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.

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.

Repeat Next-Generation Sequencing Testing on Progression in Men With Metastatic Prostate Cancer Can Identify New Actionable Alterations.

PURPOSE: There are limited data available on the real-world patterns of molecular testing in men with advanced prostate cancer. We thus sought to evaluate next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing in the United States, focused on single versus serial NGS testing, the different disease states of testing (hormone-sensitive v castration-resistant, metastatic vs nonmetastatic), tissue versus plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assays, and how often actionable data were found on each NGS test. METHODS: The Prostate Cancer Precision Medicine Multi-Institutional Collaborative Effort clinical-genomic database was used for this retrospective analysis, including 1,597 patients across 15 institutions. Actionable NGS data were defined as including somatic alterations in homologous recombination repair genes, mismatch repair deficiency, microsatellite instability (MSI-high), or a high tumor mutational burden ≥10 mut/MB. RESULTS: Serial NGS testing (two or more NGS tests with specimens collected more than 60 days apart) was performed in 9% (n = 144) of patients with a median of 182 days in between test results. For the second NGS test and beyond, 82.1% (225 of 274) of tests were from ctDNA assays and 76.1% (217 of 285) were collected in the metastatic castration-resistant setting. New actionable data were found on 11.1% (16 of 144) of second NGS tests, with 3.5% (5 of 144) of tests detecting a new BRCA2 alteration or MSI-high. A targeted therapy (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor or immunotherapy) was given after an actionable result on the second NGS test in 31.3% (5 of 16) of patients. CONCLUSION: Repeat somatic NGS testing in men with prostate cancer is infrequently performed in practice and can identify new actionable alterations not present with initial testing, suggesting the utility of repeat molecular profiling with tissue or blood of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer to guide therapy choices.

Prostatectomy in oligometastatic prostate cancer: a call for high-quality evidence.

The systematic review by Saouli et al. investigates the role of radical prostatectomy (RP) in managing oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPCa) [1]. They analyzed the existing literature to assess the oncological and functional outcomes of RP for these patients. RP is feasible and has an acceptable risk of complications. However, the lack of consensus on the definitions of omPCa and the low-quality evidence of the available comparative and retrospective studies, RP in omPCa should not be recommended outside of clinical trials.

Barriers to Clinical Trial Implementation Among Community Care Centers.

Importance: While an overwhelming majority of patients diagnosed with cancer express willingness to participate in clinical trials, only a fraction will enroll onto a research protocol. Objective: To identify critical barriers to trial enrollment to translate findings into actionable practice changes that increase cancer clinical trial enrollment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included designated site contacts at oncology practices with teams who were highly involved with the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) Community Oncology Research Institute (ACORI) clinical trials activities, all American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-ACCC collaboration pilot sites, and/or sites providing care to at least 25% African American and Hispanic residents. To determine participation trends among health care practices in oncology-focused research, identify barriers to clinical trial implementation and operation, and establish unmet needs for cancer clinics interested in trial participation, a 34-question survey was designed. Survey questions were defined within 3 categories: cancer center demographic characteristics, clinical trial characteristics, and referral practices. The survey was distributed through email and was open from June 20 through October 5, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participation in and barriers to conducting oncology trials in different community oncology settings. Results: The survey was distributed to 100 cancer centers, with completion by 58 centers (58%) across 25 states. Fifty-two centers (88%) reported that they conduct therapeutic clinical trials, of which 33 (63%) were from urban settings, 11 (21%) were from suburban settings, and 8 (15%) were from rural settings. Only 25% of rural practices (2 of 8) offered phase 1 trials, compared with 67% of urban practices (22 of 33) (P = .01). Respondents noted challenges in conducting research, including patient recruitment (27 respondents [52%]), limited staffing (27 [52%]), and nonrelevant trials for their patient population (25 [48%]). Among sites not offering therapeutic trials, barriers to research conduct included limited infrastructure, funding, and staffing. Most centers (46 of 58 [79%]) referred patients to outside centers for clinical trial enrollment, particularly in the context of late-stage disease and/or disease progression. Only 17 of these sites (37%) had established protocols for patient follow-up subsequent to outside referral. Conclusions and Relevance: In this national survey study of barriers to clinical trial implementation, most sites offered therapeutic trials, but there were significant disparities in trial availability across care settings. Furthermore, fundamental deficiencies in trial support infrastructure limited research activity, including within programs currently conducting research as well as at sites interested in future clinical research opportunities. These results identify crucial unmet needs for oncology clinics to effectively offer clinical trials to patients seeking care.

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.

Evaluating relugolix for the treatment of prostate cancer in real-world settings of care: the OPTYX study protocol.

OPTYX is a multi-center, prospective, observational study designed to further understand the actual experience of patients with advanced prostate cancer treated with relugolix (ORGOVYX®), an oral androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), by collecting clinical and patient-reported outcomes from routine care settings. The study aims to enroll 1000 consented patients with advanced prostate cancer from community, academic and government operated clinical practices across the USA. At planned timepoints, real-world data analysis on treatment patterns, adherence and safety as well as health outcomes and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) after treatment discontinuation will be published in scientific peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences. This study will provide real-world data for practitioners and researchers in their understanding of the safety and effectiveness of relugolix. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05467176 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

What is this summary about? This is a protocol summary for a research study named OPTYX. Who can participate in this research? Men 18 or older with advanced prostate cancer initiating treatment with relugolix, an oral androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), at the time of enrollment or within the 1 month before enrollment (remaining on treatment at enrollment) and are willing and able to complete patient assessments during the study. What institutions are performing this research? Community practices, academic institutions and Veterans Health Administration facilities across the USA. What are the research assessments to obtain the results? Data will be collected from the routine medical visits twice yearly including patient demographics, medical history (co-morbidities and cardiac risk factors), prostate cancer history and treatments and test results (routine lab testosterone, PSA levels and imaging). Relugolix response and all serious adverse events (SAEs) and any nonserious adverse events (AE) leading to relugolix treatment discontinuation will be assessed. Patients will be asked to respond to evaluations about their health-related quality of life and adherence to relugolix treatment. How long would the study last? Up to 5 years from enrollment date and/or up to 2 years after relugolix discontinuation. Follow-up will end with consent withdrawal, loss to follow-up, death, or study termination, whichever comes first. What do the results of the study mean? Real-world understanding of the experience and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced prostate cancer in routine clinical care and their clinical trajectory following cessation of relugolix therapy.

Three- and Seven-month Prostate-specific Antigen Levels as Prognostic Markers for Overall Survival in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Results from SWOG S1216, a Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Androgen Deprivation Plus Orteronel or Bicalutamide.

BACKGROUND: A robust decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in response to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been evaluated as a prognostic factor in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) since 2006, but the treatment of mHSPC has since evolved to include intensified therapy. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the association of PSA levels at 3 (PSA-3mo) and 7 (PSA-7mo) mo with overall survival (OS) in patients with mHSPC treated with ADT combined with either bicalutamide or orteronel in the S1216 phase 3 clinical trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: PSA responses to treatment of patients in the S1216 trial were categorized as: complete response (CR) if PSA was ≤0.2 ng/ml, partial response if PSA was >0.2 and ≤4 ng/ml, and no response (NR) if PSA was >4 ng/ml. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: A Cox analysis (adjusted for treatment arm and three stratification factors: performance status, severity of disease, and early vs late induction) was used for OS association. While PSA-7mo association was a prespecified objective, PSA-3mo association was also evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 1251 and 1231 patients from the S1216 study were evaluable for PSA-3mo and PSA-7mo, respectively. A PSA-7mo CR was associated with improved OS compared with NR (HR: 0.20; p < 0.0001). A PSA-3mo CR showed a similar association to NR (HR: 0.34; p < 0.0001). The association of a PSA response with survival did not differ by treatment arm at either time point. CONCLUSIONS: The PSA-3mo and PSA-7mo responses were strongly associated with OS; taken with other emerging prognostic biomarkers, these markers may allow for early identification of patients at the highest risk of death, aid with counseling in clinical practice, and permit design of future clinical trials targeting these patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: A low prostate-specific antigen level at 3 or 7 mo after starting treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer predicts longer survival regardless of the first treatment given with androgen deprivation therapy.

Tumor Mutational Burden in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer and Response to Checkpoint Inhibition.

This single-center cohort study assesses the association of tumor mutational burden status in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Fasting-mimicking diet causes hepatic and blood markers changes indicating reduced biological age and disease risk.

In mice, periodic cycles of a fasting mimicking diet (FMD) protect normal cells while killing damaged cells including cancer and autoimmune cells, reduce inflammation, promote multi-system regeneration, and extend longevity. Here, we performed secondary and exploratory analysis of blood samples from a randomized clinical trial (NCT02158897) and show that 3 FMD cycles in adult study participants are associated with reduced insulin resistance and other pre-diabetes markers, lower hepatic fat (as determined by magnetic resonance imaging) and increased lymphoid to myeloid ratio: an indicator of immune system age. Based on a validated measure of biological age predictive of morbidity and mortality, 3 FMD cycles were associated with a decrease of 2.5 years in median biological age, independent of weight loss. Nearly identical findings resulted from  a second clinical study (NCT04150159). Together these results provide initial support for beneficial effects of the FMD on multiple cardiometabolic risk factors and biomarkers of biological age.

Clinical implications of AR alterations in advanced prostate cancer: a multi-institutional collaboration.

BACKGROUND: AR gene alterations can develop in response to pressure of testosterone suppression and androgen receptor targeting agents (ARTA). Despite this, the relevance of these gene alterations in the context of ARTA treatment and clinical outcomes remains unclear. METHODS: Patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) who had undergone genomic testing and received ARTA treatment were identified in the Prostate Cancer Precision Medicine Multi-Institutional Collaborative Effort (PROMISE) database. Patients were stratified according to the timing of genomic testing relative to the first ARTA treatment (pre-/post-ARTA). Clinical outcomes such as time to progression, PSA response, and overall survival were compared based on alteration types. RESULTS: In total, 540 CRPC patients who received ARTA and had tissue-based (n = 321) and/or blood-based (n = 244) genomic sequencing were identified. Median age was 62 years (range 39-90) at the time of the diagnosis. Majority were White (72.2%) and had metastatic disease (92.6%) at the time of the first ARTA treatment. Pre-ARTA genomic testing was available in 24.8% of the patients, and AR mutations and amplifications were observed in 8.2% and 13.1% of the patients, respectively. Further, time to progression was longer in patients with AR amplifications (25.7 months) compared to those without an AR alteration (9.6 months; p = 0.03). In the post-ARTA group (n = 406), AR mutations and AR amplifications were observed in 18.5% and 35.7% of the patients, respectively. The most common mutation in post-ARTA group was L702H (9.9%). CONCLUSION: In this real-world clinicogenomics database-driven study we explored the development of AR alterations and their association with ARTA treatment outcomes. Our study showed that AR amplifications are associated with longer time to progression on first ARTA treatment. Further prospective studies are needed to optimize therapeutic strategies for patients with AR alterations.

A Phase I Study of Acapatamab, a Half-life Extended, PSMA-Targeting Bispecific T-cell Engager for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Safety and efficacy of acapatamab, a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) x CD3 bispecific T-cell engager were evaluated in a first-in-human study in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mCRPC refractory to androgen receptor pathway inhibitor therapy and taxane-based chemotherapy received target acapatamab doses ranging from 0.003 to 0.9 mg in dose exploration (seven dose levels) and 0.3 mg (recommended phase II dose) in dose expansion intravenously every 2 weeks. Safety (primary objective), pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity (secondary objectives) were assessed. RESULTS: In all, 133 patients (dose exploration, n = 77; dose expansion, n = 56) received acapatamab. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event seen in 97.4% and 98.2% of patients in dose exploration and dose expansion, respectively; grade ≥ 3 was seen in 23.4% and 16.1%, respectively. Most CRS events were seen in treatment cycle 1; incidence and severity decreased at/beyond cycle 2. In dose expansion, confirmed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses (PSA50) were seen in 30.4% of patients and radiographic partial responses in 7.4% (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1). Median PSA progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.0-4.9], radiographic PFS per Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 was 3.7 months (95% CI: 2.0-5.4). Acapatamab induced T-cell activation and increased cytokine production several-fold within 24 hours of initiation. Treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies were detected in 55% and impacted serum exposures in 36% of patients in dose expansion. CONCLUSIONS: Acapatamab was safe and tolerated and had a manageable CRS profile. Preliminary signs of efficacy with limited durable antitumor activity were observed. Acapatamab demonstrated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic activity.

PRESTO: A Phase III, Open-Label Study of Intensification of Androgen Blockade in Patients With High-Risk Biochemically Relapsed Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (AFT-19).

PURPOSE: Patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BRPC) after radical prostatectomy and a short PSA doubling time are at risk for distant metastases. Apalutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist, and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) prolong survival in the metastatic setting. We evaluated whether intensification of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improves outcomes in BRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRESTO is a randomized phase III, open-label trial in patients with BRPC and PSA doubling time ≤9 months (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03009981). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive a finite 52-week treatment course with ADT control, ADT + apalutamide, or ADT + apalutamide + AAP. The primary end point was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), defined as serum PSA >0.2 ng/mL after treatment completion. RESULTS: Five hundred three patients were enrolled. The median PSA was 1.8 ng/mL (IQR, 1.0-3.6). At the first planned interim analysis, both experimental arms significantly prolonged PSA-PFS compared with the control arm (median, 24.9 months for ADT + apalutamide v 20.3 months for ADT; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.77]; P = .00047; median, 26.0 months for ADT + apalutamide + AAP v 20.0 months for ADT; HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.71]; P = .00008). Median time to testosterone recovery did not differ across treatment arms. The most common grade ≥3 adverse event was hypertension (7.5%, 7.4%, and 18% in ADT, ADT + apalutamide, and ADT + apalutamide + AAP arms, respectively). CONCLUSION: Intensified AR blockade for a finite duration prolongs PSA-PFS with a manageable safety profile, without adversely affecting time to testosterone recovery. The addition of apalutamide to ADT should be considered in patients with high-risk BRPC.

Immuno-Oncology Advances in Genitourinary Cancers.

Immuno-oncology (IO) has made monumental gains in the past decade in the genitourinary space. In this review, we highlight advances with IO in renal cell carcinoma where it now has become standard-of-care frontline therapy in the metastatic setting but also discuss challenges with the initial approach. In urothelial carcinoma, we discuss the growing use of IO including exciting recent updates with IO-based regimens that may soon become the new standard of care. We further discuss difficulties with IO in prostate cancer, germ cell tumors, and penile squamous cell carcinoma. Finally, we highlight advances in IO approaches beyond checkpoint inhibition including the role of the gut microbiome and T-cell redirecting therapies.

Phase I Study of ORIC-101, a Glucocorticoid Receptor Antagonist, in Combination with Enzalutamide in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Progressing on Enzalutamide.

PURPOSE: Increased glucocorticoid receptor (GR) signaling is a proposed compensatory mechanism of resistance to androgen receptor (AR) inhibition in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). ORIC-101 is a potent and selective orally-bioavailable GR antagonist. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Safety, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic, and antitumor activity of ORIC-101 in combination with enzalutamide were studied in patients with mCRPC progressing on enzalutamide. ORIC-101 doses ranging from 80 to 240 mg once daily were tested in combination with enzalutamide 160 mg once daily. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics was assessed after a single dose and at steady state. Disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks was evaluated at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). RESULTS: A total of 41 patients were enrolled. There were no dose-limiting toxicities and the RP2D was selected as 240 mg of ORIC-101 and 160 mg of enzalutamide daily. At the RP2D, the most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (38.7%), nausea (29.0%), decreased appetite (19.4%), and constipation (12.9%). Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data confirmed ORIC-101 achieved exposures necessary for GR target engagement. Overall, for 31 patients treated at the RP2D, there was insufficient clinical benefit based on DCR (25.8%; 80% confidence interval: 15.65-38.52) which did not meet the prespecified target rate, leading to termination of the study. Exploratory subgroup analyses based on baseline GR expression, presence of AR resistance variants, and molecular features of aggressive variant prostate cancer suggested possible benefit in patients with high GR expression and no other resistance markers, although this would require confirmation. CONCLUSIONS: Although the combination of ORIC-101 and enzalutamide demonstrated an acceptable tolerability profile, GR target inhibition with ORIC-101 did not produce clinical benefit in men with metastatic prostate cancer resistant to enzalutamide.

The Combined Effect of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors on Thyroid Function.

Background: Recent successes with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for the treatment of solid malignancies have paved the way for a new era of combined therapy. A common side effect seen with each of these classes of treatment is thyroid dysfunction, with rates estimated at 30-40% for TKI and 10-20% for ICI. However, little is known about the effect of combined ICI+TKI therapy on thyroid function. Therefore, this study evaluated the incidence, clinical features, and risk factors for developing thyroid abnormalities during ICI+TKI therapy and the relationship to cancer outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients treated with combination ICI+TKI cancer therapy at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center from 2017 to 2023 who had pretreatment normal thyrotropin (TSH) levels. Primary analyses assessed the frequency, timing, and severity of thyroid function test abnormalities during ICI+TKI cancer therapy, and the requirement for thyroid hormone replacement. Secondary analyses evaluated risk factors for the development of thyroid dysfunction, including sex and drug regimen, and the association with cancer progression-free survival or overall survival. Univariable and multivariable models were used. Results: There were 106 patients who received ICI+TKI therapy with a median age of 63.5 years and a median follow-up of 12.8 months (interquartile range [IQR] 5.9-20.9). Notably, 63.2% (67/106) developed thyroid function abnormalities during ICI+TKI therapy, including 11 (10.4%) with hyperthyroidism, 42 (39.6%) with subclinical hypothyroidism (SCHypo), and 14 (13.2%) with overt hypothyroidism. The onset of thyroid dysfunction occurred at a median of 7 weeks (IQR 3.1-9.0) after start of ICI+TKI treatment for hyperthyroidism, 8.0 weeks (IQR 3.0-19.0) for SCHypo, and 8.1 weeks (IQR 5.9-9.1) for overt or worsening hypothyroidism. Hyperthyroidism resolved to hypothyroidism or normal TSH without intervention in all subjects, suggesting thyroiditis, and hypothyroidism was readily treated with thyroid hormone replacement. Conclusions: Thyroid dysfunction is a frequent adverse event in individuals treated with combination ICI+TKI therapy, with our data suggesting a rapid onset and higher incidence than previously seen with ICI or TKI therapy alone. Therefore, close monitoring of thyroid function during initial therapy and multidisciplinary care with endocrinology are recommended to facilitate early detection and initiation of thyroid hormone replacement in these patients.

Assessment of eligibility criteria in renal cell carcinoma trials evaluating systemic therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the restrictiveness of eligibility criteria in contemporary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) trials, using recommendations from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-Friends of Cancer Research (FCR) initiative. METHODS: vPhase I-III trials assessing systemic therapies in patients with RCC starting between 30 June 2012 and 30 June 2022 were identified. Eligibility criteria regarding brain metastases, prior or concurrent malignancies, hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection were identified and stratified into three groups: exclusion, conditional inclusion, and not reported. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of eligibility criteria. Fisher's exact test or chi-square test were used to calculate their associations with certain trial characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 423 RCC trials were initially identified of which 112 (26.5%) had sufficient accessible information. Exclusion of patients with HIV infection, HBV/HCV infection, brain metastases, and prior or concurrent malignancies were reported in 74.1%, 53.6%, 33.0%, and 8.0% of trials, respectively. In the context of HIV and HBV/HCV infection, patients were largely excluded from trials evaluating immunotherapy (94.4% and 77.8%, respectively). In addition, brain metastases were excluded in trials assessing targeted therapy (36.4%), combined therapy (33.3%), and immunotherapy (22.2%). Exclusion of patients with prior or concurrent malignancies was less frequently reported, accounting for 9.1%, 8.3%, and 5.6% targeted therapy, combined therapy and immunotherapy trials, respectively. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of RCC trials utilise restrictive eligibility criteria, excluding patients with fairly prevalent comorbidities. Implementing the ASCO-FCR recommendations will ensure resulting data are more inclusive and aligned with patient populations in the real-world.

Xaluritamig, a STEAP1 × CD3 XmAb 2+1 Immune Therapy for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from Dose Exploration in a First-in-Human Study.

Xaluritamig (AMG 509) is a six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate 1 (STEAP1)-targeted T-cell engager designed to facilitate lysis of STEAP1-expressing cancer cells, such as those in advanced prostate cancer. This first-in-human study reports monotherapy dose exploration for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), primarily taxane pretreated. Ninety-seven patients received ≥1 intravenous dose ranging from 0.001 to 2.0 mg weekly or every 2 weeks. MTD was identified as 1.5 mg i.v. weekly via a 3-step dose. The most common treatment-related adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 72%), fatigue (45%), and myalgia (34%). CRS occurred primarily during cycle 1 and improved with premedication and step dosing. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and RECIST responses across cohorts were encouraging [49% PSA50; 24% objective response rate (ORR)], with greater frequency at target doses ≥0.75 mg (59% PSA50; 41% ORR). Xaluritamig is a novel immunotherapy for prostate cancer that has shown encouraging results supporting further development. SIGNIFICANCE: Xaluritamig demonstrated encouraging responses (PSA and RECIST) compared with historical established treatments for patients with late-line mCRPC. This study provides proof of concept for T-cell engagers as a potential treatment for prostate cancer, validates STEAP1 as a target, and supports further clinical investigation of xaluritamig in prostate cancer. See related commentary by Hage Chehade et al., p. 20. See related article by Nolan-Stevaux et al., p. 90. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 5.