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.

Evaluation of Intense Androgen Deprivation Before Prostatectomy: A Randomized Phase II Trial of Enzalutamide and Leuprolide With or Without Abiraterone.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced prostate cancer have an increased risk of cancer recurrence and mortality. In this phase II trial, we evaluate neoadjuvant enzalutamide and leuprolide (EL) with or without abiraterone and prednisone (ELAP) before radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a biopsy Gleason score of 4 + 3 = 7 or greater, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) greater than 20 ng/mL, or T3 disease (by prostate magnetic resonance imaging). Lymph nodes were required to be smaller than 20 mm. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to ELAP or EL for 24 weeks followed by RP. All specimens underwent central pathology review. The primary end point was pathologic complete response or minimal residual disease (residual tumor ≤ 5 mm). Secondary end points were PSA, surgical staging, positive margins, and safety. Biomarkers associated with pathologic outcomes were explored. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were enrolled at four centers. Most patients had high-risk disease by National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria (n = 65; 87%). The pathologic complete response or minimal residual disease rate was 30% (n = 15 of 50) in ELAP-treated patients and 16% (n = four of 25) in EL-treated patients (two-sided P = .263). Rates of ypT3 disease, positive margins, and positive lymph nodes were similar between arms. Treatment was well-tolerated. Residual tumors in the two arms showed comparable levels of ERG, PTEN, androgen receptor PSA, and glucocorticoid receptor expression. Tumor ERG positivity and PTEN loss were associated with more extensive residual tumors at RP. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant hormone therapy followed by RP in locally advanced prostate cancer resulted in favorable pathologic responses in some patients, with a trend toward improved pathologic outcomes with ELAP. Longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate the impact of therapy on recurrence rates. The potential association of ERG and PTEN alterations with worse outcomes warrants additional investigation.

Recent combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) and the risk of thromboembolism and other cardiovascular events in new users.

BACKGROUND: Combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) place women at increased risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) and arterial thrombotic events (ATEs), including acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. There is concern that three recent CHC preparations [drospirenone-containing pills (DRSPs), the norelgestromin-containing transdermal patch (NGMN) and the etonogestrel vaginal ring (ETON)] may place women at even higher risk of thrombosis than other older low-dose CHCs with a known safety profile. STUDY DESIGN: All VTEs and all hospitalized ATEs were identified in women, ages 10-55 years, from two integrated health care programs and two state Medicaid programs during the time period covering their new use of DRSP, NGMN, ETON or one of four low-dose estrogen comparator CHCs. The relative risk of thrombotic and thromboembolic outcomes associated with the newer CHCs in relation to the comparators was assessed with Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusting for age, site and year of entry into the study. RESULTS: The hazards ratio for DRSP in relation to low-dose estrogen comparators among new users was 1.77 (95% confidence interval 1.33-2.35) for VTE and 2.01 (1.06-3.81) for ATE. The increased risk of DRSP was limited to the 10-34-year age group for VTE and the 35-55-year group for ATE. Use of the NGMN patch and ETON vaginal ring was not associated with increased risk of either thromboembolic or thrombotic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In new users, DRSP was associated with higher risk of thrombotic events (VTE and ATE) relative to low-dose estrogen comparator CHCs, while the use of the NGMN patch and ETON vaginal ring was not.

Evaluation of oxidative stress after treatment with low estrogen contraceptive either alone or associated with specific antioxidant therapy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to analyze the effect of low estrogen contraceptives (OC) on oxidative stress (OS) and concomitantly also the changes produced by different treatments using physiological modulators (PMs) with antioxidant action. STUDY DESIGN: Sixty-four female volunteers using a low estrogen OC regimen were analyzed for their OS status through the reactive oxygen metabolites-derived compounds (d-ROMs) test, during 5 different cycles (Cycle I to V). Three experiments were performed. RESULTS: In the first experiment (Cycle I), OS showed almost a constant 50% increase in all the determinations. In the second experiment (Cycles II and III), the participants were divided into two groups and treated double-blind with a placebo or with a PM (MF Templar®) that significantly reduced OS, on average by 69%, while the placebo had no effect. In the third experiment (Cycles IV and V), the placebo group was divided into three subgroups, A, B, C and treated, respectively, with MF Templar®, green tea containing the same amount of catechins present in MF Templar® or with MF Templar® devoid of catechins. Only the complete product, MF Templar®, was able to reduce OS levels, on average by 70%. CONCLUSION: We conclude that to control the OS generated by OC, specific types of PMs are needed. In particular MF Templar® was able to induce a significant reduction of OS levels.