[177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (ENZA-p): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide and lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 both improve overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Androgen and PSMA receptors have a close intracellular relationship, with data suggesting complementary benefit if targeted concurrently. In this study, we assessed the activity and safety of enzalutamide plus adaptive-dosed [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus enzalutamide alone as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: ENZA-p was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial done at 15 hospitals in Australia. Participants were men aged 18 years or older with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer not previously treated with docetaxel or androgen receptor pathway inhibitors for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, gallium-68 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-PET-CT (PSMA-PET-CT) positive disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and at least two risk factors for early progression on enzalutamide. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a centralised, web-based system using minimisation with a random component to stratify for study site, disease burden, use of early docetaxel, and previous treatment with abiraterone acetate. Patients were either given oral enzalutamide 160 mg daily alone or with adaptive-dosed (two or four doses) intravenous 7·5 GBq [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 every 6-8 weeks dependent on an interim PSMA-PET-CT (week 12). The primary endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival, defined as the interval from the date of randomisation to the date of first evidence of PSA progression, commencement of non-protocol anticancer therapy, or death. The analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population, using stratified Cox proportional hazards regression. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04419402, and participant follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: 162 participants were randomly assigned between Aug 17, 2020, and July 26, 2022. 83 men were assigned to the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group, and 79 were assigned to the enzalutamide group. Median follow-up in this interim analysis was 20 months (IQR 18-21), with 32 (39%) of 83 patients in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 16 (20%) of 79 patients in the enzalutamide group remaining on treatment at the data cutoff date. Median age was 71 years (IQR 64-76). Median PSA progression-free survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 11·0-17·0) in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 7·8 months (95% CI 4·3-11·0) in the enzalutamide group (hazard ratio 0·43, 95% CI 0·29-0·63, p<0·0001). The most common adverse events (all grades) were fatigue (61 [75%] of 81 patients), nausea (38 [47%]), and dry mouth (32 [40%]) in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and fatigue (55 [70%] of 79), nausea (21 [27%]), and constipation (18 [23%]) in the enzalutamide group. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 32 (40%) of 81 patients in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 32 (41%) of 79 patients in the enzalutamide group. Grade 3 events that occurred only in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group included anaemia (three [4%] of 81 participants) and decreased platelet count (one [1%] participant). No grade 4 or 5 events were attributed to treatment on central review in either group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 to enzalutamide improved PSA progression-free survival providing evidence of enhanced anticancer activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with risk factors for early progression on enzalutamide and warrants further evaluation of the combination more broadly in metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING: Prostate Cancer Research Alliance (Movember and Australian Federal Government), St Vincent's Clinic Foundation, GenesisCare, Roy Morgan Research, and Endocyte (a Novartis company).

Reasons for non-feasibility of therapeutic drug monitoring of oral targeted therapies in oncology - an analysis of the closed cohorts of a multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) - performing dose adjustments based on measured drug levels and established pharmacokinetic (PK) targets - could optimise treatment with drugs that show large interpatient variability in exposure. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM for multiple oral targeted therapies. Here we report on drugs for which routine TDM is not feasible. METHODS: We evaluated drug cohorts from the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group - TDM study. Based on PK levels taken at pre-specified time points, PK-guided interventions were performed. Feasibility of TDM was evaluated, and based on the success and practicability of TDM, cohorts could be closed. RESULTS: For 10 out of 24 cohorts TDM was not feasible and inclusion was closed. A high incidence of adverse events resulted in closing the cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib cohort. The enzalutamide and erlotinib cohorts were closed because almost all PK levels were above target. Other, non-pharmacological reasons led to closing the palbociclib, olaparib and tamoxifen cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although TDM could help personalising treatment for many drugs, the above-mentioned reasons can influence its feasibility, usefulness and clinical applicability. Therefore, routine TDM is not advised for cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, enzalutamide, erlotinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib. Nonetheless, TDM remains valuable for individual clinical decisions.

Efficacy and safety evaluation of androgen deprivation therapy-based combinations for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety profiles of current combination therapies based on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the heterogeneous population of individuals with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). METHODS: We retrieved pertinent literature from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and international conference databases. The study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023453853) for transparency. RESULTS: Our analysis included 20 RCTs involving 14,995 patients, evaluating 15 ADT-based combinations, including systemic therapies, radiotherapy and surgery. In the overall population, the darolutamide triplet (DARO + docetaxel + ADT) demonstrated comparable overall survival (OS) benefits to prostatectomy/radical local therapy (RLT) plus ADT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-1.57). Additionally, the enzalutamide (ENZ) triplet (ENZ + DOC + ADT) appeared to confer the best progression-free survival (HR, 0.34; 95% CI: 0.27-0.43). Subgroup analysis based on metastatic burden indicated that RLT plus ADT had the best OS performance in patients with low burden, while the DARO triplet was associated with the best OS in patients with high burden. Regarding adverse events (AEs), the addition of certain androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) agents to ADT led to an increased incidence of severe AEs, while the addition of DOC to the ARPI doublet did not appear to elevate the exposure-adjusted incidence rates. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that combined treatments result in better survival outcomes than does ADT alone. In the current landscape of systemic therapy, the significance of local therapy should not be underestimated, and therapeutic decisions should be tailored with meticulous consideration of clinical heterogeneity among patients.

Efficacy and safety of androgen receptor inhibitors for treatment of advanced prostate cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

AIMS: Androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs) have become an effective treatment for advanced prostate cancer (PC). However, it is unknown which ARI is the most helpful and safe for men with advanced PC. Our aim is to help physicians make clinical decisions and provide medication guidelines for patients with advanced PC to avoid potential risks when using ARIs for treatment. METHODS: We systematically searched the following databases: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library, with a literature publication deadline of February 2023. The primary efficacy outcomes were 18-month overall survival (OS), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), hypertension and fatigue. The network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed by Stata 15.1, and Revman 5.3 was used to assess the included studies' risk of bias. RESULTS: The analysis included 26 trials with 26 263 people. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) concluded that enzalutamide (86.8%) showed the best effect in prolonging the OS of patients. Flutamide led to the highest risk of TEAEs (29.9%) and AEs leading to discontinuation (12.8%). Apalutamide (13.4%) led to the highest risk of grade ≥3 TEAEs. Enzalutamide had the highest risk of hypertension (0.2%), grade ≥3 hypertension (4.5%) and fatigue (5.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This NMA indicates there is no one ARI to reach both the most effective and safe therapy aims for treating advanced PC and that there is a compromise between the efficacy and safety of ARIs in the treatment of advanced PC. Physicians should weigh the risks to safety against the anticipated benefits when prescribing these drugs to patients with PC.

Plain language summary of the results from the TALAPRO-2 study: Talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide for patients with advanced prostate cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from the TALAPRO-2 research study (also known as a clinical trial). The TALAPRO-2 study tested the combination of two medicines called talazoparib plus enzalutamide. This combination of medicines was used as the first treatment for adult patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide was compared with a placebo plus enzalutamide. WHAT IS METASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER?: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is a type of cancer that starts in the prostate and has spread to other parts of the body. Castration-resistant means that the cancer continues to grow even when testosterone levels in the blood are reduced to very low levels. Taking medicines to lower testosterone levels in the blood is a standard treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer. WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE TALAPRO-2 TRIAL?: TALAPRO-2 looked at if combining talazoparib plus enzalutamide would increase the length of time patients lived before their cancer got worse or they died compared with a placebo plus enzalutamide. Researchers looked at how treatment affected the size and number of tumors and the length of time before patients needed to change to a new cancer medicine. Researchers also looked at any side effects patients had during the study. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: A total of 805 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer took part in the study. Compared with patients who took a placebo plus enzalutamide, the group of patients who took talazoparib plus enzalutamide had a 37% reduced risk of their cancer getting worse or dying. Some patients had tumors that at the start of the study could be measured with scans. Sixty-two percent of patients who took talazoparib plus enzalutamide had their tumors decrease or shrink to the point that they could no longer be seen on scans versus 44% of patients who took a placebo plus enzalutamide. Patients who took talazoparib plus enzalutamide were more likely to have a longer time before they needed to change to a new cancer medicine. The most common side effects of talazoparib plus enzalutamide were low levels of red blood cells (66% of patients) and neutrophils (36% of patients), and excessive tiredness or exhaustion (34% of patients).Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03395197 (TALAPRO-2) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Determination of enzalutamide long-term safety and efficacy for castration-resistant prostate cancer patients after combined anti-androgen blockade followed by alternative anti-androgen therapy: a multicenter prospective DELC study.

BACKGROUND: Alternative anti-androgen therapy has been widely used as a first-line treatment for castration-resistant prostate cancer, and it may affect treatment outcome of subsequent agents targeting the androgen receptor axis. We conducted the prospective observational DELC (Determination of Enzalutamide Long-term safety and efficacy for Castration-resistant prostate cancer patients after combined anti-androgen blockade followed by alternative anti-androgen therapy) study to evaluate the efficacy of enzalutamide in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who underwent prior combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide and then alternative anti-androgen therapy with flutamide. METHODS: The DELC study enrolled 163 Japanese patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who underwent alternative anti-androgen therapy with flutamide following failure of initial combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide in multiple institutions between January 2016 and March 2019. Primary endpoint was overall survival. Administration of enzalutamide was started at 160 mg orally once daily in all patients. RESULTS: The rate of decline of prostate-specific antigen by 50% or more was 72.2%, and median overall survival was 42.05 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that higher pretreatment serum levels of prostate-specific antigen (≥11.3 ng/mL; P = 0.004), neuron-specific enolase (P = 0.014) and interleukin-6 (≥2.15 pg/mL; P = 0.004) were independent risk factors for overall survival. Fatigue (30.0%), constipation (19.6%) and appetite loss (17.8%) were the most common clinically relevant adverse events. The enzalutamide dose was not reduced in any patient under the age of 70, but adherence was decreased in those over 70. CONCLUSIONS: In the DELC study, the safety of enzalutamide was comparable to that in previous reports. Serum levels of neuron-specific enolase and interleukin-6 were suggested as prognostic factors for castration-resistant prostate cancer with potential clinical utility.

Thermally-Induced Supersaturation Approach for Optimizing Drug Loading and Biopharmaceutical Properties of Supersaturated Lipid-Based Formulations: Case Studies with Ibrutinib and Enzalutamide.

Lipid-based formulations (LbFs) have demonstrated success in pharmaceutical applications; however, challenges persist in dissolving entire doses of the drug into defined liquid volumes. In this study, the temperature-induced supersaturation method was employed in LbF to address drug loading and pill burden issues. Supersaturated LbFs (super-LbF) were prepared using the temperature-induced supersaturation method, where the drug load is above its equilibrium solubility. Further, the influence of the drug's physicochemical and thermal characteristics on drug loading and their relevance with an apparent degree of supersaturation (aDS) was studied using two model drugs, ibrutinib and enzalutamide. All the prepared LbFs were evaluated in terms of physical stability, dispersion, and solubilization capacity, as well as pharmacokinetic assessments. Drug re-crystallization was observed in the lipid solution on long-term storage at higher aDS values of 2-2.5. Furthermore, high-throughput lipolysis studies demonstrated a significant decrease in drug concentration across all LbFs (regardless of drug loading) due to a decline in the formulation solvation capacity and subsequent generation of in-situ supersaturation. Further, the in vivo results demonstrated comparable pharmacokinetic parameters between conventional LbF and super-LbF. The short duration of the thermodynamic metastable state limits the potential absorption benefits. However, super-LbFs of Ibr and Enz showed superior profiles, with 1.7-fold and 5.2-fold increased drug exposure compared to their respective crystalline suspensions. In summary, this study emphasizes the potential of temperature-induced supersaturation in LbF for enhancing drug loading and highlights the intricate interplay between drug properties, formulation characteristics, and in vivo performance.

Abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with or without enzalutamide for high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of primary results from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol.

BACKGROUND: Men with high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer are treated with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for 3 years, often combined with radiotherapy. We analysed new data from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials done in a multiarm, multistage platform protocol to assess the efficacy of adding abiraterone and prednisolone alone or with enzalutamide to ADT in this patient population. METHODS: These open-label, phase 3 trials were done at 113 sites in the UK and Switzerland. Eligible patients (no age restrictions) had high-risk (defined as node positive or, if node negative, having at least two of the following: tumour stage T3 or T4, Gleason sum score of 8-10, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] concentration ≥40 ng/mL) or relapsing with high-risk features (≤12 months of total ADT with an interval of ≥12 months without treatment and PSA concentration ≥4 ng/mL with a doubling time of <6 months, or a PSA concentration ≥20 ng/mL, or nodal relapse) non-metastatic prostate cancer, and a WHO performance status of 0-2. Local radiotherapy (as per local guidelines, 74 Gy in 37 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles or the equivalent using hypofractionated schedules) was mandated for node negative and encouraged for node positive disease. In both trials, patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by use of a computerised algorithm, to ADT alone (control group), which could include surgery and luteinising-hormone-releasing hormone agonists and antagonists, or with oral abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and oral prednisolone (5 mg daily; combination-therapy group). In the second trial with no overlapping controls, the combination-therapy group also received enzalutamide (160 mg daily orally). ADT was given for 3 years and combination therapy for 2 years, except if local radiotherapy was omitted when treatment could be delivered until progression. In this primary analysis, we used meta-analysis methods to pool events from both trials. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was metastasis-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, biochemical failure-free survival, progression-free survival, and toxicity and adverse events. For 90% power and a one-sided type 1 error rate set to 1·25% to detect a target hazard ratio for improvement in metastasis-free survival of 0·75, approximately 315 metastasis-free survival events in the control groups was required. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety according to the treatment started within randomised allocation. STAMPEDE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00268476, and with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN78818544. FINDINGS: Between Nov 15, 2011, and March 31, 2016, 1974 patients were randomly assigned to treatment. The first trial allocated 455 to the control group and 459 to combination therapy, and the second trial, which included enzalutamide, allocated 533 to the control group and 527 to combination therapy. Median age across all groups was 68 years (IQR 63-73) and median PSA 34 ng/ml (14·7-47); 774 (39%) of 1974 patients were node positive, and 1684 (85%) were planned to receive radiotherapy. With median follow-up of 72 months (60-84), there were 180 metastasis-free survival events in the combination-therapy groups and 306 in the control groups. Metastasis-free survival was significantly longer in the combination-therapy groups (median not reached, IQR not evaluable [NE]-NE) than in the control groups (not reached, 97-NE; hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·44-0·64, p<0·0001). 6-year metastasis-free survival was 82% (95% CI 79-85) in the combination-therapy group and 69% (66-72) in the control group. There was no evidence of a difference in metatasis-free survival when enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate were administered concurrently compared with abiraterone acetate alone (interaction HR 1·02, 0·70-1·50, p=0·91) and no evidence of between-trial heterogeneity (I2 p=0·90). Overall survival (median not reached [IQR NE-NE] in the combination-therapy groups vs not reached [103-NE] in the control groups; HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·48-0·73, p<0·0001), prostate cancer-specific survival (not reached [NE-NE] vs not reached [NE-NE]; 0·49, 0·37-0·65, p<0·0001), biochemical failure-free-survival (not reached [NE-NE] vs 86 months [83-NE]; 0·39, 0·33-0·47, p<0·0001), and progression-free-survival (not reached [NE-NE] vs not reached [103-NE]; 0·44, 0·36-0·54, p<0·0001) were also significantly longer in the combination-therapy groups than in the control groups. Adverse events grade 3 or higher during the first 24 months were, respectively, reported in 169 (37%) of 451 patients and 130 (29%) of 455 patients in the combination-therapy and control groups of the abiraterone trial, respectively, and 298 (58%) of 513 patients and 172 (32%) of 533 patients of the combination-therapy and control groups of the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial, respectively. The two most common events more frequent in the combination-therapy groups were hypertension (abiraterone trial: 23 (5%) in the combination-therapy group and six (1%) in control group; abiraterone and enzalutamide trial: 73 (14%) and eight (2%), respectively) and alanine transaminitis (abiraterone trial: 25 (6%) in the combination-therapy group and one (<1%) in control group; abiraterone and enzalutamide trial: 69 (13%) and four (1%), respectively). Seven grade 5 adverse events were reported: none in the control groups, three in the abiraterone acetate and prednisolone group (one event each of rectal adenocarcinoma, pulmonary haemorrhage, and a respiratory disorder), and four in the abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with enzalutamide group (two events each of septic shock and sudden death). INTERPRETATION: Among men with high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer, combination therapy is associated with significantly higher rates of metastasis-free survival compared with ADT alone. Abiraterone acetate with prednisolone should be considered a new standard treatment for this population. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Janssen, and Astellas.

Transcriptional profiling identifies an androgen receptor activity-low, stemness program associated with enzalutamide resistance.

The androgen receptor (AR) antagonist enzalutamide is one of the principal treatments for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). However, not all patients respond, and resistance mechanisms are largely unknown. We hypothesized that genomic and transcriptional features from metastatic CRPC biopsies prior to treatment would be predictive of de novo treatment resistance. To this end, we conducted a phase II trial of enzalutamide treatment (160 mg/d) in 36 men with metastatic CRPC. Thirty-four patients were evaluable for the primary end point of a prostate-specific antigen (PSA)50 response (PSA decline ≥50% at 12 wk vs. baseline). Nine patients were classified as nonresponders (PSA decline <50%), and 25 patients were classified as responders (PSA decline ≥50%). Failure to achieve a PSA50 was associated with shorter progression-free survival, time on treatment, and overall survival, demonstrating PSA50's utility. Targeted DNA-sequencing was performed on 26 of 36 biopsies, and RNA-sequencing was performed on 25 of 36 biopsies that contained sufficient material. Using computational methods, we measured AR transcriptional function and performed gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) to identify pathways whose activity state correlated with de novo resistance. TP53 gene alterations were more common in nonresponders, although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.055). AR gene alterations and AR expression were similar between groups. Importantly, however, transcriptional measurements demonstrated that specific gene sets-including those linked to low AR transcriptional activity and a stemness program-were activated in nonresponders. Our results suggest that patients whose tumors harbor this program should be considered for clinical trials testing rational agents to overcome de novo enzalutamide resistance.

Phase I clinical trial of HC-1119 soft capsule in Chinese healthy adult male subjects: Pharmacokinetics and safety of single-dose proportionality and effects of food.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies showed that HC-1119, a deuterated version of enzalutamide, could competitively inhibit androgen binding to androgen receptor by blocking the transmission of androgen receptor signaling pathway as enzalutamide, inducing apoptosis of prostate cancer cells and reducing the proliferation of prostate cancer cells. Animal pharmacokinetic studies also show that deuterization of enzalutamide as HC-1119 could retain the basic properties of mother drug, increases the stability of compounds to metabolic enzymes and the drug exposure in vivo, prolong the half-life and reduce the production of metabolites, which may lead to a better efficacy and safety of HC-1119 compared with enzalutamide. METHODS: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and safety of HC-1119 and the effects of food on pharmacokinetics in healthy adult Chinese men after single-dose administration of HC-1119. A total of 47 Chinese healthy adult male subjects received HC-1119 soft capsule at a single oral dose of 40, 80, or 160 mg followed on fasting or 160 mg after high-fat meal respectively. HC-1119 prototype and its metabolites M1 and M2 in plasma were collected individually in a total 23 time points. Pharmacokinetics were determined by sensitive LC/MS/MS for dose-proportionality study. RESULTS: In subjects taking HC-1119 soft capsules on fasting, Cmax of HC-1119 prototype increased dose-dependently. Either Cmax and AUC0-∞ of M1 or Cmax of M2 showed statistically significant difference. Dose-proportionality evaluation showed linear pharmacokinetic characteristics in Cmax of HC-1119 prototype, Cmax and AUC0-∞ of M2 in dose range of 40-160 mg. Cmax of HC-1119 was significantly different between the two groups as 160 mg HC-1119 on fasting or after a high-fat diet respectively, while the other parameter were not. HC-1119 and its metabolites M1 and M2 showed a linear dynamic trend. CONCLUSIONS: HC-1119 is expected to have lower clinical dose than the similar drug enzalutamide. The absorption of HC-1119 and the main pharmacokinetic parameters of HC-1119 and its metabolites M1 and M2 were not affected by high-fat diet. The clinical application of HC-1119 soft capsule in the later stage can be recommended for both fasting and postprandial. The safety and tolerance were good in this population.

Cabazitaxel versus Abiraterone or Enzalutamide in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

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

Lycopene enhances the sensitivity of castration-resistant prostate cancer to enzalutamide through the AKT/EZH2/ androgen receptor signaling pathway.

Enzalutamide is an effective drug for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), but acquired enzalutamide resistance is usually unavoidable within the short term in many patients. Lycopene, a safe and effective phytochemical, has been documented to have anticancer activity in a variety of tumors, especially for prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this study was to provide data support for the combination of lycopene and enzalutamide in the treatment of CRPC. To this end, tissues from patients with primary prostate cancer (PPC) and CRPC were examined by immunohistochemical analysis and found that p-AKT and p-EZH2 were overexpressed in CRPC. Furthermore, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the high expression of p-AKT and p-EZH2 may be related to the poor prognosis of patients. In addition, the expression of p-AKT, p-EZH2 and androgen receptor (AR) were significantly down-regulated in 22RV1 and C4-2B cells and the proliferation and invasion of CRPC cells were inhibited after treatment with lycopene, while SC79 (an AKT agonist) markedly rescue this effect. Of note, a combination of lycopene and enzalutamide significantly inhibited the proliferation and invasion of CRPC cells in vitro, as well as tumor growth and bone metastasis in vivo. These results suggest that the enhanced antitumor effects of enzalutamide by lycopene may be related to the reduction of AR protein levels through lycopene-mediated inhibition of AKT/EZH2 pathway, which may provide a new approach to improve the efficacy of enzalutamide in CRPC.

Phase II study of enzalutamide in androgen receptor positive, recurrent, high- and low-grade serous ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of the oral androgen receptor antagonist enzalutamide in patients with previously treated, recurrent, AR-positive (AR+) ovarian cancer. METHODS: This was a single-institution phase II study of patients with AR+ ovarian cancer with measurable disease with 1-3 prior lines of chemotherapy; patients were screened for enrollment from 11/2013-7/2018. Following consent, archival tissue was evaluated for AR+. Enrolled patients received daily enzalutamide 160 mg until progression of disease or treatment discontinuation. Adverse events were graded by CTCAE v4.0. Co-primary endpoints were 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6) and overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1 criteria. RESULTS: During the study period, 160 patients were screened and 59 (45 high-grade serous [HGS] and 14 low-grade serous [LGS]) consented to treatment on study. There was 1 confirmed and 1 unconfirmed partial response. The ORR was 1.7% (90% CI: 0.2-100%). The overall PFS6 rate (as binary) was 22% (90% CI: 15.1-100%). The 6-month PFS rate (as time to event) was 19.8% for HGS patients (90% CI: 12.7-100%) and 38.5% (90% CI: 21.7%-100%) for LGS patients. Grade 3 toxicities occurred in 6 patients (one toxicity (Grade 3 rash) was considered a dose-limiting toxicity). One patient died of cardiac arrest after 42 days on treatment of a cardiac arrest not attributed to study drug. CONCLUSIONS: The study met its primary endpoint, with a PFS6 rate of 22% (n = 13); however, the overall response rate was low. Enzalutamide was well tolerated and may be a potential treatment option in select patients.

Which traits affect how long patients with advanced prostate cancer live when treated with enzalutamide?

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a research article originally published in European Journal of Cancer. The PROSPER study involved men who had a type of advanced prostate cancer called nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In men with nmCRPC, their cancer has progressed on traditional hormone therapy but scans show that it has not spread to other parts of the body. The main results of the PROSPER study showed that patients treated with enzalutamide lived longer than patients treated with placebo. For this analysis, researchers looked at whether this was different depending on patients' traits. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers found that age and location did not affect how long patients lived when treated with enzalutamide. They found three patient traits that did make a difference. Being able to carry out daily activities, low prostate-specific antigen level (PSA level), and receiving no other prostate cancer treatments after the study meant that patients were more likely to live longer. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Patients with nmCRPC treated with enzalutamide lived longer than patients treated with placebo. Age and location did not affect how long these patients lived, but other traits did. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02003924 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Real-world outcomes of second novel hormonal therapy or radium-223 following first novel hormonal therapy for mCRPC.

Aim: To evaluate real-world clinical outcomes of radium-223 or alternative novel hormonal therapy (NHT) following first-line NHT for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Patients & methods: Retrospective analysis of the US Flatiron database (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03896984). Results: In the radium-223 cohort (n = 120) versus the alternative NHT cohort (n = 226), proportionally more patients had prior symptomatic skeletal events and bone-only metastases, and first-line NHT duration was shorter. Following second-line therapy, 49 versus 39% of patients received subsequent life-prolonging therapy; of these, 47 versus 76% received taxane. Median overall survival was 10.8 versus 11.2 months. Conclusion: Real-world patients with mCRPC had similar median overall survival following second-line radium-223 or alternative NHT after first-line NHT. Many patients received subsequent therapy, with less taxane use after radium-223.

Lay abstract Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer are often first treated with novel hormonal therapy (NHT) using abiraterone or enzalutamide. To aid decisions about what treatment to use next, we reviewed information about patients who were treated with an alternative NHT (226 patients) or the nuclear medicine radium-223 (120 patients) after the first NHT. Most patients given radium-223 had cancer that had spread to their bones only, whereas many patients given an alternative NHT had cancer in their bones and other parts of their body. Around one in four patients given radium-223 and one in five given an alternative NHT had symptoms related to their bone metastases after starting treatment. Five in every ten patients given radium-223 received further therapy, including chemotherapy in 50% of these patients, while four in every ten patients given an alternative NHT received further therapy, including chemotherapy in 75%. On average, patients lived for almost a year after starting radium-223 or an alternative NHT.

Medication adherence among patients with advanced prostate cancer using oral therapies.

Aims: In light of the extended overall survival and improved quality of life provided by advanced prostate cancer (PC) oral therapies, this study aimed to describe treatment adherence to advanced PC oral therapies and evaluate associated patient characteristics and subsequent healthcare resource utilization (HRU). Patients & methods: Patients with advanced PC initiating apalutamide, enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate were identified from administrative data (October 1, 2014-September 30, 2019). Adherence and persistence at six months postinitiation were used to evaluate patient factors and HRU. Results: Aged ≥75 years, Black race, chemotherapy use and higher pharmacy paid amounts were associated with poor adherence/persistence, which translated to higher HRU. Conclusions: Strategies to increase adherence and persistence may improve patient outcomes and associated HRU.

Lay abstract This study included 27,262 patients with advanced prostate cancer who started taking one of three oral cancer medications (apalutamide, enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate) between October 2014 and September 2019. Patients who were black, aged 75 years or older, who had chemotherapy or who had higher prescription costs had the most difficulty following dosing guidelines or staying on treatment. Patients who did not follow dosing guidelines required more healthcare services. In light of the extended survival and improved quality of life that oral cancer medication for advanced prostate cancer provides, helping patients to take the correct medication dose, at the right time, and for the recommended length of time may improve their outcomes and reduce medical costs.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab, with or without enzalutamide, in AR-V7-expressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A phase-2 nonrandomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: AR-V7-positive metastatic prostate cancer is a lethal phenotype with few treatment options and poor survival. METHODS: The two-cohort nonrandomized Phase 2 study of combined immune checkpoint blockade for AR-V7-expressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (STARVE-PC) evaluated nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg), without (Cohort 1) or with (Cohort 2) the anti-androgen enzalutamide. Co-primary endpoints were safety and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate. Secondary endpoints included time-to-PSA-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), time-to-clinical/radiographic-PFS, objective response rate (ORR), PFS lasting greater than 24 weeks, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty patients were treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab (N = 15, Cohort 1, previously reported), or ipilimumab plus nivolumab and enzalutamide (N = 15, Cohort 2) in patients previously progressing on enzalutamide monotherapy. PSA response rate was 2/15 (13%) in cohort 1 and 0/15 in cohort 2, ORR was 2/8 (25%) in Cohort 1 and 0/9 in Cohort 2 in those with measureable disease, median PSA-PFS was 3.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.1-NR) in cohort 1 and 2.7 (95% CI: 2.1-5.9) months in cohort 2, and median PFS was 3.7 (95% CI: 2.8-7.5) in cohort 1 and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.3-5.8) months in cohort 2. Three of 15 patients in cohort 1 (20%, 95% CI: 7.1%-45.2%) and 4/15 patients (26.7%, 95% CI: 10.5%-52.4%) in cohort 2 achieved a durable PFS lasting greater than 24 weeks. Median OS was 8.2 (95% CI: 5.5-10.4) in cohort 1 and 14.2 (95% CI: 8.5-NA) months in cohort 2. Efficacy results were not statistically different between cohorts. Grade-3/4 adverse events occurred in 7/15 cohort 1 patients (46%) and 8/15 cohort 2 patients (53%). Combined cohort (N = 30) baseline alkaline phosphatase and cytokine analysis suggested improved OS for patients with lower alkaline phosphatase (hazards ratio [HR], 0.30; 95% CI: 0.11-0.82), lower circulating interleukin-7 (IL-7) (HR, 0.24; 95% Cl: 0.06-0.93) and IL-6 (HR, 0.13; 95% Cl: 0.03-0.52) levels, and higher circulating IL-17 (HR, 4.53; 95% CI: 1.47-13.93) levels. There was a trend towards improved outcomes in men with low sPD-L1 serum levels. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrated only modest activity in patients with AR-V7-expressing prostate cancer, and was not sufficient to justify further exploration in unselected patients. Stratification by baseline alkaline phosphatase and cytokines (IL-6, -7, and -17) may be prognostic for outcomes to immunotherapy.

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

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

Indirect Comparison of Darolutamide versus Apalutamide and Enzalutamide for Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: No published head-to-head randomized trials have compared the safety and efficacy of darolutamide vs apalutamide or enzalutamide in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. This study compares prespecified adverse events and metastasis-free survival associated with darolutamide vs apalutamide, and darolutamide vs enzalutamide, via matching-adjusted indirect comparisons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individual patient data from the phase III ARAMIS trial (NPLACEBO=553; NDAROLUTAMIDE=943) were selected and reweighted to match the inclusion criteria and baseline characteristics published for the phase III SPARTAN (NPLACEBO=401; NAPALUTAMIDE=806) and PROSPER (NPLACEBO=468; NENZALUTAMIDE=933) trials. Only baseline factors consistently reported across trials were included as matching covariates. Both indirect comparisons matched on age, prostate specific antigen level and doubling time, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Gleason score, and bone-sparing agent use. Darolutamide vs apalutamide also matched on prior surgery and darolutamide vs enzalutamide also matched on region. Risk differences and odds ratios were calculated for adverse events and hazard ratios for metastasis-free survival. RESULTS: No differences in metastasis-free survival hazard ratios were found after matching in either comparison. However, fall, fracture and rash rates were statistically significantly lower in favor of darolutamide vs apalutamide. Fall, dizziness, mental impairment, fatigue and severe fatigue rates were statistically significantly lower in favor of darolutamide vs enzalutamide. CONCLUSIONS: While metastasis-free survival did not differ across drugs in these cross-trial indirect comparisons, darolutamide showed a favorable safety and tolerability profile in prespecified adverse events vs apalutamide and enzalutamide. Consideration of these adverse events is important in clinical decision-making and treatment selection in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Pembrolizumab with or without enzalutamide in selected populations of men with previously untreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer harbouring programmed cell death ligand-1 staining: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the survival outcomes of pembrolizumab (PEM) plus enzalutamide (ENZ) versus PEM alone in selected populations of men with previously untreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harbouring programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) staining. METHODS: Consecutive men with previously untreated mCRPC harbouring PD-L1 staining who underwent treatment with PEM plus ENZ (PE) or PEM alone (PA) at our medical centre from January 1, 2017, to January 31, 2021, were retrospectively identified. Follow-up was conducted monthly during the first year and then every 1 month thereafter. The primary outcomes of the study were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were the frequency of key adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: In total, 302 men were retrospectively reviewed, 96 of whom were deemed to be ineligible per the exclusion criteria, leaving 206 men (PE: n = 100, median age 64 years [range, 43-85] and PA: n = 106, 65 years [range, 45-82]) who were eligible for the study. The median follow-up for both groups was 34 months (range, 2-42). At the final follow-up, the median OS was 25.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.3-27.6) in the PE group versus 18.3 months (95% CI, 16.5-20.9) in the PA group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.80; p = 0.001). A marked distinction was also observed in the median PFS (6.1 months [95% CI, 4.7-7.8] for PE vs. 4.9 months for PA (95% CI, 3.2-6.4) for PA; HR 0.55, 95% CI, 0.41-0.75; p = 0.001). There were noteworthy differences in the rate of the key AEs between the two groups (72.0% for PE vs. 45.3% for PA, p < 0.001). Noteworthy differences were also detected for fatigue events (7.0% in the PE group vs. 0.9% in the PA group, p = 0.025) and musculoskeletal events (9.0% for PE vs. 0.9% for PA, p = 0.007), but these events tended to be manageable. CONCLUSIONS: Among selected populations of men with previously untreated mCRPC harbouring PD-L1 staining, PEM added to ENZ treatment may significantly increase the survival benefits compared with PEM treatment alone regardless of tumor mutation status. The safety profile for PE plus ENZ tends to be manageable.