% for patients aged ≥85 years vs 76% for patients aged <70 years; P < .01) and in those with low-income subsidies (69% in those with a subsidy vs 76% in those without a subsidy; P < .01). Both Hispanic ethnicity and living in a hospital referral region with a higher percentage of Hispanic beneficiaries were found to be independently associated with higher out-of-pocket payments for abiraterone and enzalutamide. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial variations in the adherence rate and out-of-pocket payments among Medicare Part D beneficiaries who were prescribed abiraterone and enzalutamide. Sociodemographic patient and regional factors were found to be associated with both adherence and out-of-pocket payments.

New Antiandrogen Compounds Compared to Docetaxel for Metastatic Hormone Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Results from a Network Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Docetaxel represent the standard of care in patients with metastatic, hormone sensitive prostate cancer. However, androgen receptor axis targeted therapies have also been shown to be effective. We aimed to analyze findings in randomized controlled trials investigating first-line treatment for hormone sensitive prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) criteria and the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes) methodology. Outcomes of interest were overall and progression-free survival, and the rate of high grade adverse events. RESULTS: No treatment was superior to docetaxel in terms of overall survival. However, abiraterone (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76-1.05), enzalutamide (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69-1.19) and apalutamide (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67-1.22) showed nonstatistically significant lower overall mortality rates than docetaxel. Abiraterone (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86), enzalutamide (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.75) and apalutamide (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.57-0.95) also showed statistically significant lower disease progression rates than docetaxel. Furthermore, abiraterone (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.56-1.21) showed no statistically significant lower rate of high grade adverse events compared to docetaxel. Finally, enzalutamide (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.92) and apalutamide (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24-0.79) showed statistically significant lower rates of high grade adverse events compared to docetaxel. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with androgen receptor axis targeted therapies combined with androgen deprivation therapy in patients with hormone sensitive prostate cancer did not offer a statistically significant advantage in overall survival compared to the standard, docetaxel. However, it was associated with a lower disease progression rate. Moreover, apalutamide and enzalutamide offer a better safety profile.

Propensity score-matched comparison of docetaxel and androgen receptor axis-targeted agents in patients with castration-resistant intraductal carcinoma of the prostate.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of docetaxel and androgen receptor axis-targeted (ARAT) agents in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) with intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) using a propensity score-matched analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified 309 patients with CRPC from February 2007 to February 2016 at Nagoya University and its affiliated hospitals. All patients received initial androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). After progression to CRPC, they received docetaxel or ARAT (abiraterone or enzalutamide) as first-line life-prolonging therapy. Docetaxel (70-75 mg/m2 ) every 3 weeks vs enzalutamide (160 mg) once daily orally or abiraterone (1 g) once daily plus prednisone (5 mg) twice daily orally was administered. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS) from the time of CRPC diagnosis. A propensity score analysis with a 1:1 ratio using an optimal matching algorithm was used to adjust for confounding factors. RESULTS: Overall, 234 patients were analysed. Propensity score-matching identified 85 patients in each group. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the groups. The median OS in the docetaxel group was 38.2 vs 58.3 months in the ARAT group (P = 0.03). For patients with IDC-P, OS was significantly longer in the ARAT group than the docetaxel group (P = 0.01), and there was no significant difference in each group, as in patients without IDC-P (P = 0.67). A multivariate analysis showed that the presence of IDC-P, duration of primary ADT, visceral metastasis, and administration of ARAT as the first-line treatment for CRPC were independent prognostic factors for OS. CONCLUSION: Administration of ARAT as the first-line treatment for CRPC may prolong OS more than that of docetaxel, especially in patients with IDC-P.

Adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide in elderly metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: In an observational prospective cohort study, we monitored patients with mCRPC for their adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide in the pre- or post-chemotherapy setting. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with median age of 76 years (range 56-94), age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity score of 10 (range, 4-15), and geriatric G8 score of 14 (range, 6-17) were enrolled. Twenty-two (38%) patients were treated with abiraterone and 36 (62%) with enzalutamide, while forty-two (72%) were in the pre-chemotherapy setting. Forty-seven patients (81%) had a caregiver. Based on the pill counting, a non-adherence rate of 4.8% and 6.2% was observed for the whole period and the first 3 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between abiraterone and enzalutamide cohorts. A lower non-adherence rate (1.3%) was reported by patients during the whole period, mainly due to a misperception (77%) and forgetfulness (19%). Non-adherence rate to the fulfilling of the clinical diary was 38% for the whole period. Non-adherence in the whole period was related to the radiological response (p = 0.03) and geriatric G8 score (p = 0.005). By the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve based on the radiological response, non-adherence cut-off was 1.87% (p = 0.04). By this non-adherence cut-off, the G8 cut-off was 14.75 (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Non-adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC may have an impact on disease response and be related to patients' frailty, suggesting their geriatric assessment and clinical interventions to monitor and increase their adherence.

Comparison of effectiveness and safety outcomes of abiraterone versus enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness and safety between abiraterone and enzalutamide in the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: We systematically searched for relevant articles from PubMed, Cochrane, Embase from their inception through November 4, 2019. Available articles from conferences were searched. The endpoints were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), number of patients with any adverse event (AE). RESULTS: 15 cohort studies involving 3546 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled result showed that PSA response rate in the enzalutamide group was significantly greater than that in the abiraterone group (867 patients, risk ratio (RR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.79, p＜0.00001, I2=29%). There was no significant difference in the total incidence of AEs between two groups (730 patients, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.14-1.31, p = 0.14, I2=84%). The common adverse events observed in the published articles were fatigue and perceived cognitive impairments. Patients who received enzalutamide had the higher risk to have the feeling of fatigue compared with abiraterone group (2555 patients, RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.85, p=0.01, I2=92%). And there was no statistical difference between two groups respect to the side effect of perceived cognitive impairments (1856 patients, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.47-1.88, p=0.85, I2=15%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated that enzalutamide was associated with higher PSA response rate compared to abiraterone in patients with mCRPC, and no significant difference was found between two groups in the overall AE. But enzalutamide use induced higher risk of the AE of fatigue.

Efficacy and cardiovascular safety of the new estrogen-free contraceptive pill containing 4 mg drospirenone alone in a 24/4 regime.

BACKGROUND: A new estrogen-free contraceptive has been approved by both the FDA and more than 15 European authorities. It is composed of drospirenone (DRSP) at a dosage of 4 mg in a regimen 24/4. The molecule is known to have anti-gonadotropic, anti-mineralocorticoid, anti-estrogenic, and antiandrogenic properties. The purpose of these clinical trials with a new estrogen-free contraceptive was to introduce a contraceptive method with high efficacy and showing a profile with low cardiovascular risks. METHODS: Three European and American multicenter clinical trials have been conducted in more than 2500 patients and more than 25,000 cycles, not only demonstrating an excellent efficacy (Pearl Index of 0.73) but also investigating possible cardiovascular risks. In the USA study, 422 participants (41.9%) had a risk factor for VTE, while in the European studies, 261 patients (16.6%) had at least one VTE risk factor. Amount of arterial and venous thromboembolic events, hemostasiological data, blood pressure development, and ECG data were evaluated. RESULTS: No single case of VTE was documented, no changes in hemastosiological parameters were observed, a small decrease in RR in patients with pretreatment values between 130 and 140 and/or 85 to 90 mm HG and no influence on ECG parameters were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a new estrogen-free contraceptive with 4 mg of non-micronized drospirenone in a 24/4-day regimen expands contraception options for women as not only a high efficacy could be demonstrated during clinical trials but also a very high cardiovascular safety profile was observed even in women with cardiovascular risk factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT registration numbers: 2010-021787-15 & 2011-002396-42 . Clincaltrials.gov: NCT02269241 .