Definitions of disease burden across the spectrum of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: comparison by disease outcomes and genomics.

BACKGROUND: Several definitions have attempted to stratify metastatic castrate-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) into low and high-volume states. However, at this time, comparison of these definitions is limited. Here we aim to compare definitions of metastatic volume in mCSPC with respect to clinical outcomes and mutational profiles. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with biochemically recurrent or mCSPC whose tumors underwent somatic targeted sequencing. 294 patients were included with median follow-up of 58.3 months. Patients were classified into low and high-volume disease per CHAARTED, STAMPEDE, and two numeric (≤3 and ≤5) definitions. Endpoints including radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), time to development of castration resistance (tdCRPC), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank test. The incidence of driver mutations between definitions were compared. RESULTS: Median OS and tdCRPC were shorter for high-volume than low-volume disease for all four definitions. In the majority of patients (84.7%) metastatic volume classification did not change across all four definitions. High volume disease was significantly associated with worse OS for all four definitions (CHAARTED: HR 2.89; p < 0.01, STAMPEDE: HR 3.82; p < 0.01, numeric ≤3: HR 4.67; p < 0.01, numeric ≤5: HR 3.76; p < 0.01) however, were similar for high (p = 0.95) and low volume (p = 0.79) disease across all four definitions. Those with discordant classification tended to have more aggressive clinical behavior and mutational profiles. Patients with low-volume disease and TP53 mutation experienced a more aggressive course with rPFS more closely mirroring high-volume disease. CONCLUSIONS: The spectrum of mCSPC was confirmed across four different metastatic definitions for clinical endpoints and genetics. All definitions were generally similar in classification of patients, outcomes, and genetic makeup. Given these findings, the simplicity of numerical definitions might be preferred, especially when integrating metastasis directed therapy. Incorporation of tumor genetics may allow further refinement of current metastatic definitions.

It doesn't always pay to be fit: success landscapes.

Landscapes play an important role in many areas of biology, in which biological lives are deeply entangled. Here we discuss a form of landscape in evolutionary biology which takes into account (1) initial growth rates, (2) mutation rates, (3) resource consumption by organisms, and (4) cyclic changes in the resources with time. The long-term equilibrium number of surviving organisms as a function of these four parameters forms what we call a success landscape, a landscape we would claim is qualitatively different from fitness landscapes which commonly do not include mutations or resource consumption/changes in mapping genomes to the final number of survivors. Although our analysis is purely theoretical, we believe the results have possibly strong connections to how we might treat diseases such as cancer in the future with a deeper understanding of the interplay between resource degradation, mutation, and uncontrolled cell growth.

Phase II study of cilengitide (EMD 121974, NSC 707544) in patients with non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, NCI-6735. A study by the DOD/PCF prostate cancer clinical trials consortium.

BACKGROUND: Integrins mediate invasion and angiogenesis in prostate cancer bone metastases. We conducted a phase II study of cilengitide, a selective antagonist of α(v)ß(3) and α(v)ß(5) integrins, in non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer with rising PSA. METHODS: Patients were observed for 4 weeks with PSA monitoring, and then treated with 2,000 mg IV of cilengitide twice weekly until toxicity/progression. PSA, circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating endothelial cells (CECs) were monitored each cycle with imaging performed every three cycles. Primary end point was PSA decline by ≥ 50%. Secondary endpoints were safety, PSA slope, time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), CTCs, CECs and gene expression. RESULTS: 16 pts were enrolled; 13 were eligible with median age 65.5 years, baseline PSA 8.4 ng/mL and median Gleason sum 7. Median of three cycles was administered. Treatment was well tolerated with two grade three toxicities and no grade four toxicities. There were no PSA responses; 11 patients progressed by PSA after three cycles. Median TTP was 1.8 months and median OS has not been reached. Median pre- and on-treatment PSA slopes were 1.1 and 1.8 ng/mL/month. Baseline CTCs were detected in 1/9 patients. CTC increased (0 to 1; 2 pts), remained at 0 (2 pts) or decreased (23 to 0; 1 patient) at progression. Baseline median CEC was 26 (0-61) and at progression, 47 (15-148). Low cell counts precluded gene expression studies. CONCLUSIONS: Cilengitide was well tolerated but had no detectable clinical activity. CTCs are of questionable utility in non-metastatic prostate cancer.