Final Overall Survival Analysis of S1500: A Randomized, Phase II Study Comparing Sunitinib With Cabozantinib, Crizotinib, and Savolitinib in Advanced Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) signaling pathway plays a role in the pathogenesis of selected patients with papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC). In the phase II PAPMET trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02761057), cabozantinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival and improved objective response rate compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced PRCC. Here, we present the final overall survival (OS) analysis. In this multicenter, randomized phase II, open-label trial, 147 patients with advanced PRCC who have received up to one previous therapy (excluding vascular endothelial growth factor-directed agents) were assigned to sunitinib, cabozantinib, crizotinib, or savolitinib. Ultimately, savolitinib and crizotinib arms were closed because of futility. With a median follow-up of 17.5 months, the median OS was 21.5 months (95% CI, 12.0 to 28.1) with cabozantinib and 17.3 months (95% CI, 12.8 to 21.8) with sunitinib (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.36; P = .46). The OS landmark estimates for cabozantinib and sunitinib were 50% versus 39% at 24 months and 32% versus 28% at 36 months. In conclusion, we observed no significant difference in OS across treatment arms. Although cabozantinib represents a well-supported option for advanced PRCC, the lack of survival benefit underscores the need to develop novel therapies for this disease.

Treatment Intensification With Novel Hormonal Therapy in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Patient Identification and Clinical Rationale.

The clinical rationale for treatment of castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) with novel hormonal therapy (NHT) or androgen receptor pathway inhibitor is reviewed. A PubMed search was conducted to identify relevant publications on NHTs for CSPC treatment. Level 1 clinical evidence demonstrated that intensification of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with NHT prolongs life and improves or maintains quality of life in patients with metastatic CSPC (mCSPC). Despite these results, real-world evidence demonstrated that 47%-88% of patients with mCSPC are treated with single agent ADT. Possible explanations for the underutilization of NHTs include patient characteristics, misperceptions about the overall survival benefit, lack of physician and patient awareness of the magnitude of clinical trial results, physician bias, safety concerns, misconceptions about the magnitude of prostate-specific antigen response needed for patient improvement, and barriers to NHT access. For patients with biochemical recurrence and no evidence of metastatic disease, limited clinical data exist with no consensus on an effective treatment strategy. Therefore, treatment strategies are developed using patient risk stratification according to clinicopathological characteristics, genomics, and next-generation imaging. Patients with high-risk biochemical recurrence may benefit from the early initiation of NHT based on outcomes from the phase III EMBARK trial. Lifestyle management is also an important aspect of treatment for CSPC, helping to mitigate the side effects of hormonal treatment and ensuring patients can maintain treatment while optimizing quality of life. In conclusion, to improve outcomes in patients with mCSPC, it is important to implement solutions addressing the barriers to underutilization of treatment intensification.

Systemic treatments for advanced prostate cancer: relationship between health insurance plan and treatment costs.

OBJECTIVES: The high costs of cancer care can cause significant harm to patients and society. Prostate cancer, the leading nonskin malignancy in men, is responsible for the second-highest out-of-pocket (OOP) payments among all malignancies. Multiple first-line treatment options exist for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC); although their costs vary substantially, comparative effectiveness data are limited. There is little evidence of how gross payments made by insurers and OOP payments made by patients differ by treatment and health plan type and how these payment differences relate to utilization. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: We used IBM MarketScan databases from 2013-2019 to identify men with prostate cancer who initiated treatment with 1 of 6 drugs approved for first-line treatment of mCRPC. We calculated and compared gross and OOP payments and drug utilization across drug and insurance plan types. RESULTS: We identified 4298 patients who met our inclusion criteria. Insurer payments varied substantially by first-line therapy but were similar across different health plan types, except for docetaxel. OOP payments for a given first-line therapy, in contrast, varied by health plan type. Utilization of first-line therapies varied by plan type in unadjusted analyses, but not after adjusting for patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The extent to which patient OOP payments for drugs reflect differences in gross payments made by insurers varies across health insurance plan types. However, even though OOP payments for the same treatment differ across plan types, treatment choice is not significantly different across type of health insurance after controlling for patient characteristics.

Homologous Recombination Repair Testing Patterns and Outcomes in mCRPC by Alteration Status and Race.

Background: Alterations in DNA damage repair genes in advanced prostate cancer (PC) may impact responses to therapy and clinical outcomes. This study described homologous recombination repair (HRR) testing patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) by HRR alteration status and race in the United States (US). Methods: Clinical data in the nationwide (US-based) Flatiron Health-Foundation Medicine, Inc. (FMI) Metastatic PC Clinico-Genomic Database were evaluated (01/01/2011-12/31/2022). Patients initiating first-line (1L) mCRPC therapy on or after mCRPC diagnosis were included. Testing patterns, time-to-next treatment, overall survival (OS), and time-to-prostate specific antigen response were described. Results: Of the 1367 patients with mCRPC and at least one HRR panel test prior to or on the date of 1L mCRPC therapy initiation, 332 (24.3%) were HRR positive (White patients: n = 219 [66.0%]; Black patients: n = 37 [11.1%]) and 1035 (75.7%) were HRR negative (White patients: n = 702 [67.8%]; Black patients: n = 84 [8.1%]). The mean time between first positive test and 1L mCRPC therapy initiation date was 588 days (White patients: 589 days; Black patients: 639 days). Among HRR positive relative to negative patients, trends for faster progression (respective 12-month rate overall: 71.1% and 63.7%; White patients: 72.5% and 64.0%; Black patients: 65.4% and 56.4%), shorter OS (respective 24-month rate overall: 46.8% and 51.9%; White patients: 48.6% and 46.2%; Black patients: 52.8% and 54.1%), and decreased treatment response (respective 12-month rate overall: 24.3% and 37.9%; White patients: 24.5% and 35.2%; Black patients: 17.0% and 43.9%) were observed. Conclusion: Patients with mCRPC positive for HRR alterations tended to exhibit poorer treatment responses and clinical outcomes than those with a negative status. These findings highlight the importance of timely genetic testing in mCRPC, particularly among Black patients, and the need for improved 1L targeted therapies to address the unmet need in HRR positive mCRPC.

Adaptation of the socioecological model to address disparities in engagement of Black men in prostate cancer genetic testing.

BACKGROUND: Black men consistently have higher rates of prostate cancer (PCA)- related mortality. Advances in PCA treatment, screening, and hereditary cancer assessment center around germline testing (GT). Of concern is the significant under-engagement of Black males in PCA GT, limiting the benefit of precision therapy and tailored cancer screening despite longstanding awareness of these disparities. To address these critical disparities, the Socioecological Model (SEM) was employed to develop comprehensive recommendations to overcome barriers and implement equitable strategies to engage Black males in PCA GT. METHODS: Clinical/research experts, national organization leaders, and community stakeholders spanning multiple regions in US and Africa participated in developing a framework for equity in PCA GT grounded in the SEM. A novel mixed-methods approach was employed to generate key areas to be addressed and informed statements for consensus consideration utilizing the modified Delphi model. Statements achieving strong consensus (> =75% agreement) were included in final equity frameworks addressing clinical/community engagement and research engagement. RESULTS: All societal levels of the SEM (interpersonal, institutional, community, and policy/advocacy) must deliver information about PCA GT to Black males that address benefits/limitations, clinical impact, hereditary cancer implications, with acknowledgment of mistrust (mean scores [MS] 4.57-5.00). Interpersonal strategies for information delivery included engagement of family/friends/peers/Black role models to improve education/awareness and overcome mistrust (MS 4.65-5.00). Institutional strategies included diversifying clinical, research, and educational programs and integrating community liaisons into healthcare institutions (MS 4.57-5.00). Community strategies included partnerships with healthcare institutions and visibility of healthcare providers/researchers at community events (MS 4.65-4.91). Policy/advocacy included improving partnerships between advocacy and healthcare/community organizations while protecting patient benefits (MS 4.57-5.00). Media strategies were endorsed for the first time at every level (MS 4.56-5.00). CONCLUSION: The SEM-based equity frameworks proposed provide the first multidisciplinary strategies dedicated to increase engagement of Black males in PCA GT, which are critical to reduce disparities in PCA-mortality through informing tailored screening, targeted therapy, and cascade testing in families.

Physician Perspectives on the Nonclinical Factors That Contribute to Decision-Making for Advanced Prostate Cancer Care: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: Promising new treatments exist for advanced prostate cancer. Decision-making is complicated: there is minimal comparative effectiveness data; differing routes of administration, drug mechanisms-of-action and side effects; and significant price differences. These challenges contribute to variations in care and quality, treatment disparities, and lack of concordance with patient values. The aim of this study was to examine physician perspectives of factors influencing decision-making for first-line advanced prostate cancer treatments. Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study of physicians who treat patients with advanced prostate cancer from 09/2021-06/2022. Participants were purposively sampled from across the United States. Results: Twenty-seven physicians participated. We identified seventeen domains and three overarching themes affecting physician decision-making for advanced prostate cancer care. The themes were: 1) physician and practice factors impact prescribing decisions, 2) health practice resource availability affects the likelihood patients will receive the recommended treatment, and that the treatment will be in-line with patients' values and 3) patient non-clinical factors influence physician decision-making, but patient values could be better incorporated into prescribing decisions. Based upon the analyses, we constructed a preliminary framework of clinician decision-making for advanced prostate cancer. Conclusions: Physicians perceive non-clinical patient, physician, and practice factors impact decision-making. These factors, therefore, must be considered when implementing programs to optimize a physician's ability to provide quality cancer care, reduce health care disparities and patient financial burden and provide patient goal-concordant care. The preliminary theoretical model of clinician decision-making for advanced prostate cancer care may also be used to inform these efforts.

Androgen Receptor Inhibitors in Patients With Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Novel androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs; darolutamide, enzalutamide, and apalutamide) are standard-of-care treatments for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). However, there are sparse data comparing their clinical use and tolerability. Objective: To compare clinical use and outcomes for darolutamide, enzalutamide, and apalutamide in patients with nmCRPC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study reviewed electronic medical records from the Precision Point Specialty network of US urology practices. Eligible patients had nmCRPC and no prior novel hormonal therapy and initiated novel ARI treatment between August 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2019, to December 31, 2022. Exposures: Patients were prescribed darolutamide, enzalutamide, or apalutamide as their first novel ARI for nmCRPC. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was a composite of 2 end points, treatment discontinuation and progression to metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), whichever occurred first. Both end points were also assessed separately. Results: All 870 patients meeting eligibility criteria were included (362 receiving darolutamide [41.6%]; 382, enzalutamide [43.9%]; 126, apalutamide [14.5%]); mean (SD) age was 78.8 (8.7) years. Self-reported race was Black or African American in 187 patients (21.5%), White in 585 (67.2%), and other or unknown in 98 (11.3%). The darolutamide cohort had lower proportions of patients with a composite end point event (134 [37.0%] vs 201 [52.6%] for enzalutamide and 66 [52.4%] for apalutamide), discontinuation (110 [30.4%] for darolutamide vs 156 [40.8%] for enzalutamide and 58 [46.0%] for apalutamide), and progression to mCRPC (64 [17.7%] for darolutamide vs 108 [28.3%] for enzalutamide and 35 [27.8%] for apalutamide) during the study period. After adjusting for baseline covariates, patients receiving darolutamide had a lower risk of a composite end point event compared with enzalutamide (risk reduction, 33.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.84]) and apalutamide (risk reduction, 35.1%; HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.48-0.88]). Similarly, patients receiving darolutamide had a lower risk of discontinuation compared with enzalutamide (risk reduction, 27.4%; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.94]) and apalutamide (risk reduction, 39.1%; HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.44-0.85]) and a lower risk of progression to mCRPC compared with enzalutamide (risk reduction, 40.6%; HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.43-0.82]) and apalutamide (risk reduction, 35.3%; HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.42-0.99]). There was no difference between enzalutamide and apalutamide treatment across outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large cohort study of patients with nmCRPC treated with novel ARIs, results suggest better tolerability for darolutamide compared with enzalutamide and apalutamide, which may be associated with a clinical effectiveness advantage. Comparative clinical studies are needed to guide treatment decisions in the absence of head-to-head clinical trials.

Intensifying Salvage Therapy in Prostate-specific Antigen Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy with Apalutamide, Salvage Radiation, and Docetaxel: The Phase 2 STARTAR Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with salvage radiation therapy (RT) improves survival for patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PC), but many patients suffer further relapse. This study aims to determine the benefit of the combination of ADT, apalutamide, salvage RT, and docetaxel for high-risk PSA recurrent PC. METHODS: STARTAR is a multicenter, investigator-initiated phase 2 trial of men with PSA recurrent PC after RP. The key inclusion criteria included M0 by computed tomography/bone scan, Gleason 7 with either T3/positive margin/N1 disease or Gleason 8-10 prostate adenocarcinoma, PSA relapse (0.2-4 ng/ml) <4 yr after RP, and fewer than four positive resected lymph nodes. Patients received ADT with apalutamide for 9 mo, RT starting week 8, and then six cycles of docetaxel. The primary endpoint was 36-mo progression-free survival (PFS) with testosterone recovery and compared against the prior STREAM trial. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We enrolled 39 men, including those with Gleason 8-10 (46%), pN1 (23%); the median PSA was 0.58 ng/ml. The median follow-up was 37 mo. All patients achieved undetectable PSA nadir. At 24 and 36 mo, PFS rates were 84% and 71%, respectively, which improved significantly over 3-yr 47% historic PFS and 54% enzalutamide/ADT/RT (STREAM) PFS rates (p = 0.004 and p = 0.039, respectively). Common any-grade adverse events included 98% hot flashes, 88% fatigue, 77% alopecia, 53% rash (10% G3), and 5% febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In this phase 2 trial of ADT, apalutamide, salvage RT, and six cycles of docetaxel for high-risk PSA recurrence, the 3-yr PFS rate improved to 71%, indicating feasible and efficacious treatment intensification, with durable remissions beyond historic data. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate cancer recurrence after surgical removal of the tumor occurs often, and current treatment options to limit recurrence after surgery are only partially effective. In this study, we found that the addition of an androgen receptor inhibitor and docetaxel chemotherapy to standard postsurgery radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy significantly improved progression-free survival at 3 yr after treatment. These results suggest that intensification of treatment after surgery can provide long-term benefit to a subset of patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Real-world economic burden associated with disease progression from metastatic castration-sensitive to castration-resistant prostate cancer on treatment in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The advent of next-generation imaging will likely reduce nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PC) prevalence and increase identification of metastatic prostate cancer cases, resulting in two predominant advanced stages in the metastatic setting. There is a need to characterize changes in health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs when metastatic castration-sensitive PC (mCSPC) progresses to metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC) to identify value drivers from current and new treatments. OBJECTIVE: To describe treatment patterns, HRU, and total health care costs among patients with mCSPC, before and after progression to mCRPC. METHODS: Clinical data from the Flatiron Metastatic PC Core Registry (January 1, 2013, to December 1, 2021) and linked claims from Komodo Health (January 1, 2014, to December 1, 2021) were used to identify patients with progression from mCSPC to mCRPC (date of progression was the index date) and subsequently initiated first-line mCRPC therapy on/after January 1, 2017. Treatment patterns and all-cause/PC-related HRU and health care costs were described per-patient-per-month (PPPM), separately for no more than 12 months pre-index (mCSPC disease state) and post-index (mCRPC disease state). Costs (payer's perspective) included those for services/procedures from medical claims and costs from pharmacy claims. Continuous HRU and costs were compared between the mCSPC and mCRPC disease states using Wilcoxon signed rank tests. RESULTS: Among 296 patients with mCSPC progressing to mCRPC (median age 69.0 years, 60.5% White, 15.9% Black), use of systemic therapies with androgen deprivation therapy increased dramatically from 35.1% in the mCSPC disease state to 92.9% in the mCRPC disease state, and use of androgen deprivation therapy monotherapy decreased from 25.7% to 2.4%, respectively. Although 39.2% received none of these therapies in the mCSPC disease state, this proportion decreased to 4.7% after transition to mCRPC. The mean number of days with PC-related outpatient visits increased from 1.57 to 2.16 PPPM in the mCSPC and mCRPC disease states (P < 0.001). From the mCSPC to mCRPC disease states, mean all-cause total health care costs PPPM increased from $4,424 (medical costs: $2,846) to $9,717 (medical costs: $4,654), and mean PC-related total health care costs PPPM increased from $2,859 (medical costs: $1,626) to $8,012 (medical costs: $3,285; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study of patients with disease progression from mCSPC to mCRPC in US clinical practice, nearly 2-in-3 patients did not receive treatment with additional systemic therapies before progression to castration resistance. Post-progression, mean PC-related total costs increased nearly 3-fold, with a more than 2-fold increase in PC-related medical costs. Use of additional systemic therapies may delay the time and cost associated with disease progression to castration resistance.

Design and Rationale of the Outcomes Database to Prospectively Assess the Changing Therapy Landscape in Renal Cell Carcinoma Registry: A Multi-institutional, Prospective Study of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Introduction and hypotheses: The Outcomes Database to prospectivelY aSSEss the changing TherapY landscape in Renal Cell Carcinoma (ODYSSEY RCC) Registry is a large, nationally representative prospective registry of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) that aims to provide a real-world picture of longitudinal clinical management and patient experiences that impact clinical outcomes. The primary goal of this study is to understand the cancer management and health-related quality of life in patients with mRCC in routine real-world clinical practice in the USA. Design: This is an observational, phase 4 study with planned enrollment of up to 800 patients aged ≥19 yr with mRCC in the USA. Patients will be identified through electronic health record (EHR) data from the PCORnet network of sites for care received at collaborating sites. A unique aspect of the study is the multiple data sources that will be linked to the EHR data. These include: (1) Medicare claims data, (2) laboratory results, (3) tissue specimens, (4) radiographic images, and (5) patient-reported outcomes, physicians' treatment selection, and discontinuation surveys. Protocol overview: We created a novel data resource that can inform patient care. Investigators have the opportunity to use these to study novel research questions after submitting an ancillary proposal and upon approval of the executive committee. Limitations include the potential for selection bias, residual confounding, and missing information. Summary: The ODYSSEY Registry will provide an advanced data resource that can examine numerous clinical questions related to patient and physician choice, and support methodological research related to omics and artificial intelligence. Patient summary: Cancer medications and treatments are changing rapidly. Collecting data on real-world clinical practice and patient-answered questionnaires will help us better understand cancer management and health-related quality of life while receiving metastatic renal cell carcinoma-specific treatment.

Treatment patterns for patients with BRCA1/2-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with BRCA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have an aggressive disease course. This study aimed to describe real-world treatment patterns among patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: De-identified electronic health record data from the Flatiron Health-Foundation Medicine Inc. Metastatic Prostate Cancer Clinico-Genomic Database (January 01, 2011 to June 30, 2022) were used to select patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC initiating first-line (1L) therapy with an oncologist-defined advanced line of therapy (LOT) or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) monotherapy. Treatment sequences and reasons for censoring were described in 1L, and among patients who initiated a second-line (2L) therapy. RESULTS: A total of 98 treated patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC were identified. The top 3 treatment regimens in 1L, overall, were ADT monotherapy (19%), enzalutamide (14%), and olaparib (13%). The main reason for censoring patients with ADT monotherapy was death (52.6%). Among 79 patients treated with an advanced LOT in 1L, 43.0% (n = 34) did not initiate a 2L therapy, of which, 29.4% died. In patients who initiated a 2L (n = 45), the most common 1L to 2L treatment sequence was olaparib to docetaxel (11.1%). The most prescribed 2L therapies were docetaxel (22.2%), olaparib (20.0%), abiraterone acetate (13.3%), and enzalutamide (11.1%). From 1L initiation, the median time-to-next-treatment was 6.2 months. CONCLUSION: Among patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC, ADT monotherapy, enzalutamide, and olaparib were most commonly used. Prognosis of BRCA-positive patients was poor, with most patients failing initial therapy resulting in a switch to a new therapy or death. These findings highlight the need for earlier and more effective treatments for patients with BRCA-positive mCRPC.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Emerging racial disparities among Medicare beneficiaries and Veterans with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that Black men receive worse prostate cancer care than White men. This has not been explored in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) in the current treatment era. METHODS: We evaluated treatment intensification (TI) and overall survival (OS) in Medicare (2015-2018) and Veterans Health Administration (VHA; 2015-2019) patients with mCSPC, classifying first-line mCSPC treatment as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + novel hormonal therapy; ADT + docetaxel; ADT + first-generation nonsteroidal antiandrogen; or ADT alone. RESULTS: We analyzed 2226 Black and 16,071 White Medicare, and 1020 Black and 2364 White VHA patients. TI was significantly lower for Black vs White Medicare patients overall (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.81) and without Medicaid (adjusted OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.57-0.87). Medicaid patients had less TI irrespective of race. OS was worse for Black vs White Medicare patients overall (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% CI 1.09-1.31) and without Medicaid (adjusted HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.01-1.27). OS was worse in Medicaid vs without Medicaid, with no significant OS difference between races. TI was significantly lower for Black vs White VHA patients (adjusted OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61-0.92), with no significant OS difference between races. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-recommended TI was low for all patients with mCSPC, with less TI in Black patients in both Medicare and the VHA. Black race was associated with worse OS in Medicare but not the VHA. Medicaid patients had less TI and worse OS than those without Medicaid, suggesting poverty and race are associated with care and outcomes.

Efficacy and Safety of Radiotherapy Plus Relugolix in Men With Localized or Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Combination androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy is commonly used for patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist relugolix with radiotherapy for treating prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter post hoc analysis of patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy in 2 randomized clinical trials (a phase 2 trial of relugolix vs degarelix, and a subset of the phase 3 HERO trial of relugolix vs leuprolide acetate) included men who were receiving radiotherapy and short-term (24 weeks) ADT (n = 103) from 2014 to 2015 and men receiving radiotherapy and longer-term (48 weeks) ADT (n = 157) from 2017 to 2019. The data were analyzed in November 2022. Interventions: Patients receiving short-term ADT received relugolix, 120 mg, orally once daily (320-mg loading dose) or degarelix, 80 mg, 4-week depot (240-mg loading dose) for 24 weeks with 12 weeks of follow-up. Patients receiving longer-term ADT received relugolix, 120 mg, orally once daily (360-mg loading dose) or leuprolide acetate injections every 12 weeks for 48 weeks, with up to 90 days of follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: Castration rate (testosterone level <50 ng/dL [to convert to nmol/L, multiply by 0.0347) at all scheduled visits between weeks 5 and 25 for patients receiving short-term ADT and weeks 5 and 49 for patients receiving longer-term ADT. Results: Of 260 patients (38 Asian [14.6%], 23 Black or African American [8.8%], 21 Hispanic [8.1%], and 188 White [72.3%] individuals), 164 (63.1%) received relugolix. Relugolix achieved castration rates of 95% (95% CI, 87.1%-99.0%) and 97% (95% CI, 90.6%-99.0%) among patients receiving short-term and longer-term ADT, respectively. Twelve weeks post-short-term relugolix, 34 (52%) achieved testosterone levels to baseline or more than 280 ng/dL. Ninety days post longer-term ADT, mean (SD) testosterone levels were 310.5 (122.4) (106.7) ng/dL (relugolix; n = 15) vs 53.0 ng/dL (leuprolide acetate; n = 8) among the subset assessed for testosterone recovery. Castration resistance-free survival was not statistically different between the relugolix and leuprolide acetate cohorts (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.35-2.72; P = .62). Adverse events grade 3 or greater for short-term or longer-term relugolix (headache, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation) were uncommon (less than 5%). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of these 2 randomized clinical trials suggest that relugolix rapidly achieves sustained castration in patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy. No new safety concerns were identified when relugolix was used with radiotherapy.

Real-world overall survival with abiraterone acetate versus enzalutamide in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are no large head-to-head phase 3 clinical trials comparing overall survival (OS) for abiraterone and enzalutamide. This study used Medicare claims data to compare OS in patients with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who initiated abiraterone or enzalutamide. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of the Medicare database (2009-2020) included adult men with ≥1 claim for prostate cancer, metastatic diagnosis, and no prior chemotherapy or novel hormone therapy who initiated first-line (1L) abiraterone or enzalutamide in the index period (September 10, 2014 to May 31, 2017). Cox proportional-hazards models with inverse probability treatment-weighting (IPTW) were used to compare OS between abiraterone- and enzalutamide-treated patients, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Subgroup analyses by baseline characteristics were also conducted. RESULTS: Overall, 5506 patients who received 1L abiraterone (n = 2911) or enzalutamide (n = 2595) were included. Median follow-up was comparable in both cohorts (abiraterone, 19.1 months; enzalutamide, 20.3 months). IPTW-adjusted median OS (95% CI) was 20.6 months (19.7‒21.4) for abiraterone and 22.5 months (21.2‒23.8) for enzalutamide, with an IPTW-adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) of 1.10 (1.04-1.16). Median OS was significantly shorter for abiraterone versus enzalutamide in patients ≥75 years old; White patients; patients with baseline diabetes, cardiovascular disease, both diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and renal disease; and across all socioeconomic strata. CONCLUSIONS: In the Medicare chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC population, 1L abiraterone was associated with worse OS versus enzalutamide in the overall population and among subgroups with older age and comorbidities, supporting findings from previous real-world studies and demonstrating a disparity in outcomes.

A phase 2 study of AZD4635 in combination with durvalumab or oleclumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of the adenosine 2A receptor (A2AR) diminishes the immunosuppressive effects of adenosine and may complement immune-targeting drugs. This phase 2 study evaluated the A2AR antagonist AZD4635 in combination with durvalumab or oleclumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed disease progressing within 6 months on ≥ 2 therapy lines were randomly assigned to either Module 1 (AZD4635 + durvalumab) or Module 2 (AZD4635 + oleclumab). Primary endpoints were objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate. Secondary endpoints included radiological progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were treated (Module 1, n = 29; Module 2, n = 30). Median number of prior therapies was 4. One confirmed complete response by RECIST (Module 1) and 2 confirmed PSA responses (1 per module) were observed. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) possibly related to AZD4635 were nausea (37.9%), fatigue (20.7%), and decreased appetite (17.2%) in Module 1; nausea (50%), fatigue (30%), and vomiting (23.3%) in Module 2. No dose-limiting toxicities or treatment-related serious AEs were observed. In Module 1, AZD4635 geometric mean trough concentration was 124.9 ng/mL (geometric CV% 69.84; n = 22); exposures were similar in Module 2. In Modules 1 and 2, median (95% CI) rPFS was 2.3 (1.6 -3.8) and 1.5 (1.3- 4.0) months, respectively. Median PFS was 1.7 versus 2.3 months for patients with high versus low blood-based adenosine signature. CONCLUSION: In this heavily pretreated population, AZD4635 with durvalumab or oleclumab demonstrated minimal antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL: gov identifier: NCT04089553.

Prognostic and predictive analyses of circulating plasma biomarkers in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer treated with docetaxel/prednisone with or without bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND: CALGB 90401 (Alliance) was a phase III trial of 1050 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) comparing docetaxel, prednisone, bevacizumab (DP+B) versus DP alone. While this trial did not show an improvement in overall survival (OS), there were improved intermediate outcomes suggesting that subsets of men may derive benefit from this combination. The purpose of this analysis was to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers associated with OS and progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from DP+B. METHODS: Baseline EDTA plasma samples from 650 consenting patients were analyzed for 24 biomarkers. The proportional hazards model was utilized to test for the prognostic and predictive importance of the biomarkers for OS. The statistically significant biomarkers of OS were further investigated for prognostic and predictive importance for other secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 15 markers [ICAM-1, VEGF-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, Ang-2, Her-3, Osteopontin (OPN), PlGF, VCAM-1, HGF, VEGF, Chromogranin A, IL-6, VEGF-R1, BMP-9] were prognostic of OS, while 9 markers (ICAM-1, VEGF-R3, Her-3, TIMP-1, Ang-2, OPN, PlGF, HGF, and VEGF) were also prognostic of PFS. All markers were statistically significant in univariate analyses after adjustment for multiplicity (FDR < 0.1). In multivariable analyses of OS adjusting for risk score, seven markers had FDR < 0.1, including ICAM-1, VEGF-R3, TIMP-1, Ang-2, VEGF, TSP-2 and HGF. In unadjusted analysis, OPN was predictive of PFS improvement with DP+B, in both univariate and multivariable analysis. However, none of the biomarkers tested were predictive of clinical outcomes after adjusting for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple biomarkers were identified in CALGB 90401 as prognostic of clinical outcomes but not predictive of OS. While OPN may have promise as a potential biomarker for anti-angiogenic therapies, further mechanistic and clinical studies are needed to determine the underlying biology and potential clinical application.

Updated 5-year results for short course abiraterone acetate and LHRH agonist for unfavorable intermediate and favorable high-risk prostate cancer.

Combined androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) improves outcomes for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer. Treatment intensification with abiraterone acetate/prednisone (AAP) provides additional benefit for high-risk disease. We previously reported 3-year outcomes of a single-arm prospective multicenter trial (AbiRT trial) of 33 patients with unfavorable intermediate risk (UIR) and favorable high risk (FHR) prostate cancer undergoing short course, combination therapy with ADT, AAP, and RT. Here we report the final analysis demonstrating a high rate of testosterone recovery (97%) and excellent biochemical progression-free survival (97%) at 5 years. These data support comparative prospective studies of shorter, more potent ADT courses in favorable high-risk prostate cancer.

The Impact of Circulating Tumor Cell HOXB13 RNA Detection in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) Treated with Abiraterone or Enzalutamide.

PURPOSE: HOXB13 is an androgen receptor (AR) coregulator specifically expressed in cells of prostatic lineage. We sought to associate circulating tumor cell (CTC) HOXB13 expression with outcomes in men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the multicenter prospective PROPHECY trial of mCRPC men (NCT02269982, n = 118) treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide. CTC detection and HOXB13 complementary DNA (cDNA) expression was measured using a modified Adnatest, grouping patients into 3 categories: CTC 0 (undetectable); CTC+ HOXB13 CTC low (<4 copies); or CTC+ HOXB13 CTC high. The HOXB13 threshold was determined by maximally selected rank statistics for prognostic associations with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We included 102 men with sufficient CTC HOXB13 cDNA, identifying 25%, 31%, and 44% of patients who were CTC 0, CTC+ HOXB13 low, and CTC+ HOXB13 high, respectively. Median OS were 25.7, 27.8, and 12.1 months whereas the median PFS were 9.0, 7.7, and 3.8 months, respectively. In subgroup analysis among men with CellSearch CTCs ≥5 copies/mL and adjusting for prior abi/enza treatment and Halabi clinical risk score, the multivariate HR for HOXB13 CTC detection was 2.39 (95% CI, 1.06-5.40) for OS and 2.78 (95% CI, 1.38-5.59) for PFS, respectively. Low HOXB13 CTC detection was associated with lower CTC PSA, PSMA, AR-FL, and AR-V7 detection, and more liver/lung metastases (41% vs. 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Higher CTC HOXB13 expression is associated with AR-dependent biomarkers in CTCs and is adversely prognostic in the context of potent AR inhibition in men with mCRPC.

Real-world economic burden of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer before and after first-line therapy initiation.

AIMS: To describe healthcare costs of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) initiating first-line (1 L) therapies from a US payer perspective. METHODS: Patients initiating a Flatiron oncologist-defined 1 L mCRPC therapy (index date) on or after mCRPC diagnosis were identified from linked electronic medical records/claims data from the Flatiron Metastatic Prostate Cancer (PC) Core Registry and Komodo's Healthcare Map. Patients were excluded if they initiated a clinical trial drug in 1 L, had <12 months of insurance eligibility prior to index, or no claims in Komodo's Healthcare Map for the Flatiron oncologist-defined index therapy. All-cause and PC-related total costs per-patient-per-month (PPPM), including costs for services and procedures from medical claims (i.e. medical costs) and costs from pharmacy claims (i.e. pharmacy costs), were described in the 12-month baseline period before 1 L therapy initiation (including the baseline pre- and post- mCRPC progression periods) and during 1 L therapy (follow-up). RESULTS: Among 459 patients with mCRPC (mean age 70 years, 57% White, 16% Black, 45% commercially-insured, 43% Medicare Advantage-insured, and 12% Medicaid-insured), average baseline all-cause total costs (PPPM) were $4,576 ($4,166 pre-mCRPC progression, $8,278 post-mCRPC progression). Average baseline PC-related total costs were $2,935 ($2,537 pre-mCRPC progression, $6,661 post-mCRPC progression). During an average 1 L duration of 8.5 months, mean total costs were $13,746 (all-cause) and $12,061 (PC-related) PPPM. The cost increase following 1 L therapy initiation was driven by higher PC-related outpatient and pharmacy costs. PC-related medical costs PPPM increased from $1,504 during baseline to $5,585 following 1 L mCRPC therapy initiation. LIMITATIONS: All analyses were descriptive; statistical testing was not performed. CONCLUSION: Incremental costs of progression to mCRPC are significant, with the majority of costs driven by higher PC-related costs. Using contemporary data, this study highlights the importance of utilizing effective therapies that slow progression and reduce healthcare resource demands despite the initial investment in treatment costs.