RESUMEN
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.).
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Feniltiohidantoína/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Benzamidas , Método Doble Ciego , Humanos , Calicreínas/sangre , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nitrilos , Feniltiohidantoína/efectos adversos , Feniltiohidantoína/uso terapéutico , Placebos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/mortalidad , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data are needed to improve the current understanding of clinical management and characteristics of patients with advanced prostate cancer (PC) treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibition (ARPI) therapy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study using real-world, population-level data from Alberta, Canada included all individuals diagnosed in 2017-2020 with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive PC (mCSPC) or nonmetastatic castration-resistant PC (nmCRPC) who initiated androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). For mCSPC, patients were classified as ARPI-exposed if they received an ARPI within 180 days of initiating ADT, while patients with nmCRPC were classified as ARPI-exposed if they received an ARPI within 2 years of diagnosis. RESULTS: This study included 976 patients with mCSPC and 233 with nmCRPC of which 33.5% and 25.3% received an ARPI, respectively. The proportion of patients with mCSPC treated with an ARPI increased considerably for patients diagnosed in 2020 compared to 2017 (56.2% vs. 6.0%). In contrast, the use of ARPI to treat nmCRPC only increased marginally from 2017 to 2019/2020 (19.7% vs. 28.9%). Patients with mHSPC who were ARPI-exposed had longer median survival than patients who were ARPI-naive (38.47 (95% CI = 32.84-NA) vs. 34.19 (95% CI = 33.33-38.83; P = .03)), with a higher proportion of patients surviving to 2-years. For nmCRPC, survival was similar between ARPI-exposed and ARPI-naive. In multivariable analyses, receiving ARPI for mCSPC was associated with younger patient age, more recent diagnoses, fewer comorbidities, a higher number of metastatic sites, referral to a medical oncologist as well as receiving surgery and radiation before ADT. Receiving ARPI for nmCRPC was associated with referral to a medical oncologist, younger age, and more recent diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome analyses in this population suggest a continued unmet clinical need and complex clinical management pathways. Given that treatment pathways have evolved considerably, continued follow-up to understand the impact of these advancements on patient outcomes are warranted.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation (HDC-ASCT) is standard therapy for metastatic germ cell tumors (mGCTs) in patients whose disease progresses during or after conventional chemotherapy. We conducted a retrospective review of HDC-ASCT in relapsed mGCT patients in the province of Alberta, Canada, over the past two decades. METHODS: Patients with mGCTs who received HDC-ASCT at two provincial cancer referral centers from 2000-2018 were identified from institutional databases. Baseline clinical and treatment characteristics were collected, as well as overall survival (OS ) and disease-free survival (DFS). Relevant prognostic variables were analyzed. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were identified. The median age was 28 years (range 19-56). A majority (95%) had non-seminoma histology and testis/retroperitoneal primary (84%). Twenty patients (47%) had poor-risk disease, as per The International Germ Cell Consensus Classification (IGCCC), at start of first-line chemotherapy. HDC-ASCT was used as second-line therapy in 65% of patients, and 58% of ASCT patients received tandem transplants. Median followup after ASCT was 22 months (range 2-181). At last followup, 42% of patients were alive without disease, including 3/7 (43%) of patients with primary mediastinal disease. Two-year and five-year DFS/OS ratios were 44%/65% and 38%/45%, respectively. Median OS and DFS for all patients were 30.0 months (13.3-46.6) and 8.0 months (0.9-15.1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found that HDC-ASCT is an effective salvage therapy in mGCT, consistent with existing literature. Patients appeared to benefit regardless of primary site. Although limited by small sample size, we found a numerical difference in DFS and OS between second- and third-line HDC-ASCT and single vs. tandem ASCT.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab and olaparib have shown single-agent activity in patients with previously treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus olaparib in mCRPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cohort A of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study enrolled patients with molecularly unselected, docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC whose disease progressed within 6 mo of screening. INTERVENTION: Pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus olaparib 400-mg capsule or 300-mg tablet orally twice daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoints were safety, confirmed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and objective response rate (ORR) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, by blinded independent central review. The secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 104 enrolled patients, 102 were treated. The median age was 70 yr (interquartile range [IQR], 65-76), and 59 patients (58%) had measurable disease as per RECIST v1.1. The median time from the first dose to database cutoff was 24 mo (IQR, 22-47). The confirmed PSA response rate was 15%. The confirmed ORR was 8.5% (five partial responses) for patients with measurable disease. The median rPFS was 4.5 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0-6.5) and median OS was 14 mo (95% CI, 10.4-18.2). Clinical activity was consistent across the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive and homologous recombination repair mutation subgroups. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 93 patients (91%). Grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 49 patients (48%). Six deaths (5.9%) were due to adverse events; two (myocardial infarction and unknown cause) were attributed to treatment. Limitations of the study include the single-arm design. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus olaparib had a safety profile consistent with the profiles of the individual agents and demonstrated antitumor activity in previously treated patients with molecularly unselected, docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Pembrolizumab plus olaparib showed antitumor activity and expected safety in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Docetaxel/uso terapéutico , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Criterios de Evaluación de Respuesta en Tumores Sólidos , Supervivencia sin ProgresiónRESUMEN
PURPOSE: There is an unmet need for therapeutic options that prolong survival for patients with heavily pretreated, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The phase III, open-label KEYLYNK-010 study evaluated pembrolizumab plus olaparib versus a next-generation hormonal agent (NHA) for biomarker-unselected, previously treated mCRPC. METHODS: Eligible participants had mCRPC that progressed on or after abiraterone or enzalutamide (but not both) and docetaxel. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to pembrolizumab plus olaparib or NHA (abiraterone or enzalutamide). The dual primary end points were radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by blinded independent central review per Prostate Cancer Working Group-modified RECIST 1.1 and overall survival (OS). Time to first subsequent therapy (TFST) was a key secondary end point. Safety and objective response rate (ORR) were secondary end points. RESULTS: Between May 30, 2019, and July 16, 2021, 529 participants were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus olaparib and 264 to NHA. At final rPFS analysis, median rPFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 6.0) with pembrolizumab plus olaparib and 4.2 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 6.1) with NHA (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.25]; P = .55). At final OS analysis, median OS was 15.8 months (95% CI, 14.6 to 17.0) and 14.6 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 17.3), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]; P = .26). At final TFST analysis, median TFST was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.7 to 8.1) versus 5.7 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 7.1), respectively (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.03]). ORR was higher with pembrolizumab plus olaparib versus NHA (16.8% v 5.9%). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34.6% and 9.0% of participants, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab plus olaparib did not significantly improve rPFS or OS versus NHA in participants with biomarker-unselected, heavily pretreated mCRPC. The study was stopped for futility. No new safety signals occurred.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Prednisona , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Biomarcadores , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In patients with prostate cancer (PCa), the identification of an alteration in genes associated with homologous recombination repair (HRR) has implications for prognostication, optimization of therapy, and familial risk mitigation. The aim of this study was to assess the genomic testing landscape of PCa in Canada and to recommend an approach to offering germline and tumor testing for HRR-associated genes. METHODS: The Canadian Genitourinary Research Consortium (GURC) administered a cross-sectional survey to a largely academic, multidisciplinary group of investigators across 22 GURC sites between January and June 2022. RESULTS: Thirty-eight investigators from all 22 sites responded to the survey. Germline genetic testing was initiated by 34%, while 45% required a referral to a genetic specialist. Most investigators (82%) reported that both germline and tumor testing were needed, with 92% currently offering germline and 72% offering tissue testing to patients with advanced PCa. The most cited reasons for not offering testing were an access gap (50%), uncertainties around who to test and which genes to test, (33%) and interpreting results (17%). A majority reported that patients with advanced PCa (74-80%) should be tested, with few investigators testing patients with localized disease except when there is a family history of PCa (45-55%). CONCLUSIONS: Canadian physicians with academic subspecialist backgrounds in genitourinary malignancies recognize the benefits of both germline and somatic testing in PCa; however, there are challenges in accessing testing across practices and specialties. An algorithm to reduce uncertainty for providers when ordering genetic testing for patients with PCa is proposed.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Genetic testing in advanced prostate cancer is rapidly moving to become standard of care. Testing for genetic alterations in genes involved in DNA repair pathways, particularly those implicated in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, in patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) can inform selection of optimal therapies, as well as provide information about familial cancer risks; however, there are currently no consistent Canadian guidelines in place for genetic testing in mPCa. METHODS: A multidisciplinary steering committee guided the process of an environmental scan to define the current landscape, as well as the perceived challenges, through interviews with specialists from 14 sites across Canada. The challenges most commonly identified include limited testing guidelines and protocols, inadequate education and awareness, and insufficient resources. Following the environmental scan, an expert multidisciplinary working group with pan-Canadian representation from medical oncologists, urologists, medical geneticists, genetic counsellors, pathologists, and clinical laboratory scientists convened in virtual meetings to discuss the challenges in implementation of genetic testing in mPCa across Canada. RESULTS: Key recommendations from the working group include implementation of germline and tumor HRR testing for all patients with mPCa, with a mainstreaming model in which non-geneticist clinicians can initiate germline testing. The working group defined the roles and responsibilities of the various healthcare providers (HCPs) involved in the genetic testing pathway for mPCa patients. In addition, the educational needs for all HCPs involved in the genetic testing pathway for mPCa were defined. CONCLUSIONS: As genetic testing for mPCa becomes standard of care, additional resources and investments will be required to implement the changes that will be needed to support the necessary volume of genetic testing, to ensure equitable access, and to provide education to all stakeholders.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Successful implementation of genomic testing in clinical practice is critical for identification of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) eligible for olaparib and future molecularly targeted therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An investigational clinical trial assay, based on the FoundationOneCDx tissue test, was used to prospectively identify patients with qualifying homologous recombination repair gene alterations in the phase III PROfound study. Evaluation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) tissue test outcome against preanalytic parameters was performed to identify key factors influencing NGS result generation. RESULTS: A total of 4,858 tissue samples from 4,047 patients were tested and reported centrally. NGS results were obtained in 58% (2,792/4,858) of samples (69% of patients). Of samples submitted, 83% were primary tumor samples (96% were archival and 4% newly obtained). Almost 17% were metastatic tumor samples (60% were archival and 33% newly obtained). NGS results were generated more frequently from newly obtained compared with archival samples (63.9% vs. 56.9%) and metastatic compared with primary samples (63.9% vs. 56.2%). Although generation of an NGS result declined with increasing sample age, approximately 50% of samples ages >10 years generated results. While higher tumor content and DNA yield resulted in greater success in obtaining NGS results, other factors, including selection and preservation of samples, may also have had an impact. CONCLUSIONS: The PROfound study shows that tissue testing to identify homologous recombination repair alterations is feasible and that high-quality tumor tissue samples are key to obtaining NGS results and identifying patients with mCRPC who may benefit from olaparib treatment.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Pruebas Genéticas , Humanos , Masculino , Ftalazinas/uso terapéutico , Piperazinas/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/genética , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Based on PROfound, olaparib is approved for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer following disease progression on at least enzalutamide or abiraterone and who carry relevant alterations in DNA repair genes. To facilitate continued olaparib treatment as long as the patient derives benefit, we describe further safety assessments from PROfound focusing on the four most common adverse events (AEs) and events of special interest. METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to olaparib tablets (300 mg bid) or control (enzalutamide or abiraterone) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Safety was assessed through AE reporting and laboratory assessments. Safety data were also collected from all patients in the control group who experienced radiographic disease progression and subsequently crossed over to olaparib treatment. RESULTS: 256 patients received olaparib and 130 control. Incidence rates for the four most commonly occurring AEs in the olaparib group (all-causality) were anaemia 50%, nausea 43%, fatigue/asthenia 42% and decreased appetite 31%. All were mostly Grade 1 and 2 and all peaked within the first 2 months of treatment as the events were managed where appropriate, primarily with dose interruptions or dose reductions. The extent of bone metastases at baseline or prior taxane use was not associated with the rate of anaemia. Pneumonitis was reported in 2% and 1.5% of patients in the olaparib and control groups, respectively, and one patient (0.4%) in the olaparib group experienced an event of MDS/AML after a 30-day follow-up period. Venous thromboembolic events occurred in 8% of olaparib and 3% of control patients. CONCLUSIONS: The four most common AEs observed in PROfound were generally manageable without the need for treatment discontinuation, allowing patients to remain on treatment for as long as they were deriving clinical benefit. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration number: NCT02987543.
Asunto(s)
Anemia , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Anemia/inducido químicamente , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Masculino , Ftalazinas/efectos adversos , Piperazinas , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) frequently receive docetaxel after they develop resistance to abiraterone or enzalutamide and need more efficacious treatments. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone in patients with mCRPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The trial included patients with mCRPC in the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 cohort B study who were chemotherapy naïve and who experienced failure of or were intolerant to ≥4 wk of abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC with progressive disease within 6 mo of screening. INTERVENTION: Pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously (IV) every 3 wk (Q3W), docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV Q3W, and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoints were safety, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression; the disease control rate (DCR) and duration of response (DOR) according to RECIST v1.1 by BICR; ORR, DCR, DOR, and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) according to Prostate Cancer Working Group 3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and overall survival (OS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 104 treated patients, 52 had measurable disease. The median time from allocation to data cutoff (July 9, 2020) was 32.4 mo, during which 101 patients discontinued treatment, 81 (78%) for disease progression. The confirmed PSA response rate was 34% and the confirmed ORR (RECIST v1.1) was 23%. Median rPFS and OS were 8.5 mo and 20.2 mo, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 100 patients (96%). Grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 46 patients (44%). Seven AE-related deaths (6.7%) occurred (2 due to treatment-related pneumonitis). Limitations of the study include the single-arm design and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC. Safety was consistent with profiles for the individual agents. Further investigation is warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab combined with the chemotherapy drug docetaxel and the steroid prednisone for patients with metastatic prostate cancer resistant to androgen deprivation therapy , and who never received chemotherapy. The combination showed antitumor activity and manageable safety in this patient population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02861573.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Acetato de Abiraterona , Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Docetaxel/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Masculino , Prednisona/uso terapéutico , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The availability of multiple new treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) mandates earlier treatment switches in the absence of a response. A decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is widely used to monitor treatment response, but is not validated as an intermediate endpoint for overall survival (OS). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between early PSA decline and OS following abiraterone acetate (AA) treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We identified mCRPC patients treated with AA before or after docetaxel at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust between 2006 and 2014. Early PSA decline was defined as a 30% decrease in PSA at 4 wk relative to baseline, and early PSA rise as a 25% increase. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Association with OS was analyzed using multivariate Cox regression and log-rank analyses. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient (r) was calculated to evaluate the association between PSA changes at 4 wk and 12 wk. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: There were 274 patients eligible for this analysis. A 30% PSA decline at 4 wk was associated with longer OS (25.8 vs 15.1 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, p<0.001), and a 25% PSA rise at 4 wk with shorter OS (15.1 vs 23.8 mo; HR 1.7, p=0.001) in both univariate and multivariable models. The percentage PSA decline at 4 wk was significantly correlated with the percentage PSA change at 12 wk (r=0.82; p<0.001). Patients achieving a 30% PSA decline at 4 wk were 11.7 times more likely to achieve a 50% PSA decrease at 12 wk (sensitivity 90.9%, specificity 79.4%). Limitations include the retrospective design of this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients not achieving 30% PSA decline after 4 wk of AA have a lower likelihood of achieving PSA response at 12 wk and significantly inferior OS. Prospective multicentre validation studies are needed to confirm these findings. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is commonly used to evaluate response to treatment in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Expert recommendations discourage reliance on PSA changes earlier than 12 wk after treatment initiation. Our data suggest that early PSA changes are associated with survival in patients receiving abiraterone acetate.
Asunto(s)
Acetato de Abiraterona/administración & dosificación , Monitoreo de Drogas , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Anciano , Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Docetaxel , Monitoreo de Drogas/métodos , Monitoreo de Drogas/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud/métodos , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Sistema de Registros , Estadística como Asunto , Análisis de Supervivencia , Taxoides/uso terapéutico , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Outcomes with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC) are unclear, and only anecdotal reports have been published. This study was a retrospective analysis of patients who received concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for PSCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient-level data were obtained from 5 institutions for outcomes with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for PSCC. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and univariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was conducted to examine the prognostic effect of candidate factors on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 26 men were evaluable. The mean age was 60.3 years. The clinical stage was ≤ III in 9 patients (36%) and stage IV in the rest. Soft tissue and visceral metastasis were present in 35% and 20% of patients, respectively. The chemotherapy was cisplatin-based in 92.3% of patients, and the median (range) of external beam radiotherapy administered was 4900 cGy (range, 1800-7000 cGy). The median OS was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5-14), and the median PFS was 5.1 months (95% CI, 2.5-7.0). When excluding patients with M1 disease, the remaining patients (n = 21) had a median OS and PFS of 10.0 months (95% CI, 5-14) and 6.0 months (95% CI, 2.0-7.0), respectively. Baseline neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was significantly associated with survival, and visceral metastasis showed a trend for association with OS. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy demonstrated poor outcomes for locally advanced PSCC. Better understanding of tumor biology and study of novel combinations of biologic agents with radiation are warranted.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/radioterapia , Quimioradioterapia/métodos , Neoplasias del Pene/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias del Pene/radioterapia , Anciano , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/mortalidad , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias del Pene/mortalidad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Prognostic factors in men with penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC) receiving systemic therapy are unknown. A prognostic classification system in this disease may facilitate interpretation of outcomes and guide rational drug development. We performed a retrospective analysis to identify prognostic factors in men with PSCC receiving first-line systemic therapy for advanced disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient level data were obtained from 13 institutions to study prognostic factors in the context of first-line systemic therapy for advanced PSCC. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was conducted to examine the prognostic effect of these candidate factors on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS): age, stage, hemoglobin, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, albumin, site of metastasis (visceral or nonvisceral), smoking, circumcision, regimen, ECOG performance status (PS), lymphovascular invasion, precancerous lesion, and surgery following chemotherapy. The effect of different treatments was then evaluated adjusting for factors in the prognostic model. RESULTS: The study included 140 eligible men. Mean age across all men was 57.0 years. Among them, 8.6%, 21.4%, and 70.0% of patients had stage 2, 3, and 4 diseases, respectively; 40.7% had ECOG PS ≥ 1, 47.4% had visceral metastases, and 73.6% received cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The multivariate model of poor prognostic factors included visceral metastases (P<0.001) and ECOG PS ≥ 1 (P<0.001) for both PFS and OS. A risk stratification model constructed with 0, 1, and both poor prognostic factors was internally validated and demonstrated moderate discriminatory ability (c-statistic of 0.657 and 0.677 for OS and PFS, respectively). The median OS for the entire population was 9 months. Median OS was not reached, 8, and 7 months for those with 0, 1, and both risk factors, respectively. Cisplatin-based regimens were associated with better OS (P = 0.017) but not PFS (P = 0.37) compared with noncisplatin-based regimens after adjusting for the 2 prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: In men with advanced PSCC receiving first-line systemic therapy, visceral metastases and ECOG PS ≥ 1 were poor prognostic factors. A prognostic model including these factors exhibited moderate discriminatory ability for outcomes and warrants external validation. Patients receiving cisplatin-based regimens exhibited better outcomes compared with noncisplatin-based regimens after adjusting for prognostic factors.