Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer who have high-risk biochemical recurrence have an increased risk of progression. The efficacy and safety of enzalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy and enzalutamide monotherapy, as compared with androgen-deprivation therapy alone, are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with prostate cancer who had high-risk biochemical recurrence with a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 9 months or less. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive enzalutamide (160 mg) daily plus leuprolide every 12 weeks (combination group), placebo plus leuprolide (leuprolide-alone group), or enzalutamide monotherapy (monotherapy group). The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, as assessed by blinded independent central review, in the combination group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. A key secondary end point was metastasis-free survival in the monotherapy group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. Other secondary end points were patient-reported outcomes and safety. RESULTS: A total of 1068 patients underwent randomization: 355 were assigned to the combination group, 358 to the leuprolide-alone group, and 355 to the monotherapy group. The patients were followed for a median of 60.7 months. At 5 years, metastasis-free survival was 87.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.0 to 90.6) in the combination group, 71.4% (95% CI, 65.7 to 76.3) in the leuprolide-alone group, and 80.0% (95% CI, 75.0 to 84.1) in the monotherapy group. With respect to metastasis-free survival, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.61; P<0.001); enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87; P = 0.005). No new safety signals were observed, with no substantial between-group differences in quality-of-life measures. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone with respect to metastasis-free survival; enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone. The safety profile of enzalutamide was consistent with that shown in previous clinical studies, with no apparent detrimental effect on quality of life. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; EMBARK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02319837.).

177Lu-PSMA-617 versus a change of androgen receptor pathway inhibitor therapy for taxane-naive patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PSMAfore): a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (177Lu-PSMA-617) prolongs radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) and taxane therapy. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in patients with taxane-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomised, controlled trial conducted at 74 sites across Europe and North America, taxane-naive patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had progressed once on a previous ARPI were randomly allocated (1:1) to open-label, intravenous 177Lu-PSMA-617 at a dosage of 7·4 GBq (200 mCi) ± 10% once every 6 weeks for six cycles, or a change of ARPI (to abiraterone or enzalutamide, administered orally on a continuous basis per product labelling). Crossover from ARPI change to 177Lu-PSMA-617 was allowed after centrally confirmed radiographic progression. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival, defined as the time from randomisation until radiographic progression or death, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was a secondary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04689828) and is ongoing. In this primary report of the study, we present primary (first data cutoff) and updated (third data cutoff) analyses of radiographic progression-free survival; all other data are based on the third data cutoff. FINDINGS: Overall, of the 585 patients screened, 468 met all eligibility criteria and were randomly allocated between June 15, 2021 and Oct 7, 2022 to receive 177Lu-PSMA-617 (234 [50%] patients) or ARPI change (234 [50%]). Baseline characteristics were mostly similar between groups; median number of 177Lu-PSMA-617 cycles was 6·0 (IQR 4·0-6·0). Of patients assigned to ARPI change, 134 (57%) crossed over to receive 177Lu-PSMA-617. In the primary analysis (median time from randomisation to first data cutoff 7·26 months [IQR 3·38-10·55]), the median radiographic progression-free survival was 9·30 months (95% CI 6·77-not estimable) in the 177Lu-PSMA-617 group versus 5·55 months (4·04-5·95) in the ARPI change group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·41 [95% CI 0·29-0·56]; p<0·0001). In the updated analysis at time of the third data cutoff (median time from randomisation to third data cutoff 24·11 months [IQR 20·24-27·40]), median radiographic progression-free survival was 11·60 months (95% CI 9·30-14·19) in the 177Lu-PSMA-617 group versus 5·59 months (4·21-5·95) in the ARPI change group (HR 0·49 [95% CI 0·39-0·61]). The incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was lower in the 177Lu-PSMA-617 group (at least one event in 81 [36%] of 227 patients; four [2%] grade 5 [none treatment related]) than the ARPI change group (112 [48%] of 232; five [2%] grade 5 [one treatment related]). INTERPRETATION: 177Lu-PSMA-617 prolonged radiographic progression-free survival relative to ARPI change, with a favourable safety profile. For patients with PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who are being considered for a change of ARPI after progression on a previous ARPI, 177Lu-PSMA-617 may be an effective treatment alternative. FUNDING: Novartis.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy for high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer without carcinoma in situ and unresponsive to BCG (KEYNOTE-057): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The KEYNOTE-057 trial evaluated activity and safety of pembrolizumab in patients with BCG-unresponsive high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer who were ineligible for or declined radical cystectomy. In cohort A (patients with carcinoma in situ, with or without papillary tumours) of the KEYNOTE-057 study, pembrolizumab monotherapy led to a complete response rate of 41% at 3 months, and 46% of responders maintained a response lasting at least 12 months. Here, we evaluate pembrolizumab monotherapy in cohort B of patients with papillary tumours without carcinoma in situ. METHODS: KEYNOTE-057 is a single-arm, phase 2 study in 54 sites (hospitals and cancer centres) in 14 countries. Cohort B eligible patients were aged 18 years and older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had BCG-unresponsive high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with papillary tumours (high-grade Ta or any-grade T1) without carcinoma in situ. Transurethral resection of bladder tumour within 12 weeks of first pembrolizumab dose was required. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of 35 cycles. Primary endpoint was 12-month disease-free survival of high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer or progressive disease as assessed by cystoscopy, cytology, and central pathology and radiology review. Activity was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a baseline evaluation. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02625961, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2016, and June 17, 2021, 132 patients (104 [79%] men and 28 [21%] women) who had received a median of ten (IQR 9-15) previous BCG instillations were enrolled into cohort B of the study. Patients received a median of 10 cycles (IQR 6-27) of pembrolizumab. At data cutoff date, Oct 20, 2022, median follow-up was 45·4 months (IQR 36·4-59·3) and five (4%) of 132 patients remained on treatment. The 12-month disease-free survival was 43·5% (95% CI 34·9-51·9). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97 (73%) of 132 patients; 19 (14%) had a grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event; the most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were colitis (in three [2%] patients) and diarrhoea (in two [2%]). 17 (13%) of 132 patients experienced serious treatment-related adverse events, of which colitis (three patients [2%]) was most common. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab monotherapy showed antitumour activity and manageable toxicity in patients with BCG-unresponsive high-risk Ta or T1 bladder cancer without carcinoma in situ and could potentially be a suitable treatment option for patients who decline or are ineligible for radical cystectomy. Findings will need to be confirmed in a randomised controlled trial. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in men with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TALAPRO-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Co-inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) and androgen receptor activity might result in antitumour efficacy irrespective of alterations in DNA damage repair genes involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of talazoparib (a PARP inhibitor) plus enzalutamide (an androgen receptor blocker) versus enzalutamide alone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: TALAPRO-2 is a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial of talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide as first-line therapy in men (age ≥18 years [≥20 years in Japan]) with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic mCRPC receiving ongoing androgen deprivation therapy. Patients were enrolled from 223 hospitals, cancer centres, and medical centres in 26 countries in North America, Europe, Israel, South America, South Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were prospectively assessed for HRR gene alterations in tumour tissue and randomly assigned (1:1) to talazoparib 0·5 mg or placebo, plus enzalutamide 160 mg, administered orally once daily. Randomisation was stratified by HRR gene alteration status (deficient vs non-deficient or unknown) and previous treatment with life-prolonging therapy (docetaxel or abiraterone, or both: yes vs no) in the castration-sensitive setting. The sponsor, patients, and investigators were masked to talazoparib or placebo, while enzalutamide was open-label. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by blinded independent central review, evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03395197) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 7, 2019, and Sept 17, 2020, 805 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (402 to the talazoparib group and 403 to the placebo group). Median follow-up for rPFS was 24·9 months (IQR 21·9-30·2) for the talazoparib group and 24·6 months (14·4-30·2) for the placebo group. At the planned primary analysis, median rPFS was not reached (95% CI 27·5 months-not reached) for talazoparib plus enzalutamide and 21·9 months (16·6-25·1) for placebo plus enzalutamide (hazard ratio 0·63; 95% CI 0·51-0·78; p<0·0001). In the talazoparib group, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia, neutropenia, and fatigue; the most common grade 3-4 event was anaemia (185 [46%] of 398 patients), which improved after dose reduction, and only 33 (8%) of 398 patients discontinued talazoparib due to anaemia. Treatment-related deaths occurred in no patients in the talazoparib group and two patients (<1%) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Talazoparib plus enzalutamide resulted in clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in rPFS versus standard of care enzalutamide as first-line treatment for patients with mCRPC. Final overall survival data and additional long-term safety follow-up will further clarify the clinical benefit of the treatment combination in patients with and without tumour HRR gene alterations. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Functional assessment in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with darolutamide: results from the DaroAcT study.

BACKGROUND: Androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs) are approved for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer; however, some patients may experience symptoms and side effects that hinder their physical functioning. The Timed Up and Go (TUG) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) tests are used to assess physical functioning in older adults and are recommended assessments for patients with prostate cancer, despite lacking validation in this setting. METHODS: DaroAct (NCT04157088) was an open-label, multicenter, phase 2b study designed to evaluate the effects of the ARI darolutamide (lead-in phase) and darolutamide vs enzalutamide (randomized phase) on physical functioning in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Only the lead-in phase, in which participants received darolutamide 600 mg twice daily, was completed. The TUG and SPPB tests were used to assess physical functioning. RESULTS: The lead-in phase enrolled 30 participants. During 24 weeks of treatment, 8 (32.0%) of 25 evaluable participants exhibited clinically meaningful worsening in TUG from baseline (primary endpoint). At the week 24 visit, 5 (21.7%) of 23 participants had worsening in TUG time, and 8 (33.3%) of 24 participants had worsening in SPPB score. Because only 48% of participants had the same outcome on the TUG and SPPB tests, the study was terminated without initiating the randomized comparison. CONCLUSION: Most participants showed no clinically meaningful worsening in physical functioning after 24 weeks of darolutamide treatment, but poor agreement between tests was observed. Tools to accurately and consistently measure the impact of ARIs on physical functioning in patients with CRPC are needed.

Efficacy and Safety of Darolutamide in Combination With Androgen-Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel in Black Patients From the Randomized ARASENS Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the ARASENS trial (NCT02799602), darolutamide in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel significantly reduced the risk of death by 32.5% (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.80; P < .0001) compared with placebo plus ADT with docetaxel in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). We present efficacy and safety of darolutamide versus placebo in Black patients from ARASENS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to darolutamide 600 mg or placebo twice daily in combination with ADT and docetaxel. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Key secondary endpoints included time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and safety. RESULTS: In ARASENS, 54 Black patients received darolutamide (n = 26) or placebo (n = 28) plus ADT and docetaxel. In Black patients, overall survival favored darolutamide versus placebo (median, not reached vs. 38.7 months; stratified HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17-1.02), with 4-year survival rates of 62% versus 41%. The darolutamide group also had longer time to CRPC compared with the placebo group (median, not reached vs .12.6 months; HR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.02-0.30). The safety profile of darolutamide in Black patients was consistent with that observed for the overall ARASENS population (grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events, TEAEs: 61.5% vs. 66.1%; serious TEAEs: 42.3% vs. 44.8%). CONCLUSION: In this small population of Black patients with mHSPC from the ARASENS trial, darolutamide was associated with an improvement in survival and time to CRPC and was well tolerated. Efficacy and safety findings in Black patients were consistent with the overall ARASENS population.

Extended Safety and Tolerability of Darolutamide for Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer and Adverse Event Time Course in ARAMIS.

BACKGROUND: Patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) are usually asymptomatic and seek treatments that improve survival but have a low risk of adverse events. Darolutamide, a structurally distinct androgen receptor inhibitor (ARi), significantly reduced the risk of metastasis and death versus placebo in ARAMIS. We assessed the extended safety and tolerability of darolutamide and the time-course profile of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) related to ARis and androgen-suppressive treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with nmCRPC were randomized 2:1 to darolutamide (n = 955) or placebo (n = 554). After trial unblinding, patients could receive open-label darolutamide. Tolerability and TEAEs were assessed every 16 weeks. Time interval-specific new and cumulative event rates were determined during the first 24 months of the double-blind period. RESULTS: Darolutamide remained well tolerated during the double-blind and open-label periods, with 98.8% of patients receiving the full planned dose. The incidence of TEAEs of interest in the darolutamide group was low and ≤2% different from that in the placebo group, except for fatigue. When incidences were adjusted for exposure time, there were minimal differences between the darolutamide double-blind and double-blind plus open-label periods. The rate of initial onset and cumulative incidence of grade 3/4 TEAEs and serious TEAEs were similar for darolutamide and placebo groups over 24 months. CONCLUSION: Extended treatment with darolutamide was well tolerated and no new safety signals were observed. Most ARi-associated and androgen-suppressive treatment-related TEAEs occurred at low incidences with darolutamide, were similar to placebo, and showed minimal increase over time with continued treatment. TRIAL NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02200614.

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

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

Complications of immuno-oncology care: what urologist should know.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a practical review of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that may be encountered in uro-oncology patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a literature review of studies reporting irAEs including articles published through September 2023 for uro-oncology patients and the potential relevancy for the practicing urologist. RESULTS: Immunotherapy has revolutionised cancer treatment, extending its impact to urological malignancies including for patients with urothelial, kidney, and prostate cancers. Immuno-oncology (IO) compounds have achieved measurable and durable responses in these cancers. Urologists, choosing to administer or co-manage IO patient care, should be prepared to understand, evaluate, and treat irAEs. This review discusses the spectrum of irAEs that can be encountered. Ongoing trials are exploring the use of immunotherapy at earlier stages of uro-oncological diseases, thus underscoring the evolving landscape of urological cancer treatment. Paradoxically, some data suggests that the occurrence of irAEs is associated with improved oncological outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Immune-related AEs, while manageable, may be life-threatening and require lifelong therapy. A thorough understanding of AEs and toxicity of a novel drug class is imperative.

Updates on Management of Biochemical Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: Patients with biochemical recurrent prostate cancer (BCR) are a heterogeneous group, whereby a personalized approach to management is critical. Patients with high-risk features such as PSA doubling time (PSADT) ≤ 9-12 months warrant earlier imaging for metastasis detection and consideration for intensified therapy (beyond intermittent androgen deprivation alone) during this phase of BCR-only disease. The BCR phase represents a unique opportunity to impact disease survival and delay metastasis progression. There is compelling evidence from the EMBARK trial that ADT monotherapy is no longer the optimal consideration for high-risk BCR patients.

TALAPRO-3 clinical trial protocol: phase III study of talazoparib plus enzalutamide in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in combination with androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors are a promising therapeutic option for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations. Here, we describe the design and rationale of the multinational, phase III, TALAPRO-3 study comparing talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide in patients with mCSPC and HRR gene alterations. The primary end point is investigator-assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) per RECIST 1.1 in soft tissue, or per PCWG3 criteria in bone. The TALAPRO-3 study will demonstrate whether the addition of talazoparib can improve the efficacy of enzalutamide as assessed by rPFS in patients with mCSPC and HRR gene alterations undergoing androgen deprivation therapy. Clinical Trial Registration:NCT04821622 (ClinicalTrials.gov) Registry Name: Study of Talazoparib With Enzalutamide in Men With DDR Gene Mutated mCSPC. Date of Registration: 29 March 2021.

The TALAPRO-3 study design: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary is about the ongoing research study called TALAPRO-3. This study is testing the use of two medicines called talazoparib and enzalutamide. The two medicines are being used together as a treatment for patients with a type of cancer called metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer and changes in specific DNA repair genes within their tumors. The study began in May 2021, and includes 599 patients from 27 countries. WHAT IS METASTATIC CASTRATION-SENSITIVE PROSTATE CANCER?: Metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer is known as mCSPC for short. It is cancer that has started in the prostate and spread to other body parts. The prostate is a gland below the bladder and helps make semen (the liquid that contains sperm). Castration-sensitive means that the cancer responds to treatments that lower testosterone in the blood. WHICH MEDICINES ARE BEING TESTED?: In this study, some patients will take talazoparib plus enzalutamide while others will take a placebo plus enzalutamide. Talazoparib and enzalutamide are two different cancer medicines. Talazoparib is not currently used to treat patients with mCSPC. Enzalutamide is used to treat patients with prostate cancer. Talazoparib plus enzalutamide is being compared with a placebo plus enzalutamide to see if patients live longer without their cancer getting worse, or them dying, when taking talazoparib plus enzalutamide or when taking a placebo plus enzalutamide. WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE TALAPRO-3 STUDY?: This study aims to find out if treatment with talazoparib plus enzalutamide increases the length of time the patients in the study live without their cancer getting worse, or them dying, compared with treatment with a placebo plus enzalutamide. The study will also measure how long the patients in the study live, the number and types of side effects they have, their general health and quality of life, and whether there are changes in how patients report their pain.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03395197 (TALAPRO-2) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The TALAPRO-3 study design: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary is about the ongoing research study called TALAPRO-3. This study is testing the use of two medicines called talazoparib and enzalutamide. The two medicines are being used together as a treatment for patients with a type of cancer called metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer and changes in specific DNA repair genes within their tumors. The study began in May 2021, and includes 599 patients from 27 countries. WHAT IS METASTATIC CASTRATION-SENSITIVE PROSTATE CANCER?: Metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer is known as mCSPC for short. It is cancer that has started in the prostate and spread to other body parts. The prostate is a gland below the bladder and helps make semen (the liquid that contains sperm). Castration-sensitive means that the cancer responds to treatments that lower testosterone in the blood. WHICH MEDICINES ARE BEING TESTED?: In this study, some patients will take talazoparib plus enzalutamide while others will take a placebo plus enzalutamide. Talazoparib and enzalutamide are two different cancer medicines. Talazoparib is not currently used to treat patients with mCSPC. Enzalutamide is used to treat patients with prostate cancer. Talazoparib plus enzalutamide is being compared with a placebo plus enzalutamide to see if patients live longer without their cancer getting worse, or them dying, when taking talazoparib plus enzalutamide or when taking a placebo plus enzalutamide. WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE TALAPRO-3 STUDY?: This study aims to find out if treatment with talazoparib plus enzalutamide increases the length of time the patients in the study live without their cancer getting worse, or them dying, compared with treatment with a placebo plus enzalutamide. The study will also measure how long the patients in the study live, the number and types of side effects they have, their general health and quality of life, and whether there are changes in how patients report their pain.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03395197 (TALAPRO-2) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

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).

CREST: phase III study of sasanlimab and Bacillus Calmette-Guérin for patients with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-naïve high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the standard of care for patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). BCG in combination with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors may yield greater anti-tumor activity compared with either agent alone. CREST is a phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of the subcutaneous PD-1 inhibitor sasanlimab in combination with BCG for patients with BCG-naive high-risk NMIBC. Eligible participants are randomized to receive sasanlimab plus BCG (induction ± maintenance) or BCG alone for up to 25 cycles within 12 weeks of TURBT. The primary outcome is event-free survival. Secondary outcomes include additional efficacy end points and safety. The target sample size is around 1000 participants.

Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is the most common type of bladder cancer. Most people have surgery to remove the cancer cells while leaving the rest of the bladder intact. This is called transurethral resection of a bladder tumor (TURBT). For people with high-risk NMIBC, a medicine called Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is placed directly inside the bladder after TURBT. A 'high risk' classification means that the cancer is more likely to spread or come back after treatment. Some people's cancer does not respond to BCG or returns after BCG treatment. Researchers are currently looking at whether BCG combined with other immunotherapies may prevent cancer growth more than BCG on its own. Immunotherapy helps the immune system recognize and kill cancer cells. Sasanlimab is an immunotherapy medicine that is not yet approved to treat people with NMIBC. It is given as an injection under the skin. In this CREST study, researchers are looking at how safe and effective sasanlimab plus BCG is for people with high-risk NMIBC. Around 1000 people are taking part in CREST. They must have had TURBT 12 weeks or less before joining the study. Researchers want to know how long people live without certain events occurring, such as bladder cancer cells returning. A plain language summary of this article can be found as Supplementary Material. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04165317; 2019-003375-19 (EudraCT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Oral Relugolix for Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Injectable luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (e.g., leuprolide) are the standard agents for achieving androgen deprivation for prostate cancer despite the initial testosterone surge and delay in therapeutic effect. The efficacy and safety of relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, as compared with those of leuprolide are not known. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with advanced prostate cancer, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive relugolix (120 mg orally once daily) or leuprolide (injections every 3 months) for 48 weeks. The primary end point was sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (<50 ng per deciliter) through 48 weeks. Secondary end points included noninferiority with respect to the primary end point, castrate levels of testosterone on day 4, and profound castrate levels (<20 ng per deciliter) on day 15. Testosterone recovery was evaluated in a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: A total of 622 patients received relugolix and 308 received leuprolide. Of men who received relugolix, 96.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.9 to 97.9) maintained castration through 48 weeks, as compared with 88.8% (95% CI, 84.6 to 91.8) of men receiving leuprolide. The difference of 7.9 percentage points (95% CI, 4.1 to 11.8) showed noninferiority and superiority of relugolix (P<0.001 for superiority). All other key secondary end points showed superiority of relugolix over leuprolide (P<0.001). The percentage of patients with castrate levels of testosterone on day 4 was 56.0% with relugolix and 0% with leuprolide. In the subgroup of 184 patients followed for testosterone recovery, the mean testosterone levels 90 days after treatment discontinuation were 288.4 ng per deciliter in the relugolix group and 58.6 ng per deciliter in the leuprolide group. Among all the patients, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was 2.9% in the relugolix group and 6.2% in the leuprolide group (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving men with advanced prostate cancer, relugolix achieved rapid, sustained suppression of testosterone levels that was superior to that with leuprolide, with a 54% lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. (Funded by Myovant Sciences; HERO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03085095.).

Enzalutamide and Survival in Nonmetastatic, Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary trial results showed that enzalutamide significantly improved metastasis-free survival among men who had nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer and rapidly increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels while taking androgen-deprivation therapy. Results from the final analysis of overall survival have not yet been reported. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (defined on the basis of conventional imaging and a PSA doubling time of ≤10 months) who were continuing to receive androgen-deprivation therapy were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) to receive enzalutamide at a dose of 160 mg or placebo once daily. Overall survival was assessed with a group sequential testing procedure and an O'Brien-Fleming-type alpha-spending function. RESULTS: As of October 15, 2019, a total of 288 of 933 patients (31%) in the enzalutamide group and 178 of 468 (38%) in the placebo group had died. Median overall survival was 67.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.0 to not reached) in the enzalutamide group and 56.3 months (95% CI, 54.4 to 63.0) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.89; P = 0.001). The exposure-adjusted rate of adverse events of grade 3 or higher was 17 per 100 patient-years in the enzalutamide group and 20 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group. Adverse events in the enzalutamide group were consistent with those previously reported for enzalutamide; the most frequently reported events were fatigue and musculoskeletal events. CONCLUSIONS: Enzalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy resulted in longer median overall survival than placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy among men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer and a rapidly rising PSA level. The risk of death associated with enzalutamide was 27% lower than with placebo. Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profile of enzalutamide. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; PROSPER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02003924.).

Nadir Prostate-specific Antigen as an Independent Predictor of Survival Outcomes: A Post Hoc Analysis of the PROSPER Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: This post hoc analysis of PROSPER evaluated the relationship between depth of PSA decline and clinical outcomes in enzalutamide-treated men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PROSPER was an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial that demonstrated significantly improved metastasis-free survival and overall survival with androgen deprivation therapy plus enzalutamide vs placebo. A total of 905 enzalutamide-treated men were included in this post hoc analysis. Metastasis-free survival (primary endpoint) and overall survival (secondary endpoint) were evaluated for 4 mutually exclusive subgroups defined by PSA decline: <50% (reference); ≥50% to <90%; ≥90%, nadir ≥0.2 ng/mL; and ≥90%, nadir <0.2 ng/mL. Medians and 95% confidence intervals were determined using a 12-month landmark analysis; hazard ratios and P values were based on an unstratified Cox proportional analysis model. RESULTS: In enzalutamide-treated men, PSA declines of <50%, ≥50% to <90%, ≥90% with nadir ≥0.2 ng/mL, and ≥90% with nadir <0.2 ng/mL were associated with median metastasis-free survival in months (95% confidence intervals) of 22.1 (14.8-not reached), 34.2 (29.4-not reached), 36.6 (33.4-not reached), and not reached, respectively, and overall survival in months (95% confidence intervals) of 40.8 (31.7-44.9), 54.4 (49.0-67.0), 64.3 (63.4-not reached), and not reached, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistically significant correlation between greater depth of PSA decline and improved clinical outcomes, suggesting a previously underappreciated relationship between changes in PSA levels and clinical outcomes in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Treatment of Low-grade Intermediate-risk Nonmuscle-invasive Bladder Cancer With UGN-102 ± Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor Compared to Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor Monotherapy: A Randomized, Controlled, Phase 3 Trial (ATLAS).

PURPOSE: Low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer is a chronic illness commonly treated by repetitive transurethral resection of bladder tumor. We compared the efficacy and safety of intravesical chemoablation with UGN-102 (a reverse thermal gel containing mitomycin), with or without subsequent transurethral resection of bladder tumor, to transurethral resection of bladder tumor alone in patients with low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized, phase 3 trial recruited patients with new or recurrent low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer to receive initial treatment with either UGN-102 once weekly for 6 weeks or transurethral resection of bladder tumor. Patients were followed quarterly by endoscopy, cytology, and for-cause biopsy. The primary end point was disease-free survival. All patients were followed for adverse events. RESULTS: Trial enrollment was halted by the sponsor to pursue an alternative development strategy after 282 of a planned 632 patients were randomized to UGN-102 ± subsequent transurethral resection of bladder tumor (n=142) or transurethral resection of bladder tumor monotherapy (n=140), rendering the trial underpowered to perform hypothesis testing. Patients were predominantly male and ≥65 years of age. Tumor-free complete response 3 months after initial treatment was achieved by 92 patients (65%) who received UGN-102 and 89 patients (64%) treated by transurethral resection of bladder tumor. The estimated probability of disease-free survival 15 months after randomization was 72% for UGN-102 ± transurethral resection of bladder tumor and 50% for transurethral resection of bladder tumor (hazard ratio 0.45). The most common adverse events (incidence ≥10%) in the UGN-102 group were dysuria, micturition urgency, nocturia, and pollakiuria. CONCLUSIONS: Primary, nonsurgical chemoablation with UGN-102 for the management of low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer offers a potential therapeutic alternative to immediate transurethral resection of bladder tumor monotherapy and warrants further investigation.

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

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