Differences in real-world outcomes by risk classification for localized prostate cancer patients after radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Limited real-world evidence exists on the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) who received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) as the initial treatment. This study evaluated clinical outcomes of US patients with high-risk LPC (HR-LPC) and low/intermediate-risk LPC (LIR-LPC) who received EBRT. METHODS: This retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data from 2012 to 2019 included patients ≥ 65 years old who received EBRT as initial therapy. Baseline patient characteristics were summarized, metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival, and time to initiation of advanced prostate cancer treatment were compared using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and adjusted Cox proportional hazard (PH) models. 5-year survival probabilities stratified by race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic [NH] White, NH Black, NH Asian, and Hispanic) were assessed. RESULTS: Of 11,313 eligible patients, 41% (n = 4600) had HR-LPC and 59% (n = 6713) had LIR-LPC. Patient characteristics for both groups were comparable, with mean age at EBRT initiation > 70 years, 86% white, and mean follow-up time >40 months. More patients in the HR-LPC than LIR-LPC groups (78% vs 34%) had concurrent androgen deprivation therapy use and for a longer duration (median 10.4 months vs. 7.4 months). A higher proportion of HR-LPC patients developed metastasis, died, or received advanced prostate cancer treatment. Adjusted Cox PH survival analyses showed significantly (p < 0.0001) higher risk of mortality (hazard ratios [HR], 1.57 [1.38, 2.34]), metastasis or death (HR, 1.97 [1.78, 2.17]), and advanced prostate cancer therapy use (HR, 2.57 [2.11, 3.14]) for HR-LPC than LIR-LPC patients. Within 5 years after the initial EBRT treatment, 18%-26% of patients with HR-LPC are expected to have died or developed metastasis. The 5-year MFS rate in the HR-LPC group was lower than the LIR-LPC group across all racial/ethnic subgroups. NH Black patients with HR-LPC had the highest all-cause mortality rate and lowest rate of receiving advanced prostate cancer treatment, compared to other racial/ethnic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study of clinical outcomes in patients with LPC treated with EBRT suggests substantial disease burden in patients with HR-LPC and highlights the need for additional treatment strategies to improve clinical outcomes in patients with HR-LPC.

Apalutamide efficacy, safety and wellbeing in older patients with advanced prostate cancer from Phase 3 randomised clinical studies TITAN and SPARTAN.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved outcomes in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) and non-metastatic castration-resistant PC (nmCRPC) in the Phase 3 randomised TITAN and SPARTAN studies, respectively, and maintained health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Apalutamide treatment effect by patient age requires assessment. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis assessed patients receiving 240 mg/day apalutamide (525 TITAN and 806 SPARTAN) or placebo (527 TITAN and 401 SPARTAN) with ongoing ADT, stratified by age groups. Prostate-specific antigen declines, radiographic progression-free survival, metastasis-free survival, overall survival (OS), HRQoL and safety were assessed using descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional-hazards model and mixed-effects model for repeated measures. RESULTS: Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) generally favoured apalutamide plus ADT versus ADT alone across all endpoints regardless of age; e.g., OS values were 0.57 (0.40-0.80), 0.70 (0.54-0.91) and 0.74 (0.40-1.39) (TITAN) and 0.39 (0.19-0.78), 0.89 (0.69-1.16) and 0.81 (0.58-1.15) (SPARTAN) in patients aged <65, 65-79 and ≥80 years. Regardless of age, apalutamide also maintained HRQoL and was tolerated well with a potential trend in rates of adverse events increasing with age. Limitations include post-hoc nature and variability in sample size of age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Apalutamide plus ADT was an effective and well-tolerated option maintaining HRQoL in patients with mCSPC and nmCRPC regardless of age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: TITAN (NCT02489318); SPARTAN (NCT01946204).

Development and Optimization of a Subtraction-Normalized Immunocyte Profiling Signature for Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Risk Stratification.

PURPOSE: Less invasive decision support tools are desperately needed to identify occult high-risk disease in men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS). For a variety of reasons, many men on AS with low- or intermediate-risk disease forgo the necessary repeat surveillance biopsies needed to identify potentially higher-risk PCa. Here, we describe the development of a blood-based immunocyte transcriptomic signature to identify men harboring occult aggressive PCa. We then validate it on a biopsy-positive population with the goal of identifying men who should not be on AS and confirm those men with indolent disease who can safely remain on AS. This model uses subtraction-normalized immunocyte transcriptomic profiles to risk-stratify men with PCa who could be candidates for AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men were eligible for enrollment in the study if they were determined by their physician to have a risk profile that warranted prostate biopsy. Both training (n = 1017) and validation cohort (n = 1198) populations had blood samples drawn coincident to their prostate biopsy. Purified CD2+ and CD14+ immune cells were obtained from peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and RNA was extracted and sequenced. To avoid overfitting and unnecessary complexity, a regularized regression model was built on the training cohort to predict PCa aggressiveness based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network PCa guidelines. This model was then validated on an independent cohort of biopsy-positive men only, using National Comprehensive Cancer Network unfavorable intermediate risk and worse as an aggressiveness outcome, identifying patients who were not appropriate for AS. RESULTS: The best final model for the AS setting was obtained by combining an immunocyte transcriptomic profile based on 2 cell types with PSA density and age, reaching an AUC of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.69-0.77). The model significantly outperforms (P < .001) PSA density as a biomarker, which has an AUC of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.65-0.73). This model yields an individualized patient risk score with 90% negative predictive value and 50% positive predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: While further validation in an intended-use cohort is needed, the immunocyte transcriptomic model offers a promising tool for risk stratification of individual patients who are being considered for AS.

Efficacy of Intravesical Nadofaragene Firadenovec for Patients With Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-Unresponsive Nonmuscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: 5-Year Follow-Up From a Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: Nadofaragene firadenovec-vncg is a nonreplicating adenoviral vector-based gene therapy for bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-unresponsive carcinoma in situ (CIS) with/without high-grade Ta/T1. We report outcomes following 5 years of planned follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This open-label phase 3 trial (NCT02773849) enrolled patients with BCG-unresponsive nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer in 2 cohorts: CIS ± Ta/T1 (CIS; n = 107) and Ta/T1 without CIS (Ta/T1 cohort; n = 50). Patients received 75 mL (3 × 1011 vp/mL) nadofaragene firadenovec intravesically once every 3 months with cystoscopy and cytology assessments, with continued treatment offered to those remaining high grade recurrence-free (HGRF). RESULTS: One hundred fifty-seven patients were enrolled from 33 US sites (n = 151 included in efficacy analyses). Median follow-up was 50.8 months (interquartile range 39.1-60.0), with 27% receiving ≥ 5 instillations and 7.6% receiving treatment for ≥ 57 months. Of patients with CIS 5.8% (95% CI 2.2-12.2) were HGRF at month 57, and 15% (95% CI 6.1-27.8) of patients with high-grade Ta/T1 were HGRF at month 57. Kaplan-Meier-estimated HGRF survival at 57 months was 13% (95% CI 6.9-21.5) and 33% (95% CI 19.5-46.6) in the CIS and Ta/T1 cohorts, respectively. Cystectomy-free survival at month 60 was 49% (95% CI 40.0-57.1): 43% (95% CI 32.2-53.7) in the CIS cohort and 59% (95% CI 43.1-71.4) in the Ta/T1 cohort. Overall survival at 60 months was 80% (71.0, 86.0): 76% (64.6-84.5) and 86% (70.9-93.5) in the CIS and Ta/T1 cohorts, respectively. Only 5 patients (4 with CIS and 1 with Ta/T1) experienced clinical progression to muscle-invasive disease. CONCLUSIONS: At 60 months, nadofaragene firadenovec-vncg allowed bladder preservation in nearly half of the patients and proved to be a safe option for BCG-unresponsive nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Impact of darolutamide on local symptoms: pre-planned and post hoc analyses of the ARAMIS trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess, the effect of darolutamide (a structurally distinct androgen receptor inhibitor) on urinary and bowel symptoms, using data from the phase III ARAMIS trial (NCT02200614) that showed darolutamide significantly reduced the risk of metastasis and death versus placebo. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) were randomised 2:1 to darolutamide (n = 955) or placebo (n = 554). Local symptom control was assessed by first prostate cancer-related invasive procedures and post hoc analyses of time to deterioration in quality of life (QoL) using total urinary and bowel symptoms, and individual questions for these symptoms from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Prostate Cancer Module subscales and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate prostate cancer subscale. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses were correlated with urinary and bowel adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Fewer patients receiving darolutamide (4.7%) versus placebo (9.6%) underwent invasive procedures, and time to first procedure was prolonged with darolutamide (hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.62). Darolutamide significantly (P < 0.01) delayed worsening of QoL for total urinary and bowel symptoms versus placebo, mostly attributed by individual symptoms of urinary frequency, associated pain, and interference with daily activities. AEs of urinary retention and dysuria were less frequent with darolutamide, and greater PSA response (≥90%, ≥50% and <90%, <50%) among darolutamide-treated patients was associated with lower incidences of urinary retention (2.2%, 4.2%, 5.1%) and dysuria (0.5%, 3.2%, 5.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Darolutamide demonstrated a positive impact on local disease recurrence and symptom control in patients with nmCRPC, delayed time to deterioration in QoL related to urinary and bowel symptoms, and a favourable safety profile showing similar incidence of urinary- and bowel-related AEs compared with placebo.

A US real-world study of treatment patterns and outcomes in localized or locally advanced prostate cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Men with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (LPC/LAPC) are at risk of progression after radiotherapy (RT) or radical prostatectomy (RP). Using real-world data, we evaluated patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes in LPC/LAPC. METHODS: Optum claims and electronic health records (EHR) data from January 2010 to December 2021 were queried for men with LPC/LAPC who received primary RT, RP, or androgen deprivation therapy alone within 180 days after diagnosis. Survival outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier curves. Real-world overall survival (rwOS) was compared in patients with and without evidence of disease (i.e., disease recurrence, metastasis, diagnosis of castration-resistant PC) at defined time points. RESULTS: 61,772 and 62,361 men in claims and EHR cohorts met the inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 719 and 901 days, respectively. Most men received primary RT (51.0% claims, 35.0% EHR) or RP (39.4% claims, 53.8% EHR). Survival was greatest among men treated with RP, followed by RT. Adjusted for age and comorbidity, rwOS was shorter among men with evidence of disease within 1, 3, 4, and 5 years after primary treatment than those without at the same time points. CONCLUSION: Real-world claims and EHR data show that survival among men with LPC/LAPC differs by primary treatment and time point of disease recurrence thereafter. Poor outcomes in men with LPC/LAPC who progress early indicate an unmet medical need for more effective primary treatment. If validated for surrogacy, no evidence of disease at specific time points could represent an intermediate efficacy endpoint in future trials.

Primary Chemoablation of Low-Grade Intermediate-Risk Nonmuscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Using UGN-102, a Mitomycin-Containing Reverse Thermal Gel (Optima II): A Phase 2b, Open-Label, Single-Arm Trial.

PURPOSE: Low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (LG IR NMIBC) is a recurrent disease, thus requiring repeated transurethral resection of bladder tumor under general anesthesia. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of UGN-102, a mitomycin-containing reverse thermal gel, as a primary chemoablative therapeutic alternative to transurethral resection of bladder tumor for patients with LG IR NMIBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, phase 2b, open-label, single-arm trial recruited patients with biopsy-proven LG IR NMIBC to receive 6 once-weekly instillations of UGN-102. The primary end point was complete response (CR) rate, defined as the proportion of patients with negative endoscopic examination, negative cytology and negative for-cause biopsy 3 months after treatment initiation. Patients with CR were followed quarterly up to 12 months to assess durability of treatment effect. Safety and adverse events were monitored throughout the trial. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients (38 males and 25 females 33-96 years old) enrolled and received ≥1 instillation of UGN-102. Among the patients 41 (65%) achieved CR at 3 months, of whom 39 (95%), 30 (73%) and 25 (61%) remained disease-free at 6, 9 and 12 months after treatment initiation, respectively. A total of 13 patients had documented recurrences. The probability of durable response 9 months after CR (12 months after treatment initiation) was estimated to be 73% by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Common adverse events (incidence ≥10%) included dysuria, urinary frequency, hematuria, micturition urgency, urinary tract infection and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Nonsurgical primary chemoablation of LG IR NMIBC using UGN-102 resulted in significant treatment response with sustained durability. UGN-102 may provide an alternative to repetitive surgery for patients with LG IR NMIBC.

Plain language summary of the design of the TALAPRO-2 study comparing talazoparib and enzalutamide versus enzalutamide and placebo in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the design of an ongoing research study (also known as a clinical trial) called TALAPRO-2. The TALAPRO-2 trial is testing the combination of two medicines called talazoparib and enzalutamide as a first treatment in adult men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The study began in December 2017 and has enrolled 1037 adult men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer from 26 countries. WHAT IS METASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER?: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is a type of cancer that has advanced beyond the prostate and continues to grow even when testosterone levels in the blood are suppressed. WHICH MEDICINES ARE BEING TESTED?: The combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide will be compared with enzalutamide plus placebo. Enzalutamide is approved to treat men with prostate cancer. Talazoparib is not approved to treat men with prostate cancer. A placebo does not contain any active ingredients and is also known as a sugar pill. WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE TALAPRO-2 TRIAL?: The TALAPRO-2 trial will find out if combining talazoparib with enzalutamide increases the length of time the men in the study live without their cancer getting worse compared with enzalutamide plus placebo. The study will also measure how long men in the study live and any side effects the men have while they are taking the study medicines. Researchers are also testing the DNA from the tumor cells of all men in the study to find out if they have faulty DNA repair genes. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT0339519 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: TALAPRO-2 phase III study design.

PARP inhibitors in combination with androgen receptor-targeted therapy have demonstrated potential in the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Here, we describe the design and rationale of the multinational, phase III, two-part TALAPRO-2 study comparing talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide as a first-line treatment for patients with mCRPC with or without DNA damage response (DDR) alterations. This study has two co-primary end points: radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by blinded independent clinical review in all-comers (cohort 1) and in patients with DDR alterations (cohort 2). TALAPRO-2 will demonstrate whether talazoparib plus enzalutamide can significantly improve the efficacy of enzalutamide in terms of rPFS in both molecularly unselected and DDR-deficient patients with mCRPC (NCT03395197). Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03395197 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Intravesical nadofaragene firadenovec gene therapy for BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a single-arm, open-label, repeat-dose clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: BCG is the most effective therapy for high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Nadofaragene firadenovec (also known as rAd-IFNa/Syn3) is a replication-deficient recombinant adenovirus that delivers human interferon alfa-2b cDNA into the bladder epithelium, and a novel intravesical therapy for BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. We aimed to evaluate its efficacy in patients with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicentre, open-label, repeat-dose study done in 33 centres (hospitals and clinics) in the USA, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older, with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status of 2 or less. Patients were excluded if they had upper urinary tract disease, urothelial carcinoma within the prostatic urethra, lymphovascular invasion, micropapillary disease, or hydronephrosis. Eligible patients received a single intravesical 75 mL dose of nadofaragene firadenovec (3 × 1011 viral particles per mL). Repeat dosing at months 3, 6, and 9 was done in the absence of high-grade recurrence. The primary endpoint was complete response at any time in patients with carcinoma in situ (with or without a high-grade Ta or T1 tumour). The null hypothesis specified a complete response rate of less than 27% in this cohort. Efficacy analyses were done on the per-protocol population, to include only patients strictly meeting the BCG-unresponsive definition. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. The study is ongoing, with a planned 4-year treatment and monitoring phase. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02773849. FINDINGS: Between Sept 19, 2016, and May 24, 2019, 198 patients were assessed for eligibility. 41 patients were excluded, and 157 were enrolled and received at least one dose of the study drug. Six patients did not meet the definition of BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and were therefore excluded from efficacy analyses; the remaining 151 patients were included in the per-protocol efficacy analyses. 55 (53·4%) of 103 patients with carcinoma in situ (with or without a high-grade Ta or T1 tumour) had a complete response within 3 months of the first dose and this response was maintained in 25 (45·5%) of 55 patients at 12 months. Micturition urgency was the most common grade 3-4 study drug-related adverse event (two [1%] of 157 patients, both grade 3), and there were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Intravesical nadofaragene firadenovec was efficacious, with a favourable benefit:risk ratio, in patients with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. This represents a novel treatment option in a therapeutically challenging disease state. FUNDING: FKD Therapies Oy.

Longitudinal follow-up and performance validation of an mRNA-based urine test (Xpert® Bladder Cancer Monitor ) for surveillance in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor (Xpert; Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) test as a predictor of tumour recurrence in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 429) undergoing surveillance for NMIBC underwent Xpert, cytology, and UroVysion testing. Patients with a positive Xpert and a negative cystoscopy result (positive-negative [PN] group, n = 66) and a control group of double negative patients (negative Xpert and cystoscopy results [NN] group) were followed for 12 months (±90 days). RESULTS: Histology-confirmed recurrences were detected in 58 patients (13.5%). Xpert had an overall sensitivity of 60.3% and a specificity of 76.5%. The sensitivity for high-grade (HG) cancer was 87% with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99%. Urine cytology showed an overall sensitivity of 23.2% (47.6% sensitivity for HG tumours) and a specificity of 88.3%. In the PN group, 32% (n = 21) developed a recurrence within 12 months, 11 of which were HG tumours. In the NN control group, 14% (n = 9) developed a recurrence and only two were HG tumours. The hazard ratio for developing recurrence in the PN group was 2.68 for all tumours and 6.84 for HG cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The Xpert test has a high sensitivity for detecting the recurrence of cancer and a high NPV for excluding HG cancer. In addition, the data suggest that patients with a positive Xpert assay in the setting of negative cystoscopy are at high risk for recurrence and need close surveillance.

Optimizing the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer patients: A practical guide for clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Advanced prostate cancer (PC) patients, especially those with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), often require complex management pathways. Despite the publication of clinical practice guidelines by leading urological and oncological organizations that provide a substantial and comprehensive framework, there are numerous clinical scenarios that are not always addressed, especially as new treatments become available, new imaging modalities are developed, and advances in genetic testing continue. METHODS: A 14-member expert review panel comprised of urologists and medical oncologists were chosen to provide guidance on addressing specific topics and issues regarding metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Panel members were chosen based upon their experience and expertise in the management of PC patients. Four academic members (two urologists and two medical oncologists) of the panel served as group leaders; the remaining eight panel members were from Large Urology Group Practice Association (LUGPA) practices with proven experience in leading their advanced PC clinics. The panel members were assigned to four separate working groups, each assigned a specific mCRPC topic to review and discuss with the entire panel. RESULTS: This article describes the practical recommendations of an expert panel on the management of mCRPC patients. The target reading audience for this publication is all providers (urologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, or advanced practice providers) who evaluate and manage advanced PC patients, regardless of their practice setting. CONCLUSION: The panel has provided recommendations for managing mCRPC with regard to specific issues: (a) biomarker monitoring and the role of genetic and molecular testing; (b) rationale, current strategies, and optimal sequencing of the various approved therapies, including hormonal therapy, cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiopharmaceuticals and immunotherapy; (c) adverse event management and monitoring; and (d) imaging advanced PC patients. These recommendations seek to complement national guidelines, not replace them, and a discussion of where the panel agreed or disagreed with national guidelines is included.

Development and evaluation of a bladder Cancer specific survivorship care plan by patients and clinical care providers: a multi-methods approach.

BACKGROUND, CONTEXT AND PURPOSE: In spite of the mixed evidence for their impact, survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) are recommended to enhance quality of care for cancer survivors. Data on the feasibility of SCPs in bladder cancer (BC) is sparse. Using a mixed-methods approach, this study describes the iterative development, acceptability and feasibility of BC specific SCP (BC-SCP) in clinical settings. METHODS: In Phase I, we developed the BC-SCP. In Phase II, we conducted four focus groups with 19 patients and 15 providers to examine its acceptability and usability challenges. Data analyses using the Atlas.ti program, informed refinement of the BC-SCP. In Phase III, we conducted feasibility testing of the refined BC-SCP with 18 providers from 12 health-centers. An encounter survey was completed after each assessment to examine the feasibility of the BC-SCP. Chi-square and Fisher Exact tests were used for comparative analyses. RESULTS: During phase I, we observed high patient and provider acceptability of the BC-SCP and substantial engagement in improving its content, design, and structure. In Phase II, providers completed 59 BC-SCPs. Mean time for BC-SCP completion was 12.3 min. Providers reported that BC-SCP content was clear, did not hamper clinic flow and was readily completed with easy-to-access information. Comparative analyses to examine differences in SCP completion time by patient clinico-demographic characteristics and provider type revealed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our BC-SCP has clinical relevance, and can be used in an active practice setting. However, considerable progress will be necessary to achieve implementation of and sharing the BC-SCP with patients and care providers, particularly within the electronic medical record. In summary, BC-SCPs are essential to improve the follow up care of BC survivors. Clinical resources are required to ensure appropriate implementation of BC-SCPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study HUM00056082.

A Clinician's Guide to Next Generation Imaging in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer (RADAR III).

PURPOSE: The advanced prostate cancer therapeutic landscape has changed dramatically in the last several years, resulting in improved overall survival of patients with castration naïve and castration resistant disease. The evolution and development of novel next generation imaging techniques will affect diagnostic and therapeutic decision making. Clinicians must navigate when and which next generation imaging techniques to use and how to adjust treatment strategies based on the results, often in the absence of correlative therapeutic data. Therefore, guidance is needed based on best available information and current clinical experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The RADAR (Radiographic Assessments for Detection of Advanced Recurrence) III Group convened to offer guidance on the use of next generation imaging to stage prostate cancer based on available data and clinical experience. The group also discussed the potential impact of next generation imaging on treatment options based on earlier detection of disease. RESULTS: The group unanimously agreed that progression to metastatic disease is a seminal event for patient treatment. Next generation imaging techniques are able to detect previously undetectable metastases, which could redefine the phases of prostate cancer progression. Thus, earlier systemic or locally directed treatment may positively alter patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The RADAR III Group recommends next generation imaging techniques in select patients in whom disease progression is suspected based on laboratory (biomarker) values, comorbidities and symptoms. Currently 18F-fluciclovine and 68Ga prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography are the next generation imaging agents with a favorable combination of availability, specificity and sensitivity. There is ongoing research of additional next generation imaging technologies, which may offer improved diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic options. As next generation imaging techniques evolve and presumably result in improved global accessibility, clinician ability to detect micrometastases may be enhanced for decision making and patient outcomes.

Validating the total illness burden index for prostate cancer (TIBI-CaP) in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: data from TRUMPET.

AIM: To validate the total illness burden index for prostate cancer (TIBI-CaP) in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients. PATIENTS & METHODS: Baseline comorbidity scores collected using the TIBI-CaP were compared with the baseline patient-reported health-related quality of life using the SF-12v2 and FACT-P questionnaires in 302 patients enrolled in the Treatment Registry for Outcomes in CRPC Patients (TRUMPET). RESULTS: Baseline TIBI-CaP scores were negatively correlated with all baseline SF-12v2 domain/composite (p < 0.001) and FACT-P subscale/total (p < 0.020) scores. There was a significant decreasing linear trend in SF12v2 and FACT-P scores over the categories based on TIBI-CaP quartiles of comorbidity burden (from 'least' to 'severe'). CONCLUSION: The TIBI-CaP is a valid measure of comorbidity burden in patients with CRPC in the real world.

Number-needed-to-treat analysis of clinical progression in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the STRIVE and TERRAIN trials.

BACKGROUND: This analysis estimated the number needed to treat with enzalutamide versus bicalutamide to achieve one additional patient with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who would obtain clinical benefit regarding progression-free survival, radiographic progression-free survival, or no prostate-specific antigen progression at 1 and 2 years following treatment initiation. METHODS: Clinical event rates were obtained from the STRIVE (NCT01664923) and TERRAIN (NCT01288911) trials, and the number needed to treat was the inverse of the absolute rate difference between the event rates of enzalutamide and bicalutamide. The 95% Confidence Interval of the number needed to treat was derived from the 95% Confidence Interval of the event rate difference. RESULTS: Using STRIVE data (patients with metastatic disease: n = 128 enzalutamide; n = 129 bicalutamide) comparing enzalutamide with bicalutamide at 1 and 2 years, the numbers needed to treat to achieve one additional patient with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with progression-free survival were 2.0 and 2.8, respectively; with radiographic progression-free survival, 2.6 and 3.0, respectively; and without prostate-specific antigen progression, 1.8 and 2.4, respectively. Using TERRAIN data (n = 184 enzalutamide; n = 191 bicalutamide) comparing enzalutamide with bicalutamide at 1 and 2 years, the numbers needed to treat to achieve one additional patient with progression-free survival were 4.3 and 3.7, respectively; with radiographic progression-free survival, 10.0 and 2.8, respectively; and without prostate-specific antigen progression, 2.1 and 3.2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combined data from TERRAIN and STRIVE demonstrated that treating chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with enzalutamide leads to more patients without clinical progression at 1 and 2 years than with bicalutamide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: STRIVE (NCT01664923; registration date: August 10, 2012) and TERRAIN (NCT01288911; registration date: February 1, 2011).

Correction to: Number-needed-to-treat analysis of clinical progression in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the STRIVE and TERRAIN trials.

It has been highlighted that in the original article [1] there was a typesetting mistake in the Results - NNT in Strive section. This Correction article states the incorrect and correct sentence.

How I Do It: Hydrogel spacer placement in men scheduled to undergo prostate radiotherapy.

Hydrogel spacer placement between the prostate and rectum in men scheduled to undergo prostate radiotherapy is an emerging technique well suited for urologists. The hydrogel spacer reduces rectal injury during radiotherapy by displacing the rectum away from the high dose region. Following radiotherapy the hydrogel spacer then liquifies, is absorbed, and then clears via renal filtration in approximately 6 months. Herein we describe the appropriate patients eligible for this procedure, and the application technique we use in our clinic.

Effect of Intravesical Instillation of Gemcitabine vs Saline Immediately Following Resection of Suspected Low-Grade Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer on Tumor Recurrence: SWOG S0337 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer frequently recurs after excision by transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). Objective: To determine whether immediate post-TURBT intravesical instillation of gemcitabine reduces recurrence of suspected low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer compared with saline. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized double-blind clinical trial conducted at 23 US centers. Patients with suspected low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer based on cystoscopic appearance without any high-grade or without more than 2 low-grade urothelial cancer episodes within 18 months before index TURBT were enrolled between January 23, 2008, and August 14, 2012, and followed up every 3 months with cystoscopy and cytology for 2 years and then semiannually for 2 years. Patients were monitored for tumor recurrence, progression to muscle invasion, survival, and toxic effects. The final date of follow-up was August 14, 2016. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive intravesical instillation of gemcitabine (2 g in 100 mL of saline) (n = 201) or saline (100 mL) (n = 205) for 1 hour immediately following TURBT. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to recurrence of cancer. Secondary end points were time to muscle invasion and death due to any cause. Results: Among 406 randomized eligible patients (median age, 66 years; 84.7% men), 383 completed the trial. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 67 of 201 patients (4-year estimate, 35%) in the gemcitabine group and 91 of 205 patients (4-year estimate, 47%) in the saline group had cancer recurrence within 4.0 years (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.90; P<.001 by 1-sided log-rank test for time to recurrence). Among the 215 patients with low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer who underwent TURBT and drug instillation, 34 of 102 patients (4-year estimate, 34%) in the gemcitabine group and 59 of 113 patients (4-year estimate, 54%) in the saline group had cancer recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.81; P = .001 by 1-sided log-rank test for time to recurrence). Fifteen patients had tumors that progressed to muscle invasion (5 in the gemcitabine group and 10 in the saline group; P = .22 by 1-sided log-rank test) and 42 died of any cause (17 in the gemcitabine group and 25 in the saline group; P = .12 by 1-sided log-rank test). There were no grade 4 or 5 adverse events and no significant differences in adverse events of grade 3 or lower. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with suspected low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer, immediate postresection intravesical instillation of gemcitabine, compared with instillation of saline, significantly reduced the risk of recurrence over a median of 4.0 years. These findings support using this therapy, but further research is needed to compare gemcitabine with other intravesical agents. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00445601.

Decipher test impacts decision making among patients considering adjuvant and salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy: Interim results from the Multicenter Prospective PRO-IMPACT study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer and their providers face uncertainty as they consider adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) or salvage radiotherapy (SRT) after undergoing radical prostatectomy. The authors prospectively evaluated the impact of the Decipher test, which predicts metastasis risk after radical prostatectomy, on decision making for ART and SRT. METHODS: A total of 150 patients who were considering ART and 115 who were considering SRT were enrolled. Providers submitted a management recommendation before processing the Decipher test and again at the time of receipt of the test results. Patients completed validated surveys on prostate cancer (PCa)-specific decisional effectiveness and PCa-related anxiety. RESULTS: Before the Decipher test, observation was recommended for 89% of patients considering ART and 58% of patients considering SRT. After Decipher testing, 18% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 12%-25%) of treatment recommendations changed in the ART arm, including 31% among high-risk patients; and 32% (95% CI, 24%-42%) of management recommendations changed in the salvage arm, including 56% among high-risk patients. Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) scores were better after viewing Decipher test results (ART arm: median DCS before Decipher, 25 and after Decipher, 19 [P<.001]; SRT arm: median DCS before Decipher, 27 and after Decipher, 23 [P<.001]). PCa-specific anxiety changed after Decipher testing; fear of PCa disease recurrence in the ART arm (P = .02) and PCa-specific anxiety in the SRT arm (P = .05) decreased significantly among low-risk patients. Decipher results reported per 5% increase in 5-year metastasis probability were associated with the decision to pursue ART (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.19-1.85) and SRT (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.81) in multivariable logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of Decipher test results was associated with treatment decision making and improved decisional effectiveness among men with PCa who were considering ART and SRT. Cancer 2017;123:2850-59. © 2017 American Cancer Society.