Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Report from the 2024 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Innovations have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer (PC). Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of topics that greatly impact daily practice. The 2024 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) surveyed experts on key questions in clinical management in order to supplement evidence-based guidelines. Here we present voting results for questions from APCCC 2024. METHODS: Before the conference, a panel of 120 international PC experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 183 multiple-choice consensus questions on eight different topics. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the voting panel members ("panellists"). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Consensus was a priori defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. The voting results show varying degrees of consensus, as discussed in this article and detailed in the Supplementary material. These findings do not include a formal literature review or meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The voting results can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers in prioritising areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised on the basis of patient and cancer characteristics, and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2024 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

The RECONCILE study protocol: Exploiting image-based risk stratification in early prostate cancer to discriminate progressors from non-progressors (RECONCILE).

INTRODUCTION: RECONCILE (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04340245) will identify molecular and radiomic markers associated with clinical progression and radiological progression events in a cohort of localised, newly diagnosed Gleason 3 + 4 tumours. Molecular markers will be correlated against standard of care MRI-targeted histology and oncological outcomes. METHODS: RECONCILE is an ethics approved (20/LO/0366) single centre, prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study of recently diagnosed (within 12 months), organ-confined Gleason 3 + 4 cancers (MCCL ≤10mm) currently under active surveillance. 60 treatment-naïve participants with a concordant MRI lesion (Likert score 4 or 5) and PSA ≤ 15 ng/ml will be recruited. Blood, urine and targeted prostate tissue cores will be subject to next generation sequencing at baseline and one year in all participants. Semen will be collected from a specified sub-population. Baseline and interval MR images will be extracted from standard of care prostate MRI ahead of radiomic analysis. Data extracted from radiological and biological samples will be used to derive the association of molecular change and radiological progression, the primary outcome of the study. To compensate for spatial intratumoral heterogeneity and inherent sampling bias, a molecular index will be derived for each participant using the molecular profile of tumour tissue at both baseline (MolBL) and one year (MolFU). We will extract a ΔMolBL:MolFU score for each participant. Molecular progression will be defined as a MolBL:MolFU score >95% CI of the combined ΔMolBL scores. Radiological progression is defined as a PRECISE score of 4 or 5. The study is powered to detect an association with a statistical power of 80%. RESULTS: Recruitment began in July 2020 (n = 62). To date, 37 participants have donated tissue for analysis. CONCLUSION: We have designed and implemented a prospective, longitudinal study to evaluate the underlying molecular landscape of intermediate risk, MR-visible prostate tumours. Recruitment is ongoing.

Patient-reported Outcomes for Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer and BRCA1/2 Gene Alterations: Final Analysis from the Randomized Phase 3 MAGNITUDE Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The phase 3 MAGNITUDE trial assessed the efficacy and safety of niraparib 200 mg and abiraterone acetate 1000 mg plus prednisone 10 mg (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and alterations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Here we report final analysis results for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the HRR+ cohort with a focus on BRCA1/2 alterations (BRCA+). METHODS: Protocol-specified endpoints evaluated patient-reported symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and tolerability (side-effect bother) using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Evaluations were completed on day 1 of designated treatment cycles and during follow-up. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: All patients with BRCA+ mCRPC (n = 225) were included in the PRO analyses with average on-treatment PRO compliance >80% when completed on-site. Time to deterioration in pain according to BPI-SF and FACT-P scores did not significantly differ between niraparib + AAP and placebo + AAP. During treatment, EQ-5D-5L revealed no clinically meaningful differences in overall HRQoL between treatment arms in the BRCA+ subgroup. Finally, tolerability was similar between arms; side effect bother rated as "not at all" or "a little bit" ranged from 79.8% to 95.9% during treatment. Limitations include a sample size that may not have been powered to detect a difference in PROs. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Treatment with niraparib + AAP maintained HRQoL with minimal side-effect bother reported by most patients with BRCA+ mCRPC. Differences between treatment groups in time to pain deterioration did not meet conventional levels of statistical significance. The MAGNITUDE trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03748641.

Liquid Biopsy in Progressing Prostate Cancer Patients Starting Docetaxel with or Without Enzalutamide: A Biomarker Study of the PRESIDE Phase 3b Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The PRESIDE (NCT02288247) randomized trial demonstrated prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) with continuing enzalutamide beyond progression in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients starting docetaxel. This study aims to test the associations of PFS and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) prior to and after one cycle (cycle 2 day 1 [C2D1]) of docetaxel and with a liquid biopsy resistance biomarker (LBRB; plasma androgen receptor [AR] gain and/or circulating tumor cells [CTCs] expressing AR splice variant 7 [CTC-AR-V7]) prior to continuation of enzalutamide/placebo. METHODS: Patients consenting to the biomarker substudy and donating blood before starting docetaxel with enzalutamide/placebo (N = 157) were included. Sequential plasma DNA samples were characterized with a prostate-cancer bespoke next-generation-sequencing capture panel (PCF_SELECT), and CTCs were assessed for AR-V7 (Epic Sciences, San Diego, CA, USA). Cox models, Kaplan-Meier, and restricted mean survival time (RMST) at 18 mo were calculated. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: There was a significant association of worse PFS with pre-docetaxel ctDNA detection (N = 86 (55%), 8.1 vs 10.8 mo hazard ratio [HR] = 1.78, p = 0.004) or persistence/rise of ctDNA at C2D1 (N = 35/134, 5.5 vs 10.9 mo, HR = 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.15-3.30, p = 0.019). LBRB-positive patients (N = 62) had no benefit from continuing enzalutamide with docetaxel (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.41-1.48, p = 0.44; RMST: 7.9 vs 7.1 mo, p = 0.50). Conversely, resistance biomarker-negative patients (N = 87) had significantly prolonged PFS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.29-0.82, p = 0.006; RMST: 11.5 vs 8.9 mo, p = 0.005). Eight patients were unevaluable. An exploratory analysis identified increased copy-number gains (CDK6/CDK4) at progression on docetaxel. Limitations included relatively low detection of CTC-AR-V7. Validation of impact on overall survival is required. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Liquid biopsy gives an early indication of docetaxel futility, could guide patient selection for continuing enzalutamide, and identifies cell cycle gene alterations as a potential cause of docetaxel resistance in mCRPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the PRESIDE biomarker study, we found that detecting circulating tumor DNA in plasma after starting treatment with docetaxel (chemotherapy) for metastatic prostate cancer resistant to androgen deprivation therapy can predict early how long patients will take to respond to treatment. Patients negative for a liquid biopsy resistance biomarker (based on the status of androgen receptor (AR) gene and AR splice variant 7 in circulating tumor cells) benefit from continuing enzalutamide in combination with docetaxel, while patients positive for the resistance biomarker did not. Additionally, we identified alterations in the cell cycle genes CDK6 and CDK4 as a potential genetic cause of resistance to docetaxel, which may support testing of specific drugs targeting these alterations.

Adjustment for imbalances in baseline characteristics in the MAGNITUDE phase 3 study confirms the clinical benefit of niraparib in combination with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: MAGNITUDE (NCT03748641) demonstrated favourable outcomes with niraparib plus abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (+AAP) versus placebo+AAP in patients with BRCA1/2-altered metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Imbalances in prognostic variables were reported between arms, which impacts estimation of both the clinical benefit and cost­effectiveness of niraparib+AAP for healthcare systems. A pre-specified multivariable analysis (MVA) demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) with niraparib+AAP. Here, we used an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) model to adjust for covariate imbalances and assess time-to-event outcomes. METHODS: IPTW analysis of time-to-event outcomes was conducted using data from patients with BRCA1/2-altered mCRPC (N = 225) in MAGNITUDE. Patients received niraparib+AAP or placebo+AAP. OS, radiographic progression-free survival, time to symptomatic progression, time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy and time to prostate-specific antigen progression were assessed. Weighted Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for each endpoint, and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were obtained from a weighted Cox model. RESULTS: Improvements in survival outcomes were estimated for niraparib+AAP versus placebo+AAP: unadjusted median OS was 30.4 months versus 28.6 months, respectively (HR: 0.79; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.55, 1.12; p = 0.183). Following IPTW, median OS increased to 34.1 months with niraparib+AAP versus a decrease to 27.4 with placebo (HR: 0.65; 95 % CI: 0.46, 0.93; p = 0.017). Similar improvements were observed for other time-to-event endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: IPTW adjustment provided a more precise estimate of the clinical benefit of niraparib+AAP versus placebo+AAP in patients with BRCA1/2-altered mCRPC. Results were consistent with the pre-specified MVA, and further demonstrated the value of adjusting for baseline imbalances, particularly in smaller studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03748641 (MAGNITUDE).

Prognostic Implications of Blood Immune-Cell Composition in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

The prognosis for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) varies, being influenced by blood-related factors such as transcriptional profiling and immune cell ratios. We aimed to address the contribution of distinct whole blood immune cell components to the prognosis of these patients. This study analyzed pre-treatment blood samples from 152 chemotherapy-naive mCRPC patients participating in a phase 2 clinical trial (NCT02288936) and a validation cohort. We used CIBERSORT-X to quantify 22 immune cell types and assessed their prognostic significance using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Reduced CD8 T-cell proportions and elevated monocyte levels were substantially connected with a worse survival. High monocyte counts correlated with a median survival of 32.2 months versus 40.3 months for lower counts (HR: 1.96, 95% CI 1.11-3.45). Low CD8 T-cell levels were associated with a median survival of 31.8 months compared to 40.3 months for higher levels (HR: 1.97, 95% CI 1.11-3.5). These findings were consistent in both the trial and validation cohorts. Multivariate analysis further confirmed the independent prognostic value of CD8 T-cell counts. This study highlights the prognostic implications of specific blood immune cells, suggesting they could serve as biomarkers in mCRPC patient management and should be further explored in clinical trials.

Noninvasive Detection of Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer through Targeted Cell-free DNA Methylation.

Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is a heterogeneous disease associated with phenotypic subtypes that drive therapy response and outcome differences. Histologic transformation to castration-resistant neuroendocrine prostate cancer (CRPC-NE) is associated with distinct epigenetic alterations, including changes in DNA methylation. The current diagnosis of CRPC-NE is challenging and relies on metastatic biopsy. We developed a targeted DNA methylation assay to detect CRPC-NE using plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA). The assay quantifies tumor content and provides a phenotype evidence score that captures diverse CRPC phenotypes, leveraging regions to inform transcriptional state. We tested the design in independent clinical cohorts (n = 222 plasma samples) and qualified it achieving an AUC > 0.93 for detecting pathology-confirmed CRPC-NE (n = 136). Methylation-defined cfDNA tumor content was associated with clinical outcomes in two prospective phase II clinical trials geared towards aggressive variant CRPC and CRPC-NE. These data support the application of targeted DNA methylation for CRPC-NE detection and patient stratification. SIGNIFICANCE: Neuroendocrine prostate cancer is an aggressive subtype of treatment-resistant prostate cancer. Early detection is important, but the diagnosis currently relies on metastatic biopsy. We describe the development and validation of a plasma cell-free DNA targeted methylation panel that can quantify tumor fraction and identify patients with neuroendocrine prostate cancer noninvasively. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 384.

Identification of a Predictive Genomic Biomarker for Prostate-directed Therapy in Synchronous Low-volume Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard of care management for synchronous metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) includes androgen deprivation therapy with a second-generation antiandrogen therapy and/or docetaxel. Recently, randomized data have demonstrated that prostate-directed therapy (PDT) is associated with an improvement in overall survival (OS) among patients with low-volume metastatic disease. Tumor genomics represents an additional dimension to define the clinical trajectory of patients with mCSPC. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a high-risk (HiRi) genomic signature to predict the benefit from PDT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a single-institution retrospective review of men with synchronous low-volume mCSPC who underwent DNA panel sequencing of their tumor. Patients were classified according to the presence of HiRi mutation including pathogenic mutations in TP53, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, or Rb1. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was to determine the effect of PDT on OS in patients with and without a HiRi mutation. A survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method compared with log-rank test and multivariable Cox regression. The interaction between HiRi mutation and PDT was evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 101 patients with synchronous low-volume CSPC were included with a median follow-up of 44 mo. Approximately half of patients were found to have a HiRi pathogenic mutation (49%). Patients with HiRi mutations demonstrated median OS of 73 versus 66.8 mo (p = 0.3) for no PDT versus PDT. Conversely, patients without a HiRi mutation demonstrated a significant improvement in OS of 60 versus 105.3 mo (p < 0.001) for no PDT versus PDT. The p value for interaction for OS between PDT and HiRi mutation was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we have identified a HiRi genomic biomarker that appears predictive for the lack of benefit from PDT in men with synchronous low-volume mCSPC. Further work validating these results is warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we evaluated a high-risk genomic biomarker to predict the benefit from prostate-directed therapy for men with synchronous low-volume metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We found that men without a high-risk mutation appear to experience a greater clinical benefit from prostate-directed therapy than those with a high-risk mutation.

Integrating extracellular vesicle and circulating cell-free DNA analysis using a single plasma aliquot improves the detection of HER2 positivity in breast cancer patients.

Multi-analyte liquid biopsies represent an emerging opportunity for non-invasive cancer assessment. We developed ONCE (ONe Aliquot for Circulating Elements), an approach for the isolation of extracellular vesicles (EV) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from a single aliquot of blood. We assessed ONCE performance to classify HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer (BrCa) patients by combining EV-associated RNA (EV-RNA) and cfDNA signals on n=64 healthy donors (HD) and non-metastatic BrCa patients. Specifically, we isolated EV-enriched samples by a charge-based (CB) method and investigated EV-RNA and cfDNA by next-generation sequencing (NGS) and by digital droplet PCR (ddPCR). Sequencing of cfDNA and EV-RNA from HER2- and HER2+ patients demonstrated concordance with in situ molecular analyses of matched tissues. Combined analysis of the two circulating analytes by ddPCR showed increased sensitivity in ERBB2/HER2 detection compared to single nucleic acid components. Multi-analyte liquid biopsy prediction performance was comparable to tissue-based sequencing results from TCGA. Also, imaging flow cytometry analysis revealed HER2 protein on the surface of EV isolated from the HER2+ BrCa plasma, thus corroborating the potential relevance of studying EV as companion analyte to cfDNA. This data confirms the relevance of combining cfDNA and EV-RNA for HER2 cancer assessment and supports the ONCE as a valuable tool for multi-analytes liquid biopsies' clinical implementation.

Copy number architectures define treatment-mediated selection of lethal prostate cancer clones.

Despite initial responses to hormone treatment, metastatic prostate cancer invariably evolves to a lethal state. To characterize the intra-patient evolutionary relationships of metastases that evade treatment, we perform genome-wide copy number profiling and bespoke approaches targeting the androgen receptor (AR) on 167 metastatic regions from 11 organs harvested post-mortem from 10 men who died from prostate cancer. We identify diverse and patient-unique alterations clustering around the AR in metastases from every patient with evidence of independent acquisition of related genomic changes within an individual and, in some patients, the co-existence of AR-neutral clones. Using the genomic boundaries of pan-autosome copy number changes, we confirm a common clone of origin across metastases and diagnostic biopsies, and identified in individual patients, clusters of metastases occupied by dominant clones with diverged autosomal copy number alterations. These autosome-defined clusters are characterized by cluster-specific AR gene architectures, and in two index cases are topologically more congruent than by chance (p-values 3.07 × 10-8 and 6.4 × 10-4). Integration with anatomical sites suggests patterns of spread and points of genomic divergence. Here, we show that copy number boundaries identify treatment-selected clones with putatively distinct lethal trajectories.

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone with or without enzalutamide for patients with metastatic prostate cancer starting androgen deprivation therapy: final results from two randomised phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (herein referred to as abiraterone) or enzalutamide added at the start of androgen deprivation therapy improves outcomes for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Here, we aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes and test whether combining enzalutamide with abiraterone and androgen deprivation therapy improves survival. METHODS: We analysed two open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol, with no overlapping controls, conducted at 117 sites in the UK and Switzerland. Eligible patients (no age restriction) had metastatic, histologically-confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma; a WHO performance status of 0-2; and adequate haematological, renal, and liver function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computerised algorithm and a minimisation technique to either standard of care (androgen deprivation therapy; docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously for six cycles with prednisolone 10 mg orally once per day allowed from Dec 17, 2015) or standard of care plus abiraterone acetate 1000 mg and prednisolone 5 mg (in the abiraterone trial) orally or abiraterone acetate and prednisolone plus enzalutamide 160 mg orally once a day (in the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial). Patients were stratified by centre, age, WHO performance status, type of androgen deprivation therapy, use of aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, pelvic nodal status, planned radiotherapy, and planned docetaxel use. The primary outcome was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who started treatment. A fixed-effects meta-analysis of individual patient data was used to compare differences in survival between the two trials. STAMPEDE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN78818544). FINDINGS: Between Nov 15, 2011, and Jan 17, 2014, 1003 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=502) or standard of care plus abiraterone (n=501) in the abiraterone trial. Between July 29, 2014, and March 31, 2016, 916 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=454) or standard of care plus abiraterone and enzalutamide (n=462) in the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial. Median follow-up was 96 months (IQR 86-107) in the abiraterone trial and 72 months (61-74) in the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial. In the abiraterone trial, median overall survival was 76·6 months (95% CI 67·8-86·9) in the abiraterone group versus 45·7 months (41·6-52·0) in the standard of care group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·62 [95% CI 0·53-0·73]; p<0·0001). In the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial, median overall survival was 73·1 months (61·9-81·3) in the abiraterone and enzalutamide group versus 51·8 months (45·3-59·0) in the standard of care group (HR 0·65 [0·55-0·77]; p<0·0001). We found no difference in the treatment effect between these two trials (interaction HR 1·05 [0·83-1·32]; pinteraction=0·71) or between-trial heterogeneity (I2 p=0·70). In the first 5 years of treatment, grade 3-5 toxic effects were higher when abiraterone was added to standard of care (271 [54%] of 498 vs 192 [38%] of 502 with standard of care) and the highest toxic effects were seen when abiraterone and enzalutamide were added to standard of care (302 [68%] of 445 vs 204 [45%] of 454 with standard of care). Cardiac causes were the most common cause of death due to adverse events (five [1%] with standard of care plus abiraterone and enzalutamide [two attributed to treatment] and one (<1%) with standard of care in the abiraterone trial). INTERPRETATION: Enzalutamide and abiraterone should not be combined for patients with prostate cancer starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. Clinically important improvements in survival from addition of abiraterone to androgen deprivation therapy are maintained for longer than 7 years. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Janssen, and Astellas.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts voted on controversial questions where high-level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. TWITTER SUMMARY: Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer is summarised here.

A novel prostate cancer subtyping classifier based on luminal and basal phenotypes.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is a clinically heterogeneous disease. The creation of an expression-based subtyping model based on prostate-specific biological processes was sought. METHODS: Unsupervised machine learning of gene expression profiles from prospectively collected primary prostate tumors (training, n = 32,000; evaluation, n = 68,547) was used to create a prostate subtyping classifier (PSC) based on basal versus luminal cell expression patterns and other gene signatures relevant to PCa biology. Subtype molecular pathways and clinical characteristics were explored in five other clinical cohorts. RESULTS: Clustering derived four subtypes: luminal differentiated (LD), luminal proliferating (LP), basal immune (BI), and basal neuroendocrine (BN). LP and LD tumors both had higher androgen receptor activity. LP tumors also had a higher expression of cell proliferation genes, MYC activity, and characteristics of homologous recombination deficiency. BI tumors possessed significant interferon γactivity and immune infiltration on immunohistochemistry. BN tumors were characterized by lower androgen receptor activity expression, lower immune infiltration, and enrichment with neuroendocrine expression patterns. Patients with LD tumors had less aggressive tumor characteristics and the longest time to metastasis after surgery. Only patients with BI tumors derived benefit from radiotherapy after surgery in terms of time to metastasis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.71; n = 855). In a phase 3 trial that randomized patients with metastatic PCa to androgen deprivation with or without docetaxel (n = 108), only patients with LP tumors derived survival benefit from docetaxel (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.09-0.51). CONCLUSIONS: With the use of expression profiles from over 100,000 tumors, a PSC was developed that identified four subtypes with distinct biological and clinical features. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Prostate cancer can behave in an indolent or aggressive manner and vary in how it responds to certain treatments. To differentiate prostate cancer on the basis of biological features, we developed a novel RNA signature by using data from over 100,000 prostate tumors-the largest data set of its kind. This signature can inform patients and physicians on tumor aggressiveness and susceptibilities to treatments to help personalize cancer management.

Niraparib and Abiraterone Acetate for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease with current standard-of-care therapies. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, including BRCA1/2 alterations, can sensitize cancer cells to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition, which may improve outcomes in treatment-naïve mCRPC when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibition. METHODS: MAGNITUDE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03748641) is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded study that evaluates niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (niraparib + AAP) in patients with (HRR+, n = 423) or without (HRR-, n = 247) HRR-associated gene alterations, as prospectively determined by tissue/plasma-based assays. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib + AAP or placebo + AAP. The primary end point, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) assessed by central review, was evaluated first in the BRCA1/2 subgroup and then in the full HRR+ cohort, with secondary end points analyzed for the full HRR+ cohort if rPFS was statistically significant. A futility analysis was preplanned in the HRR- cohort. RESULTS: Median rPFS in the BRCA1/2 subgroup was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.6 v 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79; P = .001). In the overall HRR+ cohort, rPFS was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.5 v 13.7 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .022). These findings were supported by improvement in the secondary end points of time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In the HRR- cohort, futility was declared per the prespecified criteria. Treatment with niraparib + AAP was tolerable, with anemia and hypertension as the most reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with niraparib + AAP significantly lengthened rPFS in patients with HRR+ mCRPC compared with standard-of-care AAP.[Media: see text].

Clinical testing of transcriptome-wide expression profiles in high-risk localized and metastatic prostate cancer starting androgen deprivation therapy: an ancillary study of the STAMPEDE abiraterone Phase 3 trial.

Metastatic and high-risk localized prostate cancer respond to hormone therapy but outcomes vary. Following a pre-specified statistical plan, we used Cox models adjusted for clinical variables to test associations with survival of multi-gene expression-based classifiers from 781 patients randomized to androgen deprivation with or without abiraterone in the STAMPEDE trial. Decipher score was strongly prognostic (p<2×10-5) and identified clinically-relevant differences in absolute benefit, especially for localized cancers. In metastatic disease, classifiers of proliferation, PTEN or TP53 loss and treatment-persistent cells were prognostic. In localized disease, androgen receptor activity was protective whilst interferon signaling (that strongly associated with tumor lymphocyte infiltration) was detrimental. Post-Operative Radiation-Therapy Outcomes Score was prognostic in localized but not metastatic disease (interaction p=0.0001) suggesting the impact of tumor biology on clinical outcome is context-dependent on metastatic state. Transcriptome-wide testing has clinical utility for advanced prostate cancer and identified worse outcomes for localized cancers with tumor-promoting inflammation.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.

A correlative biomarker study and integrative prognostic model in chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide.

BACKGROUND: There is a considerable need to incorporate biomarkers of resistance to new antiandrogen agents in the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). METHODS: We conducted a phase II trial of enzalutamide in first-line chemo-naïve asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC and analyzed the prognostic value of TMPRSS2-ERG and other biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs), androgen receptor splice variant (AR-V7) in CTCs and plasma Androgen Receptor copy number gain (AR-gain). These biomarkers were correlated with treatment response and survival outcomes and developed a clinical-molecular prognostic model using penalized cox-proportional hazard model. This model was validated in an independent cohort. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene was detected in 32 patients with no differences observed in efficacy outcomes. CTC detection was associated with worse outcome and AR-V7 in CTCs was associated with increased rate of progression as best response. Plasma AR gain was strongly associated with an adverse outcome, with worse median prostate specific antigen (PSA)-PFS (4.2 vs. 14.7 m; p < 0.0001), rad-PFS (4.5 vs. 27.6 m; p < 0.0001), and OS (12.7 vs. 38.1 m; p < 0.0001). The clinical prognostic model developed in PREVAIL was validated (C-Index 0.70) and the addition of plasma AR (C-Index 0.79; p < 0.001) increased its prognostic ability. We generated a parsimonious model including alkaline phosphatase (ALP); PSA and AR gain (C-index 0.78) that was validated in an independent cohort. CONCLUSIONS: TMPRSS2-ERG detection did not correlate with differential activity of enzalutamide in first-line mCRPC. However, we observed that CTCs and plasma AR gain were the most relevant biomarkers.

Accidentals of the DNA Symphony.

Cancer epigenome profiling such as DNA methylation (5mC) and DNA hydroxymethylation (5hmC) is emerging as a sensitive approach for cancer detection and risk stratification. 5mC modification has been widely described in many cancer types including prostate cancer; however, the 5hmC landscape is yet to be explored. In this issue of Cancer Research, Sjöström and colleagues have comprehensively incorporated genomic, transcriptomic, and epigenomic, including 5hmC, data to interrogate the molecular evolution of prostate cancer. See related article by Sjöström et al., p. 3888.