Rucaparib or Physician's Choice in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 2 study, rucaparib, an inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), showed a high level of activity in patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA alteration. Data are needed to confirm and expand on the findings of the phase 2 study. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration and who had disease progression after treatment with a second-generation androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI). We randomly assigned the patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or a physician's choice control (docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI [abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide]). The primary outcome was the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival according to independent review. RESULTS: Of the 4855 patients who had undergone prescreening or screening, 270 were assigned to receive rucaparib and 135 to receive a control medication (intention-to-treat population); in the two groups, 201 patients and 101 patients, respectively, had a BRCA alteration. At 62 months, the duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer in the rucaparib group than in the control group, both in the BRCA subgroup (median, 11.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.69) and in the intention-to-treat group (median, 10.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001 for both comparisons). In an exploratory analysis in the ATM subgroup, the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was 8.1 months in the rucaparib group and 6.8 months in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.52). The most frequent adverse events with rucaparib were fatigue and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: The duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer with rucaparib than with a control medication among patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA alteration. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; TRITON3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02975934.).

Erdafitinib or Chemotherapy in Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who have progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The effects of erdafitinib in patients with FGFR-altered metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progression during or after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1] or anti-programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] agents) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global phase 3 trial of erdafitinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who had progression after one or two previous treatments that included an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive erdafitinib or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel or vinflunine). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients underwent randomization: 136 to the erdafitinib group and 130 to the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 15.9 months. The median overall survival was significantly longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.88; P = 0.005). The median progression-free survival was also longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78; P<0.001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (45.9% in the erdafitinib group and 46.4% in the chemotherapy group). Treatment-related adverse events that led to death were less common with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (in 0.7% vs. 5.4% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alterations after previous anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; THOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03390504.).

3-year invasive disease-free survival with chemotherapy de-escalation using an 18F-FDG-PET-based, pathological complete response-adapted strategy in HER2-positive early breast cancer (PHERGain): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: PHERGain was designed to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a chemotherapy-free treatment based on a dual human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) blockade with trastuzumab and pertuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC). It used an 18fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET-based, pathological complete response (pCR)-adapted strategy. METHODS: PHERGain was a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial that took place in 45 hospitals in seven European countries. It randomly allocated patients in a 1:4 ratio with centrally confirmed, HER2-positive, stage I-IIIA invasive, operable breast cancer with at least one PET-evaluable lesion to either group A, where patients received docetaxel (75 mg/m2, intravenous), carboplatin (area under the curve 6 mg/mL per min, intravenous), trastuzumab (600 mg fixed dose, subcutaneous), and pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose followed by 420 mg maintenance doses, intravenous; TCHP), or group B, where patients received trastuzumab and pertuzumab with or without endocrine therapy, every 3 weeks. Random allocation was stratified by hormone receptor status. Centrally reviewed PET was conducted at baseline and after two treatment cycles. Patients in group B were treated according to on-treatment PET results. Patients in group B who were PET-responders continued with trastuzumab and pertuzumab with or without endocrine therapy for six cycles, while PET-non-responders were switched to receive six cycles of TCHP. After surgery, patients in group B who were PET-responders who did not achieve a pCR received six cycles of TCHP, and all patients completed up to 18 cycles of trastuzumab and pertuzumab. The primary endpoints were pCR in patients who were group B PET-responders after two treatment cycles (the results for which have been reported previously) and 3-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) in patients in group B. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03161353) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 26, 2017, and April 24, 2019, a total of 356 patients were randomly allocated (71 patients in group A and 285 patients in group B), and 63 (89%) and 267 (94%) patients proceeded to surgery in groups A and B, respectively. At this second analysis (data cutoff: Nov 4, 2022), the median duration of follow-up was 43·3 months (range 0·0-63·0). In group B, the 3-year iDFS rate was 94·8% (95% CI 91·4-97·1; p=0·001), meeting the primary endpoint. No new safety signals were identified. Treatment-related adverse events and serious adverse events (SAEs) were numerically higher in patients allocated to group A than to group B (grade ≥3 62% vs 33%; SAEs 28% vs 14%). Group B PET-responders with pCR presented the lowest incidence of treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (1%) without any SAEs. INTERPRETATION: Among HER2-positive EBC patients, a PET-based, pCR-adapted strategy was associated with an excellent 3-year iDFS. This strategy identified about a third of patients who had HER2-positive EBC who could safely omit chemotherapy. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Darolutamide and Survival in Metastatic, Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Darolutamide is a potent androgen-receptor inhibitor that has been associated with increased overall survival among patients with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. Whether a combination of darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel would increase survival among patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer is unknown. METHODS: In this international, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive darolutamide (at a dose of 600 mg [two 300-mg tablets] twice daily) or matching placebo, both in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The primary analysis involved 1306 patients (651 in the darolutamide group and 655 in the placebo group); 86.1% of the patients had disease that was metastatic at the time of the initial diagnosis. At the data cutoff date for the primary analysis (October 25, 2021), the risk of death was significantly lower, by 32.5%, in the darolutamide group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.80; P<0.001). Darolutamide was also associated with consistent benefits with respect to the secondary end points and prespecified subgroups. Adverse events were similar in the two groups, and the incidences of the most common adverse events (occurring in ≥10% of the patients) were highest during the overlapping docetaxel treatment period in both groups. The frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 66.1% in the darolutamide group and 63.5% in the placebo group; neutropenia was the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event (in 33.7% and 34.2%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, overall survival was significantly longer with the combination of darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel than with placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel, and the addition of darolutamide led to improvement in key secondary end points. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. (Funded by Bayer and Orion Pharma; ARASENS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02799602.).

Methylation of GPRC5A promotes liver metastasis and docetaxel resistance through activating mTOR signaling pathway in triple negative breast cancer.

AIMS: This study aims to explore the function and mechanism of G Protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member A (GPRC5A) in docetaxel-resistance and liver metastasis of breast cancer. METHODS: Single-cell RNA transcriptomic analysis and bioinformatic analysis are used to screen relevant genes in breast cancer metastatic hepatic specimens. MeRIP, dual-luciferase analysis and bioinformation were used to detect m6A modulation. Mass spectrometry (MS), co-inmunoprecipitation (co-IP) and immunofluorescence colocalization were executed to explore the mechanism of GPRC5A in breast cancer cells. RESULT: GPRC5A was upregulated in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and was associated with a poor prognosis. In vitro and in vivo experiments demonstrated that knockdown of GPRC5A alleviated metastasis and resistance to docetaxel in TNBC. Overexpression of GPRC5A had the opposite effects. The m6A methylation of GPRC5A mRNA was modulated by METTL3 and YTHDF1, which facilitates its translation. GPRC5A inhibited the ubiquitination-dependent degradation of LAMTOR1, resulting in the recruitment of mTORC1 to lysosomes and activating the mTORC1/p70s6k signaling pathway. CONCLUSION: METTL3/YTHDF1 axis up-regulates GPRC5A expression by m6A methylation. GPRC5A activates mTORC1/p70s6k signaling pathway by recruiting mTORC1 to lysosomes, consequently promotes docetaxel-resistance and liver metastasis.

Overall survival with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): secondary outcomes of a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TheraP study reported improved prostate-specific antigen responses with lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel. In this Article, we report the secondary outcome of overall survival with mature follow-up, and an updated imaging biomarker analysis. We also report the outcomes of participants excluded due to ineligibility on gallium-68 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (2-[18F]FDG) PET-CT. METHODS: TheraP was an open-label, randomised phase 2 trial at 11 centres in Australia. Eligible participants had metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel, and PET imaging with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and 2-[18F]FDG that showed prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive disease and no sites of metastatic disease with discordant 2-[18F]FDG-positive and PSMA-negative findings. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (every 6 weeks for a maximum of six cycles; starting at 8·5 GBq, decreasing by 0.5 GBq to 6·0 GBq for the sixth cycle) versus cabazitaxel (20 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, maximum of ten cycles). Overall survival was analysed by intention-to-treat and summarised as restricted mean survival time (RMST) to account for non-proportional hazards, with a 36-month restriction time corresponding to median follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03392428, and is complete. FINDINGS: 291 men were registered from Feb 6, 2018, to Sept 3, 2019; after study imaging, 200 were eligible and randomly assigned to treatment with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (n=99) or cabazitaxel (n=101). After completing study treatment, 20 (20%) participants assigned to cabazitaxel and 32 (32%) assigned to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 were subsequently treated with the alternative regimen. After a median follow-up of 35·7 months (IQR 31·1 to 39·2), 77 (78%) participants had died in the [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 70 (69%) participants had died in the cabazitaxel group. Overall survival was similar among those assigned to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus those assigned to cabazitaxel (RMST 19·1 months [95% CI 16·9 to 21·4] vs 19·6 months [17·4 to 21·8]; difference -0·5 months [95% CI -3·7 to 2·7]; p=0·77). No additional safety signals were identified with the longer follow-up in this analysis. 80 (27%) of 291 men who were registered after initial eligibility screening were excluded after [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and 2-[18F]FDG PET. In the 61 of these men with follow-up available, RMST was 11·0 months (95% CI 9·0 to 13·1). INTERPRETATION: These results support the use of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 as an alternative to cabazitaxel for PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel. We did not find evidence that overall survival differed between the randomised groups. Median overall survival was shorter for men who were excluded because of low PSMA expression or 2-[18F]FDG-discordant disease. FUNDING: Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Endocyte (a Novartis company), Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization, Movember, It's a Bloke Thing, CAN4CANCER, and The Distinguished Gentleman's Ride.

NOTCH3 promotes docetaxel resistance of prostate cancer cells through regulating TUBB3 and MAPK signaling pathway.

Docetaxel is the preferred chemotherapeutic agent in patients with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). However, patients eventually develop docetaxel resistance and in the absence of effective treatment options. Consequently, it is essential to investigate the mechanisms generating docetaxel resistance and develop novel alternative therapeutic targets. RNA sequencing was undertaken on docetaxel-sensitive and docetaxel-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) cells. Subsequently, chemoresistance, cancer stemness, and lipid metabolism were investigated. To obtain insight into the precise activities and action mechanisms of NOTCH3 in docetaxel-resistant PCa, immunoprecipitation, mass spectrometry, ChIP, luciferase reporter assay, cell metabolism, and animal experiments were performed. Through RNA sequencing analysis, we found that NOTCH3 expression was markedly higher in docetaxel-resistant cells relative to parental cells, and that this trend was continued in docetaxel-resistant PCa tissues. Experiments in vitro and in vivo revealed that NOTCH3 enhanced stemness, lipid metabolism, and docetaxel resistance in PCa. Mechanistically, NOTCH3 is bound to TUBB3 and activates the MAPK signaling pathway. Moreover, NOTCH3 was directly regulated by MEF2A in docetaxel-resistant cells. Notably, targeting NOTCH3 and the MEF2A/TUBB3 signaling axis was related to docetaxel chemoresistance in PCa. Overall, these results demonstrated that NOTCH3 fostered stemness, lipid metabolism, and docetaxel resistance in PCa via the TUBB3 and MAPK signaling pathways. Therefore, NOTCH3 may be employed as a prognostic biomarker in PCa patients. NOTCH3 could be a therapeutic target for PCa patients, particularly those who have developed docetaxel resistance.

Natural course of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the era of intensified androgen deprivation therapy in the hormone-sensitive setting.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) intensification (ADTi) (i.e., ADT with androgen receptor pathway inhibitor or docetaxel, or both) has significantly improved survival outcomes of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the impact of prior ADTi in the mHSPC setting on the disease presentation and survival outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is not well characterized. In this study, our objective was to compare the disease characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with new mCRPC with respect to receipt of intensified or nonintensified ADT in the mHSPC setting. METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, eligibility criteria were as follows: patients diagnosed with mCRPC, treated with an approved first-line mCRPC therapy, and who received either intensified or nonintensified ADT in the mHSPC setting. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined from the start of first-line therapy for mCRPC to progression per Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria or death, and overall survival (OS) was defined from the start of first-line therapy for mCRPC to death or censored at the last follow-up. A multivariable analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model was used, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Patients (n = 387) treated between March 20, 2008, and August 18, 2022, were eligible and included: 283 received nonintensified ADT, whereas 104 were treated with ADTi. At mCRPC diagnosis, patients in the ADTi group were significantly younger, had more visceral metastasis, lower baseline prostate-specific antigen (all p < 0.01), and lower hemoglobin (p = 0.027). Furthermore, they had significantly shorter PFS (median 4.8 vs. 8.4 months, adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.07-2, p = 0.017) and OS (median 21.3 vs. 33.1 months, adjusted HR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.06-2.21, p = 0.022) compared to patients in the nonintensified ADT group. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with ADTi in the mHSPC setting and experiencing disease progression to mCRPC had more aggressive disease features of mCRPC (characterized by a higher number of poor prognostic factors at mCRPC presentation). They also had shorter PFS on first-line mCRPC treatment and shorter OS after the onset of mCRPC compared to those not receiving ADTi in the mHSPC setting. Upon external validation, these findings may impact patient counseling, prognostication, treatment selection, and design of future clinical trials in the mCRPC setting. There remains an unmet need to develop novel life-prolonging therapies with new mechanisms of action to improve mCRPC prognosis in the current era.

Clinical validation of circulating GDF15/MIC-1 as a marker of response to docetaxel and survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Elevated circulating growth differentiation factor (GDF15/MIC-1), interleukin 4 (IL4), and IL6 levels were associated with resistance to docetaxel in an exploratory cohort of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study aimed to establish level 2 evidence of cytokine biomarker utility in mCRPC. METHODS: IntVal: Plasma samples at baseline (BL) and Day 21 docetaxel (n = 120). ExtVal: Serum samples at BL and Day 42 of docetaxel (n = 430). IL4, IL6, and GDF15 levels were measured by ELISA. Monocytes and dendritic cells were treated with 10% plasma from men with high or low GDF15 or recombinant GDF15. RESULTS: IntVal: Higher GDF15 levels at BL and Day 21 were associated with shorter overall survival (OS) (BL; p = 0.03 and Day 21; p = 0.004). IL4 and IL6 were not associated with outcomes. ExtVal: Higher GDF15 levels at BL and Day 42 predicted shorter OS (BL; p < 0.0001 and Day 42; p < 0.0001). Plasma from men with high GDF15 caused an increase in CD86 expression on monocytes (p = 0.03), but was not replicated by recombinant GDF15. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated circulating GDF15 is associated with poor prognosis in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel and may be a marker of changes in the innate immune system in response to docetaxel resistance. These findings provide a strong rationale to consider GDF15 as a biomarker to guide a therapeutic trial of drugs targeting the innate immune system in combination with docetaxel in mCRPC.

Safety and effectiveness of the radium-223-taxane treatment sequence in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in a global observational study (REASSURE).

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 and taxane chemotherapy each improve survival of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Whether the radium-223-taxane sequence could extend survival without cumulative toxicity was explored. METHODS: The global, prospective, observational REASSURE study (NCT02141438) assessed real-world safety and effectiveness of radium-223 in patients with mCRPC. Using data from the prespecified second interim analysis (data cutoff, March 20, 2019), hematologic events and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in patients who were chemotherapy-naive at radium-223 initiation and subsequently received taxane chemotherapy starting ≤90 days ("immediate") or >90 days ("delayed") after the last radium-223 dose. RESULTS: Following radium-223 therapy, 182 patients received docetaxel (172 [95%]) and/or cabazitaxel (44 [24%]); 34 patients (19%) received both. Seventy-three patients (40%) received immediate chemotherapy and 109 patients (60%) received delayed chemotherapy. Median time from last radium-223 dose to first taxane cycle was 3.6 months (range, 0.3-28.4). Median duration of first taxane was 3.7 months (range, 0-22.0). Fourteen patients (10 in the immediate and four in the delayed subgroup) had grade 3/4 hematologic events during taxane chemotherapy, including neutropenia in two patients in the delayed subgroup and thrombocytopenia in one patient in each subgroup. Median OS was 24.3 months from radium-223 initiation and 11.8 months from start of taxane therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world clinical practice settings, a heterogeneous population of patients who received sequential radium-223-taxane therapy had a low incidence of hematologic events, with a median survival of 1 year from taxane initiation. Thus, taxane chemotherapy is a feasible option for those who progress after radium-223. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02141438. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Radium-223 and chemotherapy are treatment options for metastatic prostate cancer, which increase survival but may affect production of blood cells as a side effect. We wanted to know what would happen if patients received chemotherapy after radium-223. Among the 182 men treated with radium-223 who went on to receive chemotherapy, only two men had severe side effects affecting white blood cell production (neutropenia) during chemotherapy. On average, the 182 men lived for 2 years after starting radium-223 and 1 year after starting chemotherapy. In conclusion, patients may benefit from chemotherapy after radium-223 treatment without increasing the risk of side effects.

Anthracycline-containing and taxane-containing chemotherapy for early-stage operable breast cancer: a patient-level meta-analysis of 100 000 women from 86 randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Anthracycline-taxane chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer substantially improves survival compared with no chemotherapy. However, concerns about short-term and long-term side-effects of anthracyclines have led to increased use of taxane chemotherapy without anthracycline, which could compromise efficacy. We aimed to better characterise the benefits and risks of including anthracycline, and the comparative benefits of different anthracycline-taxane regimens. METHODS: We did an individual patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing taxane regimens with versus without anthracycline, and updated our previous meta-analysis of anthracycline regimens with versus without taxane, as well as analysing 44 trials in six related comparisons. We searched databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and meeting abstracts to identify trials assessing anthracycline and taxane chemotherapy. Adjuvant or neoadjuvant trials were eligible if they began before Jan 1, 2012. Primary outcomes were breast cancer recurrence and cause-specific mortality. Log-rank analyses yielded first-event rate ratios (RRs) and CIs. FINDINGS: 28 trials of taxane regimens with or without anthracycline were identified, of which 23 were deemed eligible, and 15 provided data on 18 103 women. Across all 15 trials that provided individual data, recurrence rates were 14% lower on average (RR 0·86, 95% CI 0·79-0·93; p=0·0004) with taxane regimens including anthracycline than those without. Non-breast cancer deaths were not increased but there was one additional acute myeloid leukaemia case per 700 women treated. The clearest reductions in recurrence were found when anthracycline was added concurrently to docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide versus the same dose of docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide (10-year recurrence risk 12·3% vs 21·0%; risk difference 8·7%, 95% CI 4·5-12·9; RR 0·58, 0·47-0·73; p<0·0001). 10-year breast cancer mortality in this group was reduced by 4·2% (0·4-8·1; p=0·0034). No significant reduction in recurrence risk was found for sequential schedules of taxane plus anthracycline when compared with docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide (RR 0·94, 0·83-1·06; p=0·30). For the analysis of anthracycline regimens with versus without taxane, 35 trials (n=52 976) provided individual patient data. Larger recurrence reductions were seen from adding taxane to anthracycline regimens when the cumulative dose of anthracycline was the same in each group (RR 0·87, 0·82-0·93; p<0·0001; n=11 167) than in trials with two-fold higher cumulative doses of non-taxane (mostly anthracycline) in the control group than in the taxane group (RR 0·96, 0·90-1·03; p=0·27; n=14 620). Direct comparisons between anthracycline and taxane regimens showed that a higher cumulative dose and more dose-intense schedules were more efficacious. The proportional reductions in recurrence for taxane plus anthracycline were similar in oestrogen receptor-positive and oestrogen receptor-negative disease, and did not differ by age, nodal status, or tumour size or grade. INTERPRETATION: Anthracycline plus taxane regimens are most efficacious at reducing breast cancer recurrence and death. Regimens with higher cumulative doses of anthracycline plus taxane provide the greatest benefits, challenging the current trend in clinical practice and guidelines towards non-anthracycline chemotherapy, particularly shorter regimens, such as four cycles of docetaxel-cyclophosphamide. By bringing together data from almost all relevant trials, this meta-analysis provides a reliable evidence base to inform individual treatment decisions, clinical guidelines, and the design of future clinical trials. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council.

Sotorasib versus docetaxel for previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer with KRASG12C mutation: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib is a specific, irreversible inhibitor of the GTPase protein, KRASG12C. We compared the efficacy and safety of sotorasib with a standard-of-care treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with the KRASG12C mutation who had been previously treated with other anticancer drugs. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial at 148 centres in 22 countries. We recruited patients aged at least 18 years with KRASG12C-mutated advanced NSCLC, who progressed after previous platinum-based chemotherapy and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. Key exclusion criteria included new or progressing untreated brain lesions or symptomatic brain lesions, previously identified oncogenic driver mutation other than KRASG12C for which an approved therapy is available (eg EGFR or ALK), previous treatment with docetaxel (neoadjuvant or adjuvant docetaxel was allowed if the tumour did not progress within 6 months after the therapy was terminated), previous treatment with a direct KRASG12C inhibitor, systemic anticancer therapy within 28 days of study day 1, and therapeutic or palliative radiation therapy within 2 weeks of treatment initiation. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to oral sotorasib (960 mg once daily) or intravenous docetaxel (75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) in an open-label manner using interactive response technology. Randomisation was stratified by number of previous lines of therapy in advanced disease (1 vs 2 vs >2), ethnicity (Asian vs non-Asian), and history of CNS metastases (present or absent). Treatment continued until an independent central confirmation of disease progression, intolerance, initiation of another anticancer therapy, withdrawal of consent, or death, whichever occurred first. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was assessed by a blinded, independent central review in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04303780, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between June 4, 2020, and April 26, 2021, 345 patients were randomly assigned to receive sotorasib (n=171 [50%]) or docetaxel (n=174 [50%]). 169 (99%) patients in the sotorasib group and 151 (87%) in the docetaxel group received at least one dose. After a median follow-up of 17·7 months (IQR 16·4-20·1), the study met its primary endpoint of a statistically significant increase in the progression-free survival for sotorasib, compared with docetaxel (median progression-free survival 5·6 months [95% CI 4·3-7·8] vs 4·5 months [3·0-5·7]; hazard ratio 0·66 [0·51-0·86]; p=0·0017). Sotorasib was well tolerated, with fewer grade 3 or worse (n=56 [33%] vs n=61 [40%]) and serious treatment-related adverse events compared with docetaxel (n=18 [11%] vs n=34 [23%]). For sotorasib, the most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse were diarrhoea (n= 20 [12%]), alanine aminotransferase increase (n=13 [8%]), and aspartate aminotransferase increase (n=9 [5%]). For docetaxel, the most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (n=13 [9%]), fatigue (n=9 [6%]), and febrile neutropenia (n=8 [5%]). INTERPRETATION: Sotorasib significantly increased progression-free survival and had a more favourable safety profile, compared with docetaxel, in patients with advanced NSCLC with the KRASG12C mutation and who had been previously treated with other anticancer drugs. FUNDING: Amgen.

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

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

Quantifying Chemotherapy Delivery in Older and Younger Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Using Longitudinal Cumulative Dose.

BACKGROUND: Delivery of cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy, requires a complex set of decisions that can change over time. Traditional measures of chemotherapy delivery, such as relative dose intensity, measure the amount of chemotherapy received by the end of treatment but mask the timing of dose reductions, delays, and discontinuation. These events may be important for delivering timely interventions to support adherence and lower the risk of recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used an institutional database to identify women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy with a standard 4-cycle regimen of docetaxel + cyclophosphamide (TC, every 21 days) from April 2014 to December 2019. LCD was calculated as the amount of a given chemotherapy agent delivered at a specified time, t, divided by the total planned standard chemotherapy dose at time t. We visualized LCD curves for each chemotherapy agent and reported the median LCD and interquartile range (IQR) at the end of the regimen, overall and by age group (<65 years vs. 65+ years). RESULTS: The study population included 80 women. At the end of treatment, overall median LCDs for both cyclophosphamide and docetaxel were 100% (IQR: 99.6%, 100%), suggesting that TC was well tolerated. However, the lower quartile LCD for cyclophosphamide was 98.7% in older women treated with TC compared with 99.7% in younger women. CONCLUSION: Within our cohort, adjuvant TC was well tolerated with LCD curves showing largely on-time and full-dose administration. Subgroup analyses showed only slight decreases in adjuvant TC LCD for patients aged 65+ versus <65 years.

Prospective Observational Study of Ramucirumab Plus Docetaxel After Combined Chemoimmunotherapy in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A history of pre-administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors has been reported to be associated with good outcomes of ramucirumab (RAM) plus docetaxel (DOC) combination therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, existing knowledge on the clinical significance of RAM and DOC following combined chemoimmunotherapy is limited. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of RAM plus DOC therapy after combined chemoimmunotherapy and attempted to identify the predictors of its outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, prospective study investigated the efficacy and safety of RAM plus DOC after combined chemoimmunotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and incidence of adverse events. An exploratory analysis measured serum cytokine levels at the start of treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 44 patients were enrolled from 10 Japanese institutions between April 2020 and June 2022. The median PFS and OS were 6.3 and 22.6 months, respectively. Furthermore, the ORR and DCR were 36.4% and 72.7%, respectively. The high vascular endothelial growth factor D (VEGF-D) group had a significantly shorter PFS and OS. A combination of high VEGF-A and low VEGF-D levels was associated with a longer PFS. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that RAM plus DOC after combined chemoimmunotherapy might be an effective and relatively feasible second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC in a real-world setting.

Validation of metastasis-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in localized prostate cancer in the era of docetaxel for castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prior work from the Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate (ICECaP) consortium (ICECaP-1) demonstrated that metastasis-free survival (MFS) is a valid surrogate for overall survival (OS) in localized prostate cancer (PCa). This was based on data from patients treated predominantly before 2004, prior to docetaxel being available for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to validate surrogacy in a more contemporary era (ICECaP-2) with greater availability of docetaxel and other systemic therapies for mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible trials for ICECaP-2 were those providing individual patient data (IPD) after publication of ICECaP-1 and evaluating adjuvant/salvage therapy for localized PCa, and which collected MFS and OS data. MFS was defined as distant metastases or death from any cause, and OS was defined as death from any cause. Surrogacy was evaluated using a meta-analytic two-stage validation model, with an R2 ≥ 0.7 defined a priori as clinically relevant. RESULTS: A total of 15 164 IPD from 14 trials were included in ICECaP-2, with 70% of patients treated after 2004. The median follow-up was 8.3 years and the median postmetastasis survival was 3.1 years in ICECaP-2, compared with 1.9 years in ICECaP-1. For surrogacy condition 1, Kendall's tau was 0.92 for MFS with OS at the patient level, and R2 from weighted linear regression (WLR) of 8-year OS on 5-year MFS was 0.73 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.82) at the trial level. For condition 2, R2 was 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.64-0.89) from WLR of log[hazard ratio (HR)]-OS on log(HR)-MFS. The surrogate threshold effect on OS was an HR(MFS) of 0.81. CONCLUSIONS: MFS remained a valid surrogate for OS in a more contemporary era, where patients had greater access to docetaxel and other systemic therapies for mCRPC. This supports the use of MFS as the primary outcome measure for ongoing adjuvant trials in localized PCa.

SAPPHIRE: phase III study of sitravatinib plus nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy revolutionized treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, most patients progress due to primary or acquired resistance. Sitravatinib is a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that can shift the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment toward an immunostimulatory state. Combining sitravatinib with nivolumab (sitra + nivo) may potentially overcome initial CPI resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase III SAPPHIRE study, patients with advanced non-oncogenic driven, nonsquamous NSCLC who initially benefited from (≥4 months on CPI without progression) and subsequently experienced disease progression on or after CPI combined with or following platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to sitra (100 mg once daily administered orally) + nivo (240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks administered intravenously) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks administered intravenously). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of response (DOR; all assessed by blinded independent central review), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 577 patients included randomized: sitra + nivo, n = 284; docetaxel, n = 293 (median follow-up, 17.1 months). Sitra + nivo did not significantly improve OS versus docetaxel [median, 12.2 versus 10.6 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-1.05; P = 0.144]. The median PFS was 4.4 versus 5.4 months, respectively (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32; P = 0.452). The ORR was 15.6% for sitra + nivo and 17.2% for docetaxel (P = 0.597); CBR was 75.5% and 64.5%, respectively (P = 0.004); median DOR was 7.4 versus 7.1 months, respectively (P = 0.924). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 53.0% versus 66.7% of patients receiving sitra + nivo versus docetaxel, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although median OS was numerically longer with sitra + nivo, the primary endpoint was not met in patients with previously treated advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. The safety profiles demonstrated were consistent with previous reports.

Correlation between trophoblast cell-surface antigen-2 (Trop-2) expression and pathological complete response in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel, carboplatin, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab.

PURPOSE: The prognostic and predictive role of trophoblast cell-surface antigen-2 (Trop-2) overexpression in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2-positive) breast cancer is currently unknown. We retrospectively analyzed Trop-2 expression and its correlation with clinicopathologic features and pathological complete response (pCR) in HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel, carboplatin, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab in the PHERGain study. METHODS: Trop-2 expression at baseline was determined in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded primary tumor biopsies by immunohistochemistry and was first classified into expressing (Trop-2-positive) or not-expressing (Trop-2-negative) tumors. Then, it was classified by histochemical score (H-score) according to its intensity into low (0-9), intermediate (10-49), and high (≥ 50). The association between clinicopathologic features, pCR, and Trop-2 expression was performed with Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Forty-one patients with tissue evaluable for Trop-2 expression were included, with 28 (68.3%) Trop-2-positive tumors. Overall, 17 (41.46%), 14 (34.15%), and 10 (24.40%) tumors were classified as low, intermediate, and high, respectively. Trop-2 expression was significantly associated with decreased pCR rates (50.0% vs. 92.3%; odds ratio [OR] 0.05; 95% CI, 0.002-0.360]; p adjusted = 0.01) but was not correlated with any clinicopathologic features (p ≥ 0.05). Tumors with the highest Trop-2 H-score were less likely to obtain a pCR (OR 0.03; 95% CI, 0.001-0.290, p adjusted < 0.01). This association was confirmed in univariate and multivariate regression analyses. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest a potential role of Trop-2 expression as a biomarker of resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus dual HER2 blockade and may become a strategic target for future combinations in HER2-positive EBC patients.

Boosting antitumor efficacy using docetaxel-loaded nanoplatforms: from cancer therapy to regenerative medicine approaches.

The intersection of nanotechnology and pharmacology has revolutionized the delivery and efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents, notably docetaxel, a key drug in cancer treatment. Traditionally limited by poor solubility and significant side effects, docetaxel's therapeutic potential has been significantly enhanced through its incorporation into nanoplatforms, such as nanofibers and nanoparticles. This advancement offers targeted delivery, controlled release, and improved bioavailability, dramatically reducing systemic toxicity and enhancing patient outcomes. Nanofibers provide a versatile scaffold for the controlled release of docetaxel, utilizing techniques like electrospinning to tailor drug release profiles. Nanoparticles, on the other hand, enable precise drug delivery to tumor cells, minimizing damage to healthy tissues through sophisticated encapsulation methods such as nanoprecipitation and emulsion. These nanotechnologies not only improve the pharmacokinetic properties of docetaxel but also open new avenues in regenerative medicine by facilitating targeted therapy and cellular regeneration. This narrative review highlights the transformative impact of docetaxel-loaded nanoplatforms in oncology and beyond, showcasing the potential of nanotechnology to overcome the limitations of traditional chemotherapy and pave the way for future innovations in drug delivery and regenerative therapies. Through these advancements, nanotechnology promises a new era of precision medicine, enhancing the efficacy of cancer treatments while minimizing adverse effects.

Neoadjuvant Triplet Chemotherapy with Docetaxel, Cisplatin plus 5-Fluorouracil versus Docetaxel, Cisplatin plus S-1 for Advanced Esophageal Squamous cell Carcinoma: Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study examines whether neoadjuvant docetaxel, cisplatin plus S-1 (DCS) therapy is superior to docetaxel, cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (DCF) therapy for resectable advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with resectable advanced ESCC at our hospital between January 2010 and December 2019 underwent either neoadjuvant DCF therapy or DCS therapy, followed by radical esophagectomy. Prior to August 2014, we usually used neoadjuvant DCF therapy; we then completely transitioned to using neoadjuvant DCS therapy. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients received one of these triplet regimens as neoadjuvant chemotherapy: DCF therapy to 67 patients and DCS therapy to 77 patients. After propensity score matching, 55 patients in each group were selected as matched cohorts. There was no significant difference between the groups in complete response (DCF = 7.3%, DCS = 9.1%) or in partial response (DCF = 45.4%, DCS = 52.7%). The pathological response rate was 23.8% for grade 2 and 18.2% for grade 3 in the DCF group, compared with 30.9% and 14.5% in the DCS group. Independent predictive factors for recurrence-free survival were poor clinical response and pathological response ≤1b. Independent prognostic factors for overall survival were poor clinical response, anastomotic leakage, and pathological response ≤1b. Duration of hospital stays in the DCS group was significantly shorter than those of the DCF group (6.0 vs. 15.0 days, p < 0.001). Expenses of drug and hospitalization for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the DCS group were also significantly lower than those of the DCF group (265.7 vs. 550.3 USD, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant DCS therapy for resectable advanced ESCC did not result in significantly higher clinical and pathological response than neoadjuvant DCF therapy. However, neoadjuvant DCS therapy for resectable ESCC required comparatively shorter hospital stays and incurred lower costs, making it an attractive therapeutic option.