Corrigendum: mTORC1-dependent AMD1 regulation sustains polyamine metabolism in prostate cancer.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/nature22964.

Survival with Olaparib in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported that olaparib led to significantly longer imaging-based progression-free survival than the physician's choice of enzalutamide or abiraterone among men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had qualifying alterations in homologous recombination repair genes and whose disease had progressed during previous treatment with a next-generation hormonal agent. The results of the final analysis of overall survival have not yet been reported. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive olaparib (256 patients) or the physician's choice of enzalutamide or abiraterone plus prednisone as the control therapy (131 patients). Cohort A included 245 patients with at least one alteration in BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM, and cohort B included 142 patients with at least one alteration in any of the other 12 prespecified genes. Crossover to olaparib was allowed after imaging-based disease progression for patients who met certain criteria. Overall survival in cohort A, a key secondary end point, was analyzed with the use of an alpha-controlled, stratified log-rank test at a data maturity of approximately 60%. The primary and other key secondary end points were reported previously. RESULTS: The median duration of overall survival in cohort A was 19.1 months with olaparib and 14.7 months with control therapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50 to 0.97; P = 0.02). In cohort B, the median duration of overall survival was 14.1 months with olaparib and 11.5 months with control therapy. In the overall population (cohorts A and B), the corresponding durations were 17.3 months and 14.0 months. Overall, 86 of 131 patients (66%) in the control group crossed over to receive olaparib (56 of 83 patients [67%] in cohort A). A sensitivity analysis that adjusted for crossover to olaparib showed hazard ratios for death of 0.42 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.91) in cohort A, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.11 to 5.98) in cohort B, and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.29 to 1.06) in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Among men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had tumors with at least one alteration in BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM and whose disease had progressed during previous treatment with a next-generation hormonal agent, those who were initially assigned to receive olaparib had a significantly longer duration of overall survival than those who were assigned to receive enzalutamide or abiraterone plus prednisone as the control therapy, despite substantial crossover from control therapy to olaparib. (Funded by AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp and Dohme; PROfound ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02987543.).

Olaparib for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Multiple loss-of-function alterations in genes that are involved in DNA repair, including homologous recombination repair, are associated with response to poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition in patients with prostate and other cancers. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluating the PARP inhibitor olaparib in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had disease progression while receiving a new hormonal agent (e.g., enzalutamide or abiraterone). All the men had a qualifying alteration in prespecified genes with a direct or indirect role in homologous recombination repair. Cohort A (245 patients) had at least one alteration in BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM; cohort B (142 patients) had alterations in any of 12 other prespecified genes, prospectively and centrally determined from tumor tissue. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) to receive olaparib or the physician's choice of enzalutamide or abiraterone (control). The primary end point was imaging-based progression-free survival in cohort A according to blinded independent central review. RESULTS: In cohort A, imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the control group (median, 7.4 months vs. 3.6 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.47; P<0.001); a significant benefit was also observed with respect to the confirmed objective response rate and the time to pain progression. The median overall survival in cohort A was 18.5 months in the olaparib group and 15.1 months in the control group; 81% of the patients in the control group who had progression crossed over to receive olaparib. A significant benefit for olaparib was also seen for imaging-based progression-free survival in the overall population (cohorts A and B). Anemia and nausea were the main toxic effects in patients who received olaparib. CONCLUSIONS: In men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had disease progression while receiving enzalutamide or abiraterone and who had alterations in genes with a role in homologous recombination repair, olaparib was associated with longer progression-free survival and better measures of response and patient-reported end points than either enzalutamide or abiraterone. (Funded by AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme; PROfound ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02987543.).

mTORC1-dependent AMD1 regulation sustains polyamine metabolism in prostate cancer.

Activation of the PTEN-PI3K-mTORC1 pathway consolidates metabolic programs that sustain cancer cell growth and proliferation. Here we show that mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) regulates polyamine dynamics, a metabolic route that is essential for oncogenicity. By using integrative metabolomics in a mouse model and human biopsies of prostate cancer, we identify alterations in tumours affecting the production of decarboxylated S-adenosylmethionine (dcSAM) and polyamine synthesis. Mechanistically, this metabolic rewiring stems from mTORC1-dependent regulation of S-adenosylmethionine decarboxylase 1 (AMD1) stability. This novel molecular regulation is validated in mouse and human cancer specimens. AMD1 is upregulated in human prostate cancer with activated mTORC1. Conversely, samples from a clinical trial with the mTORC1 inhibitor everolimus exhibit a predominant decrease in AMD1 immunoreactivity that is associated with a decrease in proliferation, in line with the requirement of dcSAM production for oncogenicity. These findings provide fundamental information about the complex regulatory landscape controlled by mTORC1 to integrate and translate growth signals into an oncogenic metabolic program.

Niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA repair gene defects (GALAHAD): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers are enriched for DNA repair gene defects (DRDs) that can be susceptible to synthetic lethality through inhibition of PARP proteins. We evaluated the anti-tumour activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers and DRDs who progressed on previous treatment with an androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mixed histology accepted, with the exception of the small cell pure phenotype) and DRDs (assessed in blood, tumour tissue, or saliva), with progression on a previous next-generation androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 or Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were eligible. Enrolled patients received niraparib 300 mg orally once daily until treatment discontinuation, death, or study termination. For the final study analysis, all patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis population; patients with germline pathogenic or somatic biallelic pathogenic alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) or biallelic alterations in other prespecified DRDs (non-BRCA cohort) were included in the efficacy analysis population. The primary endpoint was objective response rate in patients with BRCA alterations and measurable disease (measurable BRCA cohort). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02854436. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2016, and June 26, 2020, 289 patients were enrolled, of whom 182 (63%) had received three or more systemic therapies for prostate cancer. 223 (77%) of 289 patients were included in the overall efficacy analysis population, which included BRCA (n=142) and non-BRCA (n=81) cohorts. At final analysis, with a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 6·6-13·3), the objective response rate in the measurable BRCA cohort (n=76) was 34·2% (95% CI 23·7-46·0). In the safety analysis population, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were nausea (169 [58%] of 289), anaemia (156 [54%]), and vomiting (111 [38%]); the most common grade 3 or worse events were haematological (anaemia in 95 [33%] of 289; thrombocytopenia in 47 [16%]; and neutropenia in 28 [10%]). Of 134 (46%) of 289 patients with at least one serious treatment-emergent adverse event, the most common were also haematological (thrombocytopenia in 17 [6%] and anaemia in 13 [4%]). Two adverse events with fatal outcome (one patient with urosepsis in the BRCA cohort and one patient with sepsis in the non-BRCA cohort) were deemed possibly related to niraparib treatment. INTERPRETATION: Niraparib is tolerable and shows anti-tumour activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DRDs, particularly in those with BRCA alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Ipatasertib plus abiraterone and prednisolone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (IPATential150): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The PI3K/AKT and androgen-receptor pathways are dysregulated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers (mCRPCs); tumours with functional PTEN-loss status have hyperactivated AKT signalling. Dual pathway inhibition with AKT inhibitor ipatasertib plus abiraterone might have greater benefit than abiraterone alone. We aimed to compare ipatasertib plus abiraterone with placebo plus abiraterone in patients with previously untreated mCRPC with or without tumour PTEN loss. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial at 200 sites across 26 countries or regions. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic mCRPC who had progressive disease and Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1; permuted block method) to receive ipatasertib (400 mg once daily orally) plus abiraterone (1000 mg once daily orally) and prednisolone (5 mg twice a day orally) or placebo plus abiraterone and prednisolone (with the same dosing schedule). Patients received study treatment until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, withdrawal from the study, or study completion. Stratification factors were previous taxane-based therapy for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, type of progression, presence of visceral metastasis, and tumour PTEN-loss status by immunohistochemistry. Patients, investigators, and the study sponsor were masked to the treatment allocation. The coprimary endpoints were investigator-assessed radiographical progression-free survival in the PTEN-loss-by-immunohistochemistry population and in the intention-to-treat population. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03072238. FINDINGS: Between June 30, 2017, and Jan 17, 2019, 1611 patients were screened for eligibility and 1101 (68%) were enrolled; 554 (50%) were assigned to the placebo-abiraterone group and 547 (50%) to the ipatasertib-abiraterone group. At data cutoff (March 16, 2020), median follow-up duration was 19 months (range 0-33). In the 521 (47%) patients who had tumours with PTEN loss by immunohistochemistry (261 in the placebo-abiraterone group and 260 in the ipatasertib-abiraterone group), median radiographical progression-free survival was 16·5 months (95% CI 13·9-17·0) in the placebo-abiraterone group and 18·5 months (16·3-22·1) in the ipatasertib-abiraterone group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·77 [95% CI 0·61-0·98]; p=0·034; significant at α=0·04). In the intention-to-treat population, median progression-free survival was 16·6 months (95% CI 15·6-19·1) in the placebo-abiraterone group and 19·2 months (16·5-22·3) in the ipatasertib-abiraterone group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·71-0·99]; p=0·043; not significant at α=0·01). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 213 (39%) of 546 patients in the placebo-abiraterone group and in 386 (70%) of 551 patients in the ipatasertib-abiraterone group; adverse events leading to discontinuation of placebo or ipatasertib occurred in 28 (5%) in the placebo-abiraterone group and 116 (21%) in the ipatasertib-abiraterone group. Deaths due to adverse events deemed related to treatment occurred in two patients (<1%; acute myocardial infarction [n=1] and lower respiratory tract infection [n=1]) in the placebo-abiraterone group and in two patients (<1%; hyperglycaemia [n=1] and chemical pneumonitis [n=1]) in the ipastasertb-abiraterone group. INTERPRETATION: Ipatasertib plus abiraterone significantly improved radiographical progression-free survival compared with placebo plus abiraterone among patients with mCRPC with PTEN-loss tumours, but there was no significant difference between the groups in the intention-to-treat population. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of each agent. These data suggest that combined AKT and androgen-receptor signalling pathway inhibition with ipatasertib and abiraterone is a potential treatment for men with PTEN-loss mCRPC, a population with a poor prognosis. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Implications of DNA damage repair alterations for the management of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this review, we summarize the prevalence of alterations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes in prostate cancer, their clinical significance, the therapeutic strategies developed to take advantage of the impaired tumour ability to repair DNA and the diagnostic approaches available to identify patients likely to benefit from DDR-targeting agents. RECENT FINDINGS: DDR alterations are more frequent in metastatic than in localized prostate cancer and some of them associate with aggressive disease whereas the significance of others remain unclear. The most appropriate management approach for DDR-defective prostate cancer patients is unknown. Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of different poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with BRCA1/2 alterations, although there may be other DDR alterations that sensitize patients to these drugs. Multiple strategies to target DDR defects are being investigated, including PARPi in combination, platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy, both in earlier and late disease stages. Optimization of molecular testing is paramount for the implementation of precision oncology in prostate cancer. SUMMARY: Certain DDR defects present in prostate cancer have prognostic and therapeutic implications whereas the significance of other DDR alterations is yet to be elucidated.

Efficacy of systemic therapies in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer harboring germline ATM versus BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: Among men with metastatic prostate cancer, about 10% have germline alterations in DNA damage response genes. Most studies have examined BRCA2 alone or an aggregate of BRCA1/2 and ATM. Emerging data suggest that ATM mutations may have distinct biology and warrant individual evaluation. The objective of this study is to determine whether response to prostate cancer systemic therapies differs between men with germline mutations in ATM (gATM) and BRCA2 (gBRCA2). METHODS: This is an international multicenter retrospective matched cohort study of men with prostate cancer harboring gATM or gBRCA2. PSA50 response (≥50% decline in prostate-specific antigen) was compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The study included 45 gATM and 45 gBRCA2 patients, matched on stage and year of germline testing. Patients with gATM and gBRCA2 had similar age, Gleason grade, and PSA at diagnosis. We did not observe differences in PSA50 responses to abiraterone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer between the two groups; however, 0/7 with gATM and 12/14 with gBRCA2 achieved PSA50 response to PARPi (p < .001). Median (95% confidence interval) overall survival from diagnosis to death was 10.9 years (9.5-not reached) versus 9.9 years (7.1-not reached, p = .07) for the gATM and gBRCA2 cohorts, respectively. Limitations include the retrospective design and lack of mutation zygosity data. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional therapies can be effective in gATM carriers and should be considered before PARPi, which shows limited efficacy in this group. Men with gATM mutations warrant prioritization for novel treatment strategies.

Genetic aberrations in DNA repair pathways: a cornerstone of precision oncology in prostate cancer.

Over the past years, several studies have demonstrated that defects in DNA damage response and repair (DDR) genes are present in a significant proportion of patients with prostate cancer. These alterations, particularly mutations in BRCA2, are known to be associated with an increased risk of developing prostate cancer and more aggressive forms of the disease. There is growing evidence that certain DDR gene aberrations confer sensitivity to poly-(ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitors and/or platinum chemotherapy, while other defects might identify cases that are more likely to benefit from immune checkpoint inhibition. The potential prognostic impact and relevance for treatment selection together with the decreasing costs and broader accessibility to next-generation sequencing have already resulted in the increased frequency of genetic profiling of prostate tumours. Remarkably, almost half of all DDR genetic defects can occur in the germline, and prostate cancer patients identified as mutation carriers, as well as their families, will require appropriate genetic counselling. In this review, we summarise the current knowledge regarding the biology and clinical implications of DDR defects in prostate cancer, and outline how this evidence is prompting a change in the treatment landscape of the disease.

Apalutamide Treatment and Metastasis-free Survival in Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide, a competitive inhibitor of the androgen receptor, is under development for the treatment of prostate cancer. We evaluated the efficacy of apalutamide in men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were at high risk for the development of metastasis. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial involving men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 10 months or less. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive apalutamide (240 mg per day) or placebo. All the patients continued to receive androgen-deprivation therapy. The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, which was defined as the time from randomization to the first detection of distant metastasis on imaging or death. RESULTS: A total of 1207 men underwent randomization (806 to the apalutamide group and 401 to the placebo group). In the planned primary analysis, which was performed after 378 events had occurred, median metastasis-free survival was 40.5 months in the apalutamide group as compared with 16.2 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.35; P<0.001). Time to symptomatic progression was significantly longer with apalutamide than with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.63; P<0.001). The rate of adverse events leading to discontinuation of the trial regimen was 10.6% in the apalutamide group and 7.0% in the placebo group. The following adverse events occurred at a higher rate with apalutamide than with placebo: rash (23.8% vs. 5.5%), hypothyroidism (8.1% vs. 2.0%), and fracture (11.7% vs. 6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Among men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastasis-free survival and time to symptomatic progression were significantly longer with apalutamide than with placebo. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; SPARTAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01946204 .).

Phase II pilot study of the prednisone to dexamethasone switch in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with limited progression on abiraterone plus prednisone (SWITCH study).

BACKGROUND: Despite most metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients benefit from abiraterone acetate plus prednisone 5 mg bid (AA + P), resistance eventually occurs. Long-term use of prednisone has been suggested as one of the mechanisms driving resistance, which may be reversed by switching to another steroid. METHODS: SWITCH was a single-arm, open-label, single-stage phase II study. The primary objective was to evaluate the antitumour activity of abiraterone acetate plus dexamethasone 0.5 mg daily (AA + D) in mCRPC patients progressing to AA + P. Clinically stable mCRPC patients who had prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or limited radiographic progression after at least 12 weeks on AA + P, were eligible. The primary endpoint was measured as the proportion of patients achieving a PSA decline of ≥ 30% (PSA30) from baseline after 6 weeks on AA + D. Secondary endpoints included: PSA50 response rate at 12 weeks, time to biochemical and radiological progression, overall survival, safety profile evaluation, benefit from subsequent treatment lines and the identification of biomarkers of response (AR copy number, TMPRSS2-ERG status and PTEN expression). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were enrolled. PSA30 and PSA50 were 46.2% and 34.6%, respectively. Median time to biochemical and radiological progression were 5.3 and 11.8 months, respectively. Two radiological responses were observed. Median overall survival was 20.9 months. Patients with AR gain detected in plasma circulating tumour DNA did not respond to switch, whereas patients with AR normal status benefited the most. No significant toxicities were observed and PSA50 response rate to subsequent taxane was 50%. CONCLUSIONS: In selected clinical stable mCRPC patients with limited disease progression on AA + P, a steroid switch from prednisone to dexamethasone can lead to PSA and radiological responses.

Impact of fusion gene status versus histology on risk-stratification for rhabdomyosarcoma: Retrospective analyses of patients on UK trials.

BACKGROUND: Long-term toxicities from current treatments are a major issue in paediatric cancer. Previous studies, including our own, have shown prognostic value for the presence of PAX3/7-FOXO1 fusion genes in rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). It is proposed to introduce PAX3/7-FOXO1 positivity as a component of risk stratification, rather than alveolar histology, in future clinical trials. PROCEDURE: To assess the potential impact of this reclassification, we have determined the changes to risk category assignment of 210 histologically reviewed patients treated in the UK from previous malignant mesenchymal tumour clinical trials for non-metastatic RMS based on identification of PAX3/7-FOXO1 by fluorescence in situ hybridisation and/or reverse transcription PCR. RESULTS: Using fusion gene positivity in the current risk stratification would reassign 7% of patients to different European Paediatric Soft Tissue Sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG) risk groups. The next European trial would have 80% power to detect differences in event-free survival of 15% over 10 years and 20% over 5 years in reassigned patients. This would decrease treatment for over a quarter of patients with alveolar histology tumours that lack PAX3/7-FOXO1. CONCLUSIONS: Fusion gene status used in stratification may result in significant numbers of patients benefitting from lower treatment-associated toxicity. Prospective testing to show this reassignment maintains current survival rates is now required and is shown to be feasible based on estimated recruitment to a future EpSSG trial. Together with developing novel therapeutic strategies for patients identified as higher risk, this may ultimately improve the outcome and quality of life for patients with RMS.

A first in man, dose-finding study of the mTORC1/mTORC2 inhibitor OSI-027 in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

BACKGROUND: The kinase activity of mTOR involves 2 multiprotein complexes, (mTORC1-mTORC2). Targeting mTORC1 with rapalogues induces compensatory feedback loops resulting in AKT/ERK activation, which may be abrogated by mTORC2 inhibition. A first-in-human trial evaluating tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the dual TORC1/TORC2 inhibitor OSI-027 was conducted. METHODS: Dose escalation was pursued for three schedules of administration (three consecutive days per week (S1), once a week (S2) and daily dosing (S3)), until dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were identified. Expansion cohorts with paired tumour biopsies were initiated based on tolerability and pharmacodynamics. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty eight patients with advanced cancer were enrolled. DLT consisted predominantly of fatigue, renal function disturbances and cardiac events. OSI-027 exposure was dose proportional, with Tmax within 4 h and a half-life of ∼14 h. Expansion cohorts were initiated for S1 and S2, as MTD for S3 was overall considered suboptimal. Target modulation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were observed from 30 mg, but in tumour biopsies 120 mg QD were needed, which was a non-tolerable dose due to renal toxicity. No RECIST responses were recorded, with stable disease >6 months in six (5%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: OSI-027 inhibits mTORC1/2 in patients with advanced tumour s in a dose-dependent manner but doses above the tolerable levels in S1 and S3 are required for a sustained biological effect in tumour biopsies.

A robust blood gene expression-based prognostic model for castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is associated with wide variations in survival. Recent studies of whole blood mRNA expression-based biomarkers strongly predicted survival but the genes used in these biomarker models were non-overlapping and their relationship was unknown. We developed a biomarker model for CRPC that is robust, but also captures underlying biological processes that drive prostate cancer lethality. METHODS: Using three independent cohorts of CRPC patients, we developed an integrative genomic approach for understanding the biological processes underlying genes associated with cancer progression, constructed a novel four-gene model that captured these changes, and compared the performance of the new model with existing gene models and other clinical parameters. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed striking patterns of myeloid- and lymphoid-specific distribution of genes that were differentially expressed in whole blood mRNA profiles: up-regulated genes in patients with worse survival were overexpressed in myeloid cells, whereas down-regulated genes were noted in lymphocytes. A resulting novel four-gene model showed significant prognostic power independent of known clinical predictors in two independent datasets totaling 90 patients with CRPC, and was superior to the two existing gene models. CONCLUSIONS: Whole blood mRNA profiling provides clinically relevant information in patients with CRPC. Integrative genomic analysis revealed patterns of differential mRNA expression with changes in gene expression in immune cell components which robustly predicted the survival of CRPC patients. The next step would be validation in a cohort of suitable size to quantify the prognostic improvement by the gene score upon the standard set of clinical parameters.

Circulating and disseminated tumor cells in ovarian cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Detecting circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the peripheral blood and disseminated tumor cells (DTCs) in the bone marrow of cancer patients has proven feasible and of prognostic value in different neoplasms. However, the clinical significance of CTCs and DTCs in ovarian cancer and its association with outcome remains unclear. METHODS: A literature search in PubMed was performed from January 2000 to December 2013 for studies evaluating CTCs and/or DTCs and its association with clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcome in ovarian cancer. The main outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Median study size was 84 patients (range 43-216). Median follow-up was 19months (range 5-52). Most studies were small case series (n<100; studies; 71%). The majority of studies used an immunophenotyping approach to identify CTCs and/or DTCs, but only 3 studies (21%) used the FDA-approved Cell Search method. Despite the differences in methodology among studies the presence of CTCs and DTCs tended to be associated with higher baseline CA-125 serum levels, higher odds of residual disease after surgery, and worse survival in ovarian cancer across studies. No consistent intra-patient correlation was observed between DTCs detected in the bone marrow and CTCs detected in the blood. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of CTCs and DTCs is associated with adverse clinicopathological characteristics and poor clinical outcomes in ovarian cancer patients. Its implementation as a valuable prognostic tool in the clinical setting requires uniform methodology and prospective validation.

Randomized Phase II trial of nintedanib, afatinib and sequential combination in castration-resistant prostate cancer.

AIMS: The aim of this article was to evaluate afatinib (BIBW 2992), an ErbB family blocker, and nintedanib (BIBF 1120), a triple angiokinase inhibitor, in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive nintedanib (250 mg twice daily), afatinib (40 mg once daily [q.d.]), or alternating sequential 7-day nintedanib (250 mg twice daily) and afatinib (70 mg q.d. [Combi70]), which was reduced to 40 mg q.d. (Combi40) due to adverse events. The primary end point was progression-free rate at 12 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 85 patients treated 46, 20, 16 and three received nintedanib, afatinib, Combi40 and Combi70, respectively. At 12 weeks, the progression-free rate was 26% (seven out of 27 patients) for nintedanib, and 0% for afatinib and Combi40 groups. Two patients had a ≥50% decline in PSA (nintedanib and the Combi40 groups). The most common drug-related adverse events were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and lethargy. CONCLUSION: Nintedanib and/or afatinib demonstrated limited anti-tumor activity in unselected advanced castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.

Anatomical factors of the maxillary tuberosity that influence molar distalization.

Objective: To examine the areas of the maxillary tuberosity (MT) (coronal, apical, width, and height) with respect to the presence or absence of the third molar to establish possible anatomical limitations for molar distalization. Methods: A total of 277 tuberosities were evaluated through sagittal computed tomography (CT) images, divided for measurement into coronal (free of bone), apical (area of influence of the maxillary sinus), and tuberosity (bony area) zones, and stratified by the presence or absence of the third molar, sex, and two age subgroups. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the groups considering the third molar. Results: The medians of the width and height of the tuberosity decreased significantly in the absence of the third molar (P < 0.001). The apical area also showed differences, with negative values in the absence of the third molar and positive values in the presence of the third molar (P < 0.001). However, no differences were observed for the coronal area (P > 0.05). Conclusions: In the absence of the third molar, the size of the MT, represented by its width and height, was smaller and negative values (decrease) were observed for the maxillary sinus. The sagittal CT provides useful information regarding the amount of bone tissue available for distalization and relationship of the second molar with respect to the maxillary sinus, which allows individualizing each case in relation to the amount and type of movement expected.

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).

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.