ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Early PSA response has been found to be prognostic of outcomes in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer. We performed a secondary analysis of the TITAN trial to determine if early PSA response was predictive of treatment efficacy in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Early PSA response was defined as achieving a PSA level of ≤ 0.2 ng/mL by 6 months of random assignment. A Cox proportional hazard model was constructed in a landmark population with an interaction term between the treatment and early PSA response to determine differential treatment effect on overall survival (OS). We applied multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model with time to early PSA response fitted with restricted cubic spline to determine the association of time to early PSA response with OS. RESULTS: Approximately 24% (124/524) of patients in the androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone group and 61% (321/524) in the apalutamide group had PSA response ≤ 0.2 ng/mL by 6 months. Longer time to early PSA response was associated with significantly superior OS in the apalutamide group. There was a significant difference in treatment effect from apalutamide on OS (P = .03 for interaction) among 6-month PSA responders (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.44-1.00) vs nonresponders (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.89-1.46). This difference in treatment effect was not statistically significant at 3 months (P = .17 for interaction). Among 6-month PSA responders, 3-year confounder-adjusted OS was 84% (80%-88%) for the apalutamide group and 74% (66%-82%) for the ADT alone group. Among nonresponders, 3-year adjusted OS for the 2 treatment arms were 58% (52%-65%) and 56% (51%-60%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early PSA response by 6 months was a predictor of treatment efficacy from ADT plus apalutamide on OS. Longer time to early PSA response was associated with superior OS in the apalutamide arm.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We performed a secondary analysis of ACIS study to determine if synchronous versus metachronous metastatic presentation has any association with survival and treatment response to dual androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) in docetaxel naïve metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODOLOGY: In this phase III randomized controlled trial, docetaxel naïve mCRPC patients were randomized to either apalutamide or placebo combined with abiraterone and prednisone. Multivariable Cox regression models were applied to determine the adjusted association of M-stage with radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). To determine the heterogeneity of treatment effect based on metastatic stage (M-stage) at presentation, Cox regression was applied with interaction terms between M-stage and treatment. RESULTS: Among 972 patients, 432 had M0, 334 had M1, while M-stage at presentation was unknown in 206. There was no association of M-stage at presentation with rPFS in patients with prior local therapy (LT) (hazard ratio for M1-stage: 1.22 [95% confidence interval: 0.82-1.82]; unknown: 1.03 [0.77-1.38]) or without prior LT (M1-stage: 0.87 [0.64-1.19]; unknown: 1.15 [0.77-1.72]) with no significant heterogeneity. Similarly, there was no association of M-stage with OS in patients with prior LT (M1-stage: 1.04 [0.81-1.33]; unknown: 0.98 [0.79-1.21]) or without prior LT (M1-stage: 0.95 [0.70-1.29]; unknown: 1.17 [0.80-1.71]) with no significant heterogeneity. Based on M-stage at presentation, we did not find any significant heterogeneity in treatment effect on rPFS (interaction p = 0.13), and OS (interaction p = 0.87). CONCLUSION: M-stage at presentation had no association with survival in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. We did not find any statistically significant heterogeneity in efficacy of dual ARAT based on synchronous versus metachronous presentation.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Male , Humans , Docetaxel/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prednisone/therapeutic use , Progression-Free SurvivalABSTRACT
PURPOSE: After cessation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), testosterone gradually recovers to supracastrate levels (> 50 ng/dL). After this, rises in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are often seen. However, it remains unknown whether early PSA kinetics after testosterone recovery are associated with subsequent biochemical recurrence (BCR). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of a phase III randomized controlled trial in which newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer patients were randomly allocated to ADT for 6 months starting 4 months prior to or simultaneously with prostate RT. We calculated the PSA doubling time (PSADT) based on PSA values up to 18 months after supracastrate testosterone recovery. Competing risk regression was used to evaluate the association of PSADT with relative incidence of BCR, considering deaths as competing events. RESULTS: Overall, 313 patients were eligible. Median PSADT was 8 months. Cumulative incidence of BCR at 10 years from supracastrate testosterone recovery was 19% and 11% in patients with PSADT < 8 months and ≥ 8 months (p = 0.03). Compared to patients with PSADT of < 4 months, patients with higher PSADT (sHR for PSADT 4 to < 8 months: 0.36 [95% CI 0.16-0.82]; 8 to < 12 months: 0.26 [0.08-0.91]; ≥ 12 months: 0.20 [0.07-0.56]) had lower risk of relative incidence of BCR. CONCLUSIONS: Early PSA kinetics, within 18 months of recovery of testosterone to a supracastrate level, can predict for subsequent BCR. Taking account of early changes in PSA after testosterone recovery may allow for recognition of potential failures earlier in the disease course and thereby permit superior personalization of treatment.
Subject(s)
Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Testosterone/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists , ProstatectomyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cancer poses a significant global health burden. With advances in screening and treatment, there are now a growing number of cancer survivors with complex needs, requiring the involvement of multiple health care providers. Previous studies have identified problems related to communication and care coordination between primary care providers (PCPs) and cancer specialists. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine whether a web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) could facilitate communication between PCPs and cancer specialists (oncologists and oncology nurses) to improve patient-reported continuity of care among patients receiving treatment or posttreatment survivorship care. METHODS: In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, a total of 173 patients were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (eOncoNote plus usual methods of communication between PCPs and cancer specialists) or a control group (usual communication only), including 104 (60.1%) patients in the survivorship phase (breast and colorectal cancer) and 69 (39.9%) patients in the treatment phase (breast and prostate cancer). The primary outcome was patient-reported team and cross-boundary continuity (Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire). Secondary outcome measures included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire on Major Depression, and Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire. Patients completed the questionnaires at baseline and at 2 points following randomization. Patients in the treatment phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 1 month and at either 4 months (patients with prostate cancer) or 6 months following randomization (patients with breast cancer). Patients in the survivorship phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 6 months and at 12 months following randomization. RESULTS: The results did not show an intervention effect on the primary outcome of team and cross-boundary continuity of care or on the secondary outcomes of depression and patient experience with their health care. However, there was an intervention effect on anxiety. In the treatment phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score from baseline to the 1-month follow-up for GAD-7 (mean difference -2.3; P=.03). In the survivorship phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score for GAD-7 between baseline and the 6-month follow-up (mean difference -1.7; P=.03) and between baseline and the 12-month follow-up (mean difference -2.4; P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs' and cancer specialists' access to eOncoNote is not significantly associated with patient-reported continuity of care. However, PCPs' and cancer specialists' access to the eOncoNote intervention may be a factor in reducing patient anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03333785; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03333785.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Continuity of Patient Care , Communication , InternetABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a non-invasive treatment option for primary renal cell carcinoma, for which long-term data are awaited. The primary aim of this study was to report on long-term efficacy and safety of SABR for localised renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: This study was an individual patient data meta-analysis, for which patients undergoing SABR for primary renal cell carcinoma across 12 institutions in five countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, and the USA) were eligible. Eligible patients had at least 2 years of follow-up, were aged 18 years or older, had any performance status, and had no previous local therapy. Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma or upper-tract urothelial carcinoma were excluded. SABR was delivered as a single or multiple fractions of greater than 5 Gy. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed local failure per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, and was evaluated using cumulative incidence functions. FINDINGS: 190 patients received SABR between March 23, 2007, and Sept 20, 2018. Single-fraction SABR was delivered in 81 (43%) patients and multifraction SABR was delivered in 109 (57%) patients. Median follow-up was 5·0 years (IQR 3·4-6·8). 139 (73%) patients were men, and 51 (27%) were women. Median age was 73·6 years (IQR 66·2-82·0). Median tumour diameter was 4·0 cm (IQR 2·8-4·9). 96 (75%) of 128 patients with available operability details were deemed inoperable by the referring urologist. 56 (29%) of 190 patients had a solitary kidney. Median baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 60·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (IQR 42·0-76·0) and decreased by 14·2 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (IQR 5·4-22·5) by 5 years post-SABR. Seven (4%) patients required dialysis post-SABR. The cumulative incidence of local failure at 5 years was 5·5% (95% CI 2·8-9·5) overall, with single-fraction SABR yielding fewer local failures than multifraction (Gray's p=0·020). There were no grade 3 toxic effects or treatment-related deaths. One (1%) patient developed an acute grade 4 duodenal ulcer and late grade 4 gastritis. INTERPRETATION: SABR is effective and safe in the long term for patients with primary renal cell carcinoma. Single-fraction SABR might yield less local failure than multifraction, but further evidence from randomised trials is needed to elucidate optimal treatment schedules. These mature data lend further support for renal SABR as a treatment option for patients unwilling or unfit to undergo surgery. FUNDING: None.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Kidney Neoplasms , Radiosurgery , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Female , Aged , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/radiotherapy , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/surgery , Radiosurgery/adverse effects , Kidney Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Kidney Neoplasms/surgery , KidneyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this guideline is to present recommendations regarding moderately hypofractionated (240-340 cGy per fraction) and ultrahypofractionated (500 cGy or more per fraction) radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 8 key questions on appropriate indications and dose-fractionation for moderately and ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy, as well as technical issues, including normal tissue dose constraints, treatment volumes, and use of image guided and intensity modulated radiation therapy. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and Society-approved tools for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS: Based on high-quality evidence, strong consensus was reached for offering moderate hypofractionation across risk groups to patients choosing external beam radiation therapy. The task force conditionally recommends ultrahypofractionated radiation may be offered for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer but strongly encourages treatment of intermediate-risk patients on a clinical trial or multi-institutional registry. For high-risk patients, the task force conditionally recommends against routine use of ultrahypofractionated external beam radiation therapy. With any hypofractionated approach, the task force strongly recommends image guided radiation therapy and avoidance of nonmodulated 3-dimensional conformal techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Hypofractionated radiation therapy provides important potential advantages in cost and convenience for patients, and these recommendations are intended to provide guidance on moderate hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation for localized prostate cancer. The limits in the current evidentiary base-especially for ultrahypofractionation-highlight the imperative to support large-scale randomized clinical trials and underscore the importance of shared decision making between clinicians and patients.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiation Dose Hypofractionation , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize recent evidence concerning the use of moderately hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy, defined as 2.4-3.4 Gy per fraction, and ultrahypofractionated external beam radiotherapy (also known as stereotactic body radiotherapy [SBRT]), defined as at least 5 Gy per fraction, in men with localized prostate cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Taken together, a number of recently completed randomized trials show that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy confers similar biochemical control compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy without increasing late toxicity. These effects appear to extend across all baseline clinical risk groups. Several single-arm phase II studies, as well as a recently published large-scale randomized trial comparing SBRT with conventional fractionation, show very promising biochemical control and favorable acute and late treatment-related morbidity with the use of SBRT in predominantly low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. As it is associated with similar prostate cancer control and toxicity while improving patient convenience and reducing cost, moderate hypofractionation is a preferred alternative to conventional fractionation in a majority of men with localized prostate cancer choosing radiotherapy as their primary treatment modality. To date, studies conducted largely in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer report encouraging oncologic outcomes and acceptable toxicity with SBRT. Mature results of phase III trials evaluating five-fraction SBRT regimens are eagerly awaited.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiation Dose Hypofractionation , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to evaluate accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for local staging of bladder cancer for four clinical scenarios (T-stage thresholds) considered against current standards for clinical staging and secondarily to identify sources for variability in accuracy. Systematic review of patients with bladder cancer undergoing T-staging MRI to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Sub-group analysis was done to explore variability; risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. The search identified 30 studies (5156 patients). Pooled accuracy at multiple T-stage thresholds: ≤T1 vs ≥T2 = sensitivity 87% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82-91), specificity 79% (95% CI 72-85); T-any vs T0 = sensitivity 65% (95% CI 23-92), specificity 90% (95% CI 83-94); ≤T2 vs ≥T3 = sensitivity 83% (95% CI 75-88), specificity 87% (95% CI 78-93); and Subject(s)
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
, Neoplasm Staging
, Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
, Adult
, Aged
, Aged, 80 and over
, Female
, Humans
, Male
, Middle Aged
, Neoplasm Staging/methods
, Neoplasm Staging/standards
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Bone health is a significant concern in men with prostate cancer. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of drug, supplement, and lifestyle interventions aimed at preventing fracture, improving bone mineral density (BMD), or preventing or delaying osteoporosis in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 19 January 2017), EMBASE (1980 to 18 January 2017), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (19 January 2017). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials and systematic reviews of trials that were published in English; involved men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer; and compared bone-targeted therapies with placebo, usual care, or other active treatments. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and assessed study risk of bias for each outcome. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two systematic reviews and 28 reports of 27 trials met inclusion criteria. All trials focused on men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who were initiating or continuing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Bisphosphonates were effective in increasing BMD, but no trial was sufficiently powered to detect reduction in fractures. Denosumab improved BMD and reduced the incidence of new radiographic vertebral fractures in 1 high-quality trial. No trials compared calcium or vitamin D versus placebo. Three lifestyle intervention trials did not show a statistically significant difference in change in BMD between exercise and usual care. LIMITATIONS: Most trials were of moderate quality. Only 2 randomized controlled trials were designed to examine fracture outcomes. Potential harms of treatments were not evaluated. CONCLUSION: Both bisphosphonates and denosumab improve BMD in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who are receiving ADT. Denosumab also reduces risk for radiographic vertebral fractures, based on 1 trial. More trials studying fracture outcomes are needed in this population. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Program in Evidence-Based Care.
Subject(s)
Androgen Antagonists/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/adverse effects , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Osteoporosis/prevention & control , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Bone Density/drug effects , Denosumab/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Osteoporosis/chemically induced , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Toremifene/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Our purpose was to develop a summary of recommendations regarding the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer based on the American Urologic Association/ ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. METHODS: The American Urologic Association and ASTRO convened a multidisciplinary, expert panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic literature review using an a priori defined consensus-building methodology. The topics covered were risk assessment, staging, risk-based management, principles of management including active surveillance, surgery, radiation, and follow-up after treatment. Presented are recommendations from the guideline most pertinent to radiation oncologists with an additional statement on health equity, diversity, and inclusion related to guideline panel composition and the topic of clinically localized prostate cancer. SUMMARY: Staging, risk assessment, and management options in prostate cancer have advanced over the last decade and significantly affect shared decision-making for treatment management. Current advancements and controversies discussed to guide staging, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations include the use of advanced imaging and tumor genomic profiling. An essential active surveillance strategy includes prostate-specific antigen monitoring and periodic digital rectal examination with changes triggering magnetic resonance imaging and possible biopsy thereafter and histologic progression or greater tumor volume prompting consideration of definitive local treatment. The panel recommends against routine use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for patients with prostate cancer after prostatectomy with negative nodes and an undetectable prostate-specific antigen, while acknowledging that patients at highest risk of recurrence were relatively poorly represented in the 3 largest randomized trials comparing adjuvant RT to early salvage and that a role may exist for adjuvant RT in selected patients at highest risk. RT for clinically localized prostate cancer has evolved rapidly, with new trial results, therapeutic combinations, and technological advances. The recommendation of moderately hypofractionated RT has not changed, and the updated guideline incorporates a conditional recommendation for the use of ultrahypofractionated treatment. Health disparities and inequities exist in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer across the continuum of care that can influence guideline concordance.
Subject(s)
Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Biopsy , Consensus , GenomicsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We present long-term outcomes from a phase 3 randomized controlled trial that compared helical tomotherapy with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Newly diagnosed patients with high-risk prostate cancer were randomly allocated to receive radical radiation therapy (RT) using 3D-CRT or helical tomotherapy. In both arms, patients received an initial dose of 46 Gy in 23 fractions to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes, followed by an additional boost to the prostate of 32 Gy in 16 fractions. RT was combined with 3 years of adjuvant androgen deprivation. The primary endpoint was late (>90 days since RT initiation) rectal toxicity. RESULTS: Overall,123 patients were randomly assigned to either the 3D-CRT (n = 60) or tomotherapy (n = 63) arms. The median follow-up was 161 months. Overall, the proportion of patients with grade ≥ 2 late rectal toxicity was 8.3% (95% CI, 3.1-19.1; n = 5) in the 3D-CRT arm and 11.1% (95% CI, 5.0-22.2; n = 7) in the tomotherapy arm with no significant between-arm difference (P = .83). There was no significant difference (P = .17) in the proportion of patients with late grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicity:10.0% (95% CI, 4.1-21.2) in the 3D-CRT arm and 20.6% (95% CI, 11.9-33.0) in the tomotherapy arm. There was no significant difference in the hazard of biochemical progression or death between the 2 groups (hazard ratio for the tomotherapy arm: 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.15; P = .17). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 3 trial, the overall incidence of grade ≥ 2 rectal toxicity was low and was not significantly different between the 2 arms. There was no significant evidence of improved biochemical progression-free survival in patients treated with tomotherapy. These findings should be interpreted considering the possibility of type II errors due to limited sample size and low event rates.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: It is unclear whether exposure to commonly prescribed medications influences survival and treatment response in patients with de novo high-risk metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of the LATITUDE trial to determine whether receipt of concomitant medications influenced the effect of abiraterone acetate and prednisone, in addition to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), on overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in patients with de novo mPCa. We focused on 7 commonly prescribed classes of medications: metformin, statins, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors, aspirin, acetaminophen, and NSAIDs (nonselective COX inhibitors). To account for multiple testing, a two-sided pâ¯<â¯0.0024 was set as the threshold for statistical significance. RESULTS: Overall, 1135 patients were eligible. There was some evidence of a differential treatment effect from abiraterone among patients who received concomitant NSAIDs (hazard ratio [HR] for OS: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.42-0.70) versus those who did not (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.60-0.91), though this did not reach significance (interaction pâ¯=â¯0.05). A similar non-significant finding of heterogeneity of effect from abiraterone was noted among patients who received concomitant aspirin (HR for OS: 0.93 [0.63-1.36]) versus those who did not (HR: 0.61 [0.51-0.73]) (interaction pâ¯=â¯0.04). Receipt of NSAIDs was independently associated with a significantly inferior OS (HR: 1.37 [1.15-1.62]; pâ¯<â¯0.001) and higher relative incidence of PCSM (sHR: 1.47 [1.21-1.78]; pâ¯<â¯0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis did not find statistically significant evidence of differences in treatment effects from ADT plus abiraterone in de novo high-risk mPCa based on the receipt of concurrent medications. The receipt of NSAIDs was independently associated with increased PCSM and inferior OS.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Abiraterone Acetate/therapeutic use , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Aspirin/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Pelvic radiation therapy may lead to decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and increased risk of fracture that could be of particular concern in patients with prostate cancer who also receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We performed an exploratory analysis of a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether exposure to prior pelvic external beam radiation therapy (XRT) affects BMD and risk of fracture in patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer aged ≥70 years or <70 years with low BMD (T-score < -1) or osteoporotic fracture who had been receiving ADT for ≥12 months were randomly assigned to receive densoumab or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. BMD was measured at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36. We applied multivariable linear mixed-effects models with an interaction term between the treatment arm and exposure to prior pelvic XRT to evaluate differential XRT effect on percent BMD change between the 2 treatment arms. RESULTS: Among 1407 eligible patients, 31% (n = 447) received prior pelvic XRT. There was no significant difference in any clinical fractures among patients with (5.8%, 26 of 447) or without (5.2%, 50 of 960) prior pelvic XRT (P = .42). Prior pelvic XRT was associated with a significant (0.54%) improvement in BMD (95% CI, 0.05-1.02) in the placebo group and a nonsignificant (0.04%) decline in BMD (95% CI, -0.47 to -0.35) in the denosumab group (interaction P = .007). There was no significant difference in pelvic XRT effect on percent BMD change in the lumbar spine (P = .65) or total hip (P = .39) between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find sufficient evidence to suggest any detrimental effect of pelvic XRT on the treatment effect from denosumab on percent BMD change, with only an approximately 5% incidence of clinical fractures.
Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Fractures, Bone , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Bone Density , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Denosumab/pharmacology , Denosumab/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Lumbar VertebraeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The utility of prostate radiotherapy (RT) is unclear in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) receiving intensified systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the role of prostate RT in low-volume mHSPC. METHODS: Bibliographic databases and conference proceedings were searched through July 2023 for RCTs evaluating the addition of ARPIs or prostate RT to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy, defined as ADT or ADT plus docetaxel, for the initial treatment of mHSPC. We focused exclusively on aggregate data from the low-volume mHSPC subpopulation in these trials. We pooled the treatment arms into four groups: SOC, SOC plus ARPI, SOC plus RT, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). To compare treatment strategies, a fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was undertaken, while a Bayesian network meta-regression was performed to account for across-trial differences in docetaxel use as part of SOC and in proportions of patients with de novo presentation. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Ten RCTs comprising 4423 patients were eligible. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve scores were 0.0006, 0.45, 0.62, and 0.94 for SOC, SOC plus RT, SOC plus ARPI, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT, respectively. On a meta-regression, in a population with de novo mHSPC and no docetaxel use, we did not find sufficient evidence of a difference in OS between SOC plus ARPI plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% credible interval: 0.51-1.16) and SOC plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (HR: 1.10; 95% credible interval: 0.92-1.42). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: There was some evidence that SOC plus ARPI plus RT reduced mortality compared with the next best strategy of SOC plus ARPI in patients with low-volume de novo mHSPC. A meta-analysis with individual patient data or an RCT is needed to confirm these findings.
Subject(s)
Network Meta-Analysis , Prostatic Neoplasms , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Neoplasm MetastasisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Renal function preservation is particularly important following nonoperative treatment of localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) since patients are often older with medical comorbidities. Our objective was to report long-term renal function outcomes after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) including patients with a solitary kidney. METHODS: Patients with primary RCC treated with SABR with ≥2 yr of follow-up at 12 International Radiosurgery Consortium for Kidney institutions were included. Renal function was measured by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 190 patients (56 with a solitary kidney) underwent SABR and were followed for a median of 5.0 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.4-6.8). In patients with a solitary kidney versus bilateral kidneys, pre-SABR eGFR (mean [standard deviation]) was 61.1 (23.2) versus 58.0 (22.3) ml/min (p = 0.32) and the median tumor size was 3.65 cm (IQR: 2.59-4.50 cm) versus 4.00 cm (IQR: 3.00-5.00 cm; p = 0.026). At 5 yr after SABR, eGFR decreased by -14.5 (7.6) and -13.3 (15.9) ml/min (p = 0.67), respectively, and there were similar rates of post-SABR dialysis (3.6% [n = 2/56] vs 3.7% [n = 5/134]). A multivariable analysis demonstrated that increasing tumor size (odds ratio [OR] per 1 cm: 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-2.16, p = 0.0055) and baseline eGFR (OR per 10 ml/min: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.02-1.66, p = 0.034) were associated with an eGFR decline of ≥15 ml/min at 1 yr. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: With long-term follow-up after SABR, kidney function decline remains moderate, with no observed difference between patients with a solitary kidney and bilateral kidneys. Tumor size and baseline eGFR are dominant factors predictive of long-term renal function decline. PATIENT SUMMARY: With long-term follow-up, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) yields moderate long-term renal function decline and low dialysis rates even in patients with a solitary kidney. SABR thus represents a promising noninvasive, nephron-sparing option for patients with localized renal cell carcinoma.
ABSTRACT
We investigated whether inter-patient variation in the dynamic trajectory of hemoglobin (Hb), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) can prognosticate overall survival (OS) in de novo mHSPC. This is a secondary analysis of the LATITUDE trial in which high-risk de novo mHSPC patients were randomly assigned to receive either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus abiraterone or ADT plus placebo. We used a five-fold cross-validated joint model approach to determine the association of temporal changes in the serological markers with OS. Decision curve analysis was applied to determine the net benefit. When dynamic changes in Hb, LMR, NLR, PLR, and PSA were included in a multivariate joint model, an increase in the log of the current value of PSA (HR: 1.24 [1.20-1.28]) was associated with inferior OS. A multivariate joint model that captured dynamic trajectory of Hb, NLR, PLR, LMR, and PSA up to 24 months, showed a net benefit over the "treat all" strategy at a threshold of probability of approximately ≥30% while no net benefit was seen when dynamic change in PSA was omitted. Our joint model could be used for designing future adaptive trials investigating sequential treatment personalization.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Metastatic castrate sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) is a heterogeneous disease state with variable prognosis. Although several life-prolonging systemic agents are available, there is no robust multivariable model to predict prognosis and improve risk stratification in mCSPC. The objective of this study was to build and validate a multivariable prognostic model to predict overall survival (OS) in mCSPC. METHODS: We used data from LATITUDE, a phase III randomized controlled trial in which men with de novo mCSPC were randomly allocated to either ADT plus abiraterone or ADT with placebo. Patients with non-missing data (n = 1,058) were randomly split in a 70:30 ratio to training (n = 743) and testing (n = 315) sets. Elastic net regression was used for variable selection. A multivariable Cox regression model for OS was then fitted using the selected variables. The predictive accuracy of the model was assessed on the testing set using the time-dependent area under curve (tAUC) with bootstrapped confidence intervals [CI] primarily for OS and secondarily for radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS). RESULTS: The 11 prognostic variables in the final model were performance status, number of skeletal metastases, Gleason score, presence of liver metastasis, worst pain score, albumin, lactate dehydrogenase, prostate-specific antigen, hemoglobin, and treatment regimen. The tAUC for predicting OS at 2- and 3-years was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.67-0.80) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.77), respectively. The tAUC for rPFS at 2- and 3-years was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.77) and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.82), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A prognostic model for men with de novo mCSPC was developed and validated in an independent testing set. Our model had high accuracy for predicting OS and rPFS. The model includes commonly used clinical and laboratory parameters and can guide risk stratification of these patients for participation in future trials.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prognosis , Prostate-Specific Antigen/therapeutic use , Proportional Hazards Models , Neoplasm Grading , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pain is an important dimension of quality-of-life in patients with metastatic castrate-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). However, it is unclear if dynamic change in pain over time can predict for overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in these patients. METHODS: This is an exploratory analysis of LATITUDE, a phase III randomized study, in which men with de novo mCSPC were randomized to receive either ADT plus abiraterone versus ADT alone. Information was collected on patient-reported worst pain score (WPS) and pain-interference score (PIS) from the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. A Bayesian joint modelling approach was used determine the association of dynamic change in WPS and PIS with OS and PFS. RESULTS: Overall, 1125 patients with at least 3 measurements on pain scores were eligible. On Cox multivariable regression, increase in baseline WPS was associated with inferior OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.049 [95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.015-1.085]; time dependent area under curve [tAUC] 0.64) and PFS (HR 1.045 [1.011-1.080]; tAUC: 0.64). Increase in baseline PIS was associated with inferior OS (HR 1.062 [1.020-1.105]; tAUC: 0.63) but not with PFS (HR 1.038 [0.996-1.08]). On independent joint models, an increase in the current value of WPS by 1-unit was associated with inferior OS (HR 1.316 [1.258-1.376]; tAUC 0.74) and PFS (HR 1.319 [1.260-1.382]; tAUC 0.70). Similar association was seen for increase in the current value of PIS with OS (HR 1.319 [1.261-1.381]; tAUC 0.73) and PFS (HR 1.282 [1.224-1.344]; tAUC 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: The above findings highlight the potential dynamic interplay between patient-reported pain with OS and PFS in mCSPC. Compared to baseline pain, such dynamic assessment of pain was found to have superior predictive ability and thus has the potential to tailor subsequent treatment based on response to initial therapy beyond its role as a very important dimension of quality-of-life.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms/complications , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Bayes Theorem , Pain/diagnosis , Pain/epidemiology , Pain/etiology , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Healthcare providers have reported challenges with coordinating care for patients with cancer. Digital technology tools have brought new possibilities for improving care coordination. A web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) was implemented in Ottawa, Canada for cancer specialists and primary care providers (PCPs). This study aimed to examine PCPs' experiences of implementing eOncoNote and how access to the system influenced communication between PCPs and cancer specialists. As part of a larger study, we collected and analyzed system usage data and administered an end-of-discussion survey to understand the perceived value of using eOncoNote. eOncoNote data were analyzed for 76 shared patients (33 patients receiving treatment and 43 patients in the survivorship phase). Thirty-nine percent of the PCPs responded to the cancer specialist's initial eOncoNote message and nearly all of those sent only one message. Forty-five percent of the PCPs completed the survey. Most PCPs reported no additional benefits of using eOncoNote and emphasized the need for electronic medical record (EMR) integration. Over half of the PCPs indicated that eOncoNote could be a helpful service if they had questions about a patient. Future research should examine opportunities for EMR integration and whether additional interventions could support communication between PCPs and cancer specialists.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Digital Technology , Internet Access , Oncologists , Physicians, Primary Care , Female , Humans , Male , Breast Neoplasms , Cancer Survivors , Colorectal Neoplasms , Digital Technology/methods , Digital Technology/organization & administration , Electronic Health Records/instrumentation , Electronic Health Records/organization & administration , Health Care Surveys , Internet Access/statistics & numerical data , Nurse Practitioners , Nurses , Oncologists/organization & administration , Physicians, Primary Care/organization & administration , Prostatic Neoplasms , Random AllocationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The adoption of docetaxel for systemic treatment of metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), in both castration-sensitive (mCSPC) and castration-resistant (mCRPC) settings, is poorly understood. This study examined the real-world utilization of docetaxel in these patients and their outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective population-based study used administrative data from Ontario, Canada, to identify men aged ≥66 years who were diagnosed with de novo mCSPC or mCRPC between 2014 and 2019 and received docetaxel. The study assessed treatment tolerability and toxicity, and survival in both cohorts. Descriptive and comparative statistical analysis were conducted. RESULTS: The study identified 11.2% (399/3556) and 13.2% (203/1534) patients diagnosed with de novo mCSPC and with mCRPC who received docetaxel respectively. The median age in both cohorts was 72 years (IQR: 68-76). Overall, 43.9% (n = 175) patients with de novo mCSPC and 52.1% (n = 85) with mCRPC completed ≥6 cycles of docetaxel. Over two-fifth also needed dose adjustments in both cohorts. Hospitalization or emergency department visit for febrile neutropenia were noted in 15.8% (n = 63) of de novo mCSPC patients and similarly in 19% (n = 31) of mCRPC cohort. The median survival of PCa patients who completed ≥6 cycles of docetaxel was significantly longer relative to those who completed <4 cycles: 32.7 vs. 23.5 months (p < 0.001) for mCSPC and 20.5 vs. 10.7 (p = 0.012) for mCRPC respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study of elderly patients with metastatic PCa, treatment with docetaxel was associated with poor tolerability and higher toxicity compared with clinical trials. Receipt of limited cycles and reduced overall dose of docetaxel were associated with inferior overall survival.