A phase II trial of apalutamide for intermediate-risk prostate cancer and molecular correlates.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether 6 months of preoperative apalutamide for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPCa) reduces the aggregate postoperative radiotherapy risk and to evaluate associations of molecular perturbations with clinical outcomes in this study cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 2018 and February 2020, eligible patients with IRPCa (Gleason 3 + 4 or 4 + 3 and clinical T2b-c or prostate-specific antigen level of 10-20 ng/mL) were treated with apalutamide 240 mg/day for 6 months followed by radical prostatectomy (RP) in this single-arm, phase II trial. The primary endpoint was presence of any adverse pathological feature at risk of pelvic radiation (pathological T stage after neoadjuvant therapy [yp]T3 or ypN1 or positive surgical margins). Translational studies, including germline and somatic DNA alterations and RNA and protein expression, were performed on post-apalutamide RP specimens, and assessed for associations with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients underwent a RP, and only one patient discontinued apalutamide prior to 6 months. In all, 40% had adverse pathological features at time of RP, and the 3-year biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate was 15%, with 27.5% being not evaluable. Genomic alterations frequently seen in metastatic PCas, such as androgen receptor (AR), tumour protein p53 (TP53), phosphatase and tensin homologue (PTEN), or BReast CAncer associated gene (BRCA1/2) were underrepresented in this localised cohort. Adverse pathological features and BCR at 3-years were associated with increased expression of select cell cycle (e.g., E2F targets: adjusted P value [Padj] < 0.001, normalised enrichment score [NES] 2.47) and oxidative phosphorylation (Padj < 0.001, NES 1.62) pathways. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative apalutamide did not reduce the aggregate postoperative radiation risk to the pre-specified threshold in unselected men with IRPCa. However, transcriptomic analysis identified key dysregulated pathways in tumours associated with adverse pathological outcomes and BCR, which warrant future study. Further investigation of preoperative therapy is underway for men with high-risk PCa.

True-Positive 18F-Flotufolastat Lesions in Patients with Prostate Cancer Recurrence with Baseline-Negative Conventional Imaging: Results from the Prospective, Phase 3, Multicenter SPOTLIGHT Study.

18F-rhPSMA-7.3 (18F-flotufolastat) is a high-affinity prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted diagnostic radiopharmaceutical for PET imaging in patients with prostate cancer. Here, we report findings from the SPOTLIGHT study (NCT04186845), assessing the performance of 18F-flotufolastat PET/CT for identifying prostate-specific membrane antigen-positive lesions confirmed by standard of truth (SoT) in men with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer and negative conventional imaging at baseline. Methods: Men with biochemical recurrence received 296 MBq of 18F-flotufolastat intravenously and then underwent PET/CT 50-70 min later. 18F-flotufolastat PET/CT findings were evaluated by 3 masked central readers and verified using histopathology or follow-up confirmatory imaging (CT, MRI, bone scan, or 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT) as the SoT. The present analysis evaluated all patients who had negative conventional imaging at baseline, underwent 18F-flotufolastat PET/CT, and had SoT verification by histopathology or follow-up confirmatory imaging to report detection rate (DR), which is the number of patients with at least 1 PET-positive lesion, divided by the number of evaluable patients, and verified DR (VDR), which is the proportion of patients with at least 1 true-positive lesion as verified by SoT, of all patients scanned (PET-positive and PET-negative scans). DR and VDR were calculated and stratified according to prior therapy. Majority read data (agreement between ≥2 readers) are reported. Results: In total, 171 patients with negative baseline conventional imaging and SoT by histopathology or post-PET confirmatory imaging were evaluated. By majority read, the overall 18F-flotufolastat DR among these patients was 95% (163/171; 95% CI, 91.0%-98.0%), and 110 of 171 of these patients had at least 1 true-positive lesion identified (VDR, 64%; 95% CI, 56.7%-71.5%). In the postprostatectomy group (133/171), 8.3% of patients had at least 1 true-positive lesion in the prostate bed, 28% in pelvic lymph nodes, and 35% in other sites. Among those who had received radiotherapy (36/171), 50% of patients had true-positive detections in the prostate, 8.3% in pelvic lymph nodes, and 36% in other sites. Conclusion: 18F-flotufolastat frequently identified true-positive prostate cancer lesions in patients with negative conventional imaging. 18F-flotufolastat may help to better define sites of disease recurrence and inform salvage therapy decisions than does conventional imaging, potentially leading to improved outcomes.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 1.

Purpose: Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy. Results: The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC. Conclusions: CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 2.

Background: Management strategies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have rapidly shifted in recent years. As novel imaging and therapeutic approaches have made their way to the clinic, providers are encountering increasingly challenging clinical scenarios, with limited guidance from the current literature. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) is a multidisciplinary meeting of prostate cancer experts intended to address the many challenges of prostate cancer management. At the first annual USPCC meeting, areas of controversy and consensus were identified during a 2-day meeting that included expert presentations, full-panel discussions, and postdiscussion responses to questions developed by the USPCC cochairs and session moderators. Results: This narrative review covers the USPCC expert discussion and perspectives relevant to mCRPC, including neuroendocrine/aggressive-variant prostate cancer (NEPC/AVPC). Areas of broad agreement identified among USPCC experts include the benefits of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, the use of radioligand therapy in patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive mCRPC, and the need for clinical trials that address real-world clinical questions, including the performance of novel therapies when compared with modern standard-of-care treatment. Ongoing areas of controversy and uncertainty included the appropriateness of PARP inhibitors in patients with non-BRCA1/2 mutations, the optimal definition of PSMA positivity, and systemic therapies for patients with NEPC/AVPC after progression on platinum-based therapies. Conclusions: The first annual USPCC meeting identified several areas of controversy in the management of mCRPC, highlighting the urgent need for clinical trials designed to facilitate treatment selection and sequencing in this heterogeneous disease state.

Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part III: Salvage Therapy After Radiotherapy or Focal Therapy, Pelvic Nodal Recurrence and Oligometastasis, and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part III of a three-part series focusing on evaluation and management of suspected non-metastatic recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, evaluation and management of regional recurrence, management for molecular imaging metastatic recurrence, and future directions. Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous and deliberate efforts for multidisciplinary care in prostate cancer will be required to optimize and improve the oncologic and functional outcomes of patients treated with salvage therapies in the future.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part I: Introduction and Treatment Decision-Making at the Time of Suspected Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part I of a three-part series focusing on treatment decision-making at the time of suspected biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic BCR after RP and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing work in the area of diagnostic tools (particularly imaging), biomarkers, radiation delivery, and biological manipulation with the evolving armamentarium of therapeutic agents will undoubtedly present new opportunities for patients to experience long-term control of their cancer while minimizing toxicity.

Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline Part II: Treatment Delivery for Non-metastatic Biochemical Recurrence After Primary Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part II of a three-part series focusing on treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing and personalizing the approach to salvage therapy remains an ongoing area of work in the field of genitourinary oncology and represents an area of research and clinical care that requires well-coordinated, multi-disciplinary efforts.

The association of body mass index with tumor aggression among men undergoing radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of preoperative body mass index (BMI) on adverse pathology in peripheral (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) tumors at time of prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Clinical and pathologic characteristics were obtained from up to 100 consecutive prostatectomy patients from 10 prostate surgeons. BMI groups included normal (18.5-24.9), overweight (25-29.9) and obese (> 29.9). "Aggressive" pathology was defined as the presence of Grade Group (GG) 3 or higher and/or pT3a or higher. Pathologic characteristics were evaluated for association with BMI using univariate analyses. Our primary outcome was the association of BMI with adverse pathology, which was assessed using logistic regression accounting for patient age. We hypothesized that obese BMI would be associated with aggressive TZ tumor. RESULTS: Among 923 patients, 140 (15%) were classified as "normal" BMI, 413 (45%) were "overweight", and 370 (40%) were "obese." 474 patients (51%) had aggressive PZ tumors while 102 (11%) had aggressive TZ tumors. "Obese" BMI was not associated with aggressive TZ tumor compared to normal weight. Increasing BMI group was associated with overall increased risk of aggressive PZ tumor (HR 1.56 [95CI 1.04-2.34]; P = 0.03). Among patients with GG1 or GG2, increasing BMI was associated with presence of pT3a or higher TZ tumor (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Increased BMI is associated with adverse pathology in PZ tumors. TZ adverse pathology risk may be increased among obese men with GG1 or GG2 disease, which has implications for future studies assessing behavioral change among men whose tumors are actively monitored.

Surgical Management and Considerations for Patients with Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: Localized high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogenous disease state with a wide range of presentations and outcomes. Historically, non-surgical management with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy was the treatment option of choice. However, surgical resection with radical prostatectomy (RP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is increasingly utilized as a primary treatment modality for patients with HRPCa. Recent studies have demonstrated that surgery is an equivalent treatment option in select patients with the potential to avoid the side effects from androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy combined. Advances in imaging techniques and biomarkers have also improved staging and patient selection for surgical resection. Advances in robotic surgical technology grant surgeons various techniques to perform RP, even in patients with HR disease, which can reduce the morbidity of the procedure without sacrificing oncologic outcomes. Clinical trials are not only being performed to assess the safety and oncologic outcomes of these surgical techniques, but to also evaluate the role of surgical resection as a part of a multimodal treatment plan. Further research is needed to determine the ideal role of surgery to potentially provide a more personalized and tailored treatment plan for patients with localized HR PCa.

Association of Frailty and Complications Following Prostate Biopsy: Results From a Population-Based, Privately Insured Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate needle biopsy (PNBx) is essential for prostate cancer diagnosis, yet it is not without risks. We sought to assess patients who underwent PNBx using a claims-based frailty index to study the association between frailty and postbiopsy complications from a large population-based cohort. We hypothesized that increased frailty would be associated with adverse outcomes. METHODS: Using Market Scan, we identified all men who underwent PNBx from 2010 to 2015. Individuals were stratified by claims-based frailty index into 2 prespecified categories: not frail, frail. Complications occurring within 30 days from prostate biopsy requiring emergency department, clinic, or hospital evaluations constituted the primary outcome. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses identified patient covariates associated with complications. RESULTS: We identified 193,490 patients who underwent PNBx. The mean age was 57.6 years (SD: 5.0). In all, 5% were prefrail, mildly frail, or moderately to severely frail. The rate of overall complications increased from 11.1% for not frail to 15.5% for frail men. After adjusting for covariates, individuals with any degree of frailty experienced a higher risk of overall complication (odds ratio [OR]: 1.29; P < .001), clinic (OR: 1.26; P < .001) and emergency department visits (OR: 1.32; P = .02), and hospital readmissions (OR: 1.41; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was associated with a higher risk of complications for patients undergoing PNBx. Frailty assessment should be integrated into shared decision-making to limit the provision of potentially harmful care associated with prostate cancer screening.

Prostate Cancer, Version 4.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions regarding the workup of patients with prostate cancer, risk stratification and management of localized disease, post-treatment monitoring, and treatment of recurrence and advanced disease. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on the management of metastatic castration-sensitive disease, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with treatment intensification is strongly recommended for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. For patients with nonmetastatic CRPC, ADT is continued with or without the addition of certain secondary hormone therapies depending on prostate-specific antigen doubling time. In the mCRPC setting, ADT is continued with the sequential addition of certain secondary hormone therapies, chemotherapies, immunotherapies, radiopharmaceuticals, and/or targeted therapies. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel emphasizes a shared decision-making approach in all disease settings based on patient preferences, prior treatment exposures, the presence or absence of visceral disease, symptoms, and potential side effects.

Archival single-cell genomics reveals persistent subclones during DCIS progression.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a common precursor of invasive breast cancer. Our understanding of its genomic progression to recurrent disease remains poor, partly due to challenges associated with the genomic profiling of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) materials. Here, we developed Arc-well, a high-throughput single-cell DNA-sequencing method that is compatible with FFPE materials. We validated our method by profiling 40,330 single cells from cell lines, a frozen tissue, and 27 FFPE samples from breast, lung, and prostate tumors stored for 3-31 years. Analysis of 10 patients with matched DCIS and cancers that recurred 2-16 years later show that many primary DCIS had already undergone whole-genome doubling and clonal diversification and that they shared genomic lineages with persistent subclones in the recurrences. Evolutionary analysis suggests that most DCIS cases in our cohort underwent an evolutionary bottleneck, and further identified chromosome aberrations in the persistent subclones that were associated with recurrence.

Diagnostic Performance and Safety of Positron Emission Tomography with 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Unfavourable Intermediate- to Very-high-risk Prostate Cancer: Results from a Phase 3, Prospective, Multicentre Study (LIGHTHOUSE).

BACKGROUND: Radiohybrid (rh) 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 is a novel high-affinity prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeting radiopharmaceutical for prostate cancer (PCa) imaging. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance and safety of 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 in newly diagnosed PCa patients planned for prostatectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data on 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 were reported from the phase 3 prospective, multicentre LIGHTHOUSE study (NCT04186819). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patients underwent positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) 50-70 min after an injection of 296 MBq 18F-rhPSMA-7.3. Images were interpreted locally and by three blinded independent readers. The coprimary endpoints were patient-level sensitivity and specificity for the detection of pelvic lymph node (PLN) metastases, validated using histopathology at PLN dissection. Prespecified statistical thresholds (lower bounds of 95% confidence interval [CI]) were set at 22.5% for sensitivity and 82.5% for specificity. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 372 patients screened, 352 had evaluable 18F-rhPSMA-7.3-PET/CT and 296 (99 [33%] with unfavourable intermediate-risk [UIR] and 197 [67%] with high-/very-high-risk [VHR] PCa) subsequently underwent surgery. As per the independent reads, 23-37 (7.8-13%) patients had 18F-rhPSMA-7.3-positive PLN. Seventy (24%) patients had one or more positive PLNs on histopathology. The sensitivity for PLN detection was 30% (95% CI, 19.6-42.1%) for reader 1, 27% (95% CI, 17.2-39.1%) for reader 2, and 23% (95% CI, 13.7-34.4%) for reader 3, not meeting the prespecified threshold. Specificity was 93% (95% CI, 88.8-95.9%), 94% (95% CI, 89.8-96.6%), and 97% (95% CI, 93.7-98.7%), respectively, exceeding the threshold for all readers. Specificity was high (≥92%) across both risk stratifications. Sensitivity was higher among high-risk/VHR (24-33%) than among UIR (16-21%) patients. Extrapelvic (M1) lesions were reported for 56-98/352 (16-28%) patients who underwent 18F-rhPSMA-7.3-PET/CT irrespective of surgery. Verification of these (predominantly by conventional imaging) gave a verified detection rate of 9.9-14% (positive predictive value, 51-63%). No serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Across all risk stratifications, 18F-rhPSMA-7.3-PET/CT had high specificity, meeting the specificity endpoint. The sensitivity endpoint was not met, although higher sensitivity was noted among high-risk/VHR than among UIR patients. Overall, 18F-rhPSMA-7.3-PET/CT was well tolerated, and identified N1 and M1 disease prior to surgery in newly diagnosed PCa patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In order to select the most appropriate treatment for patients with prostate cancer, it is critical to diagnose the disease burden accurately at initial diagnosis. In this study, we investigated a new diagnostic imaging agent in a large population of men with primary prostate cancer. We found it to have an excellent safety profile and to provide clinically useful information regarding the presence of disease beyond the prostate.

Diagnostic Performance and Safety of 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 Positron Emission Tomography in Men With Suspected Prostate Cancer Recurrence: Results From a Phase 3, Prospective, Multicenter Study (SPOTLIGHT).

PURPOSE: SPOTLIGHT (NCT04186845) evaluated diagnostic performance and safety of radiohybrid 18F-rhPSMA-7.3, a novel high-affinity positron emission tomography radiopharmaceutical. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men with prostate cancer recurrence underwent positron emission tomography/CT 50-70 minutes after intravenous administration of 296±20% MBq 18F-rhPSMA-7.3. To assess the coprimary end points (verified detection rate and combined region-level positive predictive value), 3 blinded, independent central readers evaluated the scans. Verified detection rate is equivalent to the overall detection rate × positive predictive value. Standard of truth was established for each patient using histopathology or confirmatory imaging. Statistical thresholds (lower bounds of the confidence intervals) of 36.5% and 62.5% were prespecified for verified detection rate and combined region-level positive predictive value, respectively. Additional end points included detection rate, verified detection rate, and combined region-level positive predictive value in patients with histopathology standard of truth, and safety. RESULTS: The overall 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 detection rate among all 389 patients with an evaluable scan was 83% (majority read). Among the 366 patients (median prostate-specific antigen 1.27 ng/mL) for whom a standard of truth (histopathology [n=69]/confirmatory imaging only [n=297]) was available, verified detection rate ranged from 51% (95% CI 46.1-56.6) to 54% (95% CI 48.8-59.3), exceeding the prespecified statistical threshold. Combined region-level positive predictive value ranged from 46% (95% CI 42.0-50.3) to 60% (95% CI 55.1-65.5) across the readers, not meeting the threshold. In the subset of patients with histopathology standard of truth, the verified detection rate and combined region-level positive predictive value were both above the prespecified thresholds (majority read, 81% [95% CI 69.9-89.6] and 72% [95% CI 62.5-80.7], respectively). No significant safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 offers a clinically meaningful verified detection rate for localization of recurrent prostate cancer. Despite missing the coprimary end point of combined region-level positive predictive value, the totality of the data support the potential clinical utility of 18F-rhPSMA-7.3.

Addition of Metastasis-Directed Therapy to Intermittent Hormone Therapy for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: The EXTEND Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite evidence demonstrating an overall survival benefit with up-front hormone therapy in addition to established synergy between hormone therapy and radiation, the addition of metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) to hormone therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer, to date, has not been evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. Objective: To determine in men with oligometastatic prostate cancer whether the addition of MDT to intermittent hormone therapy improves oncologic outcomes and preserves time with eugonadal testosterone compared with intermittent hormone therapy alone. Design, Setting, Participants: The External Beam Radiation to Eliminate Nominal Metastatic Disease (EXTEND) trial is a phase 2, basket randomized clinical trial for multiple solid tumors testing the addition of MDT to standard-of-care systemic therapy. Men aged 18 years or older with oligometastatic prostate cancer who had 5 or fewer metastases and were treated with hormone therapy for 2 or more months were enrolled to the prostate intermittent hormone therapy basket at multicenter tertiary cancer centers from September 2018 to November 2020. The cutoff date for the primary analysis was January 7, 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to MDT, consisting of definitive radiation therapy to all sites of disease and intermittent hormone therapy (combined therapy arm; n = 43) or to hormone therapy only (n = 44). A planned break in hormone therapy occurred 6 months after enrollment, after which hormone therapy was withheld until progression. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease progression, defined as death or radiographic, clinical, or biochemical progression. A key predefined secondary end point was eugonadal progression-free survival (PFS), defined as the time from achieving a eugonadal testosterone level (≥150 ng/dL; to convert to nanomoles per liter, multiply by 0.0347) until progression. Exploratory measures included quality of life and systemic immune evaluation using flow cytometry and T-cell receptor sequencing. Results: The study included 87 men (median age, 67 years [IQR, 63-72 years]). Median follow-up was 22.0 months (range, 11.6-39.2 months). Progression-free survival was improved in the combined therapy arm (median not reached) compared with the hormone therapy only arm (median, 15.8 months; 95% CI, 13.6-21.2 months) (hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.55; P < .001). Eugonadal PFS was also improved with MDT (median not reached) compared with the hormone therapy only (6.1 months; 95% CI, 3.7 months to not estimable) (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11-0.91; P = .03). Flow cytometry and T-cell receptor sequencing demonstrated increased markers of T-cell activation, proliferation, and clonal expansion limited to the combined therapy arm. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, PFS and eugonadal PFS were significantly improved with combination treatment compared with hormone treatment only in men with oligometastatic prostate cancer. Combination of MDT with intermittent hormone therapy may allow for excellent disease control while facilitating prolonged eugonadal testosterone intervals. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03599765.