Real-World Clinical Outcomes and Treatment Patterns Among Black and Non-Black Patients With Prostate Cancer Initiated on Apalutamide in a Urology Setting.

Background: The use of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors, including apalutamide, in combination with androgen deprivation therapy is recommended for the treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) and non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Objective: To describe real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with mCSPC or nmCRPC who initiated apalutamide in the United States. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients with mCSPC or nmCRPC who initiated apalutamide was conducted using electronic medical record data from US community-based urology practices (Feb. 1, 2017-April 1, 2022). Persistence with apalutamide was reported at 6-, 12-, and 18-months post treatment initiation. Clinical outcomes described up to 24 months after apalutamide initiation using Kaplan-Meier analyses included progression to castration resistance, castration resistance-free survival (CRFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS). Outcomes were reported separately based on mCSPC or nmCRPC status and race (ie, Black or non-Black). Results: This study included 589 patients with mCSPC (mean age, 75.9 years) and 406 patients with nmCRPC (mean age, 78.8 years). Using a treatment gap of >90 days, persistence with apalutamide at 12 months remained high for both the mCSPC (94.9%) and nmCRPC (92.7%) cohorts, and results were descriptively similar among Black and non-Black patients, and when a treatment gap of >60 days was considered. In patients with mCSPC, overall progression to castration resistance rates at 12 and 24 months were 20.9% and 33.5%, and overall CRFS rates were 76.2% and 62.0%, respectively. In patients with nmCRPC, overall MFS rates at 12 and 24 months were 89.7% and 75.4%, respectively. Rates of these clinical outcomes were descriptively similar between Black and non-Black patients. Discussion: While clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of apalutamide, there is limited real-world data describing treatment persistence and clinical outcomes among patients with mCSPC and nmCRPC who initiated apalutamide. Conclusions: In this real-world study of patients with mCSPC or nmCRPC initiated on apalutamide, treatment persistence was high and apalutamide demonstrated robust real-world effectiveness with respect to progression to castration resistance, CRFS, and MFS, overall and among Black and non-Black patients.

PSA doubling time 4.65 months as an optimal cut-off of Japanese nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

A multicenter study of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) was conducted to identify the optimal cut-off value of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time (PSADT) that correlated with the prognosis in Japanese nmCRPC. Of the 515 patients diagnosed and treated for nmCRPC at 25 participating Japanese Urological Oncology Group centers, 450 patients with complete clinical information were included. The prognostic values of clinical factors were evaluated with respect to prostate specific antigen progression-free (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). The optimal cutoff value of PSADT was identified using survival tree analysis by Python. The Median PSA and PSADT at diagnosis of nmCRPC were 3.3 ng/ml, and 5.2 months, respectively. Patients treated with novel hormonal therapy (NHT) showed significantly longer PFS (HR: hazard ratio 0.38, p < 0.0001) and PFS2 (HR 0.45, p < 0.0001) than those treated with vintage nonsteroidal antiandrogen agent (Vintage). The survival tree identified 4.65 months as the most prognostic PSADT cutoff point. Among the clinical and pathological factors PSADT of < 4.65 months remained an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 2.96, p = 0.0003) and CSS (HR 3.66, p < 0.0001). Current data represented optimal cut-off of PSADT 4.65 months for a Japanese nmCRPC.

Appropriate definition of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and optimal timing of androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI).

BACKGROUND: Defined by rising PSA levels under androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) despite no visible metastases on conventional imaging, non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) represents a complex clinical challenge. A significant subset of these patients rapidly develops metastatic disease, negatively impacting survival. We examined the difference in prognosis of nmCRPC patients according to the timing of therapeutic interventions with androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI). METHODS: We examined 102 nmCRPC patients treated with ARSI. We divided patients according to their PSA levels when ARSI was administered: Cohort A (PSA 0.5-2.0 ng/mL), Cohort B (PSA 2.0-4.0 ng/mL), and Cohort C (PSA > 4.0 ng/mL). Utilizing the Kaplan-Meier method for survival analysis, our analytical starting point was the moment when PSA levels exceeded 0.5 ng/mL post-ADT nadir, ensuring a fair comparison and minimizing lead-time bias. RESULTS: After excluding 5 patients whose PSA nadir after ADT > 0.5 ng/mL, patient distribution across Cohort A, Cohort B, and Cohort C was 32, 24, and 41 patients, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis highlighted a 2-year metastasis-free survival rate of 97% for Cohort A, 87% for Cohort B, and 73% for Cohort C. A marked statistical difference emerged when comparing Cohort A with Cohorts B and C, with a p-value of 0.043. CONCLUSION: The timely initiation of ARSI is paramount in nmCRPC management. Our findings strongly advocate for consideration of ARSI administration in nmCRPC patients before their PSA levels exceed 2.0 ng/mL. Our results indicated a PSA threshold of 1.0 ng/mL for nmCRPC definition which is more reasonable to administer ARSI without delay.

Physician preferences for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment in China.

Introduction: The treatment preferences of Chinese physicians who treat nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and how they weigh the benefits and risks of nmCRPC treatment are still unknown. This study aimed to evaluate Chinese physicians' benefit-risk treatment preferences for nmCRPC and assist in setting nmCRPC treatment goals. Methods: A paper-based discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey was administered to 80 nmCRPC-treating physicians. DCE responses were analyzed to produce the preference weight and the relative importance score for each attribute level. The marginal rate of substitution (MRS) was used to quantify the amount of overall survival (OS) physicians were willing to trade for a reduction in treatment-related adverse events (AEs). We further conducted the exploratory analysis, stratifying physicians from 5 perspectives into different subgroups and examining the treatment preferences and OS trade-off in each subgroup. Results: In terms of efficacy attributes, physicians placed greater emphasis on OS than time to pain progression. With regard to safety attributes, serious fracture was perceived as the most important AE by physicians, followed by serious fall, cognitive problems, skin rash, and fatigue. In the exploratory analysis, we found generally that physicians with less clinical practice experience and those from more economically developed regions placed more emphasis on AEs and were willing to give up more of their patients' OS to reduce the risk of AEs. Conclusion: Physicians from mainland China value the importance of minimizing treatment-related AEs when considering different treatment options for patients with nmCRPC, and they are willing to trade a substantial amount of OS to avoid AEs.

Effectiveness and safety of enzalutamide and apalutamide in the treatment of patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC): a multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Phase III clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of enzalutamide and apalutamide in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and PSA doubling time ≤10 months. Although these drugs have been shown to vary in their adverse event (AE) profiles, the differences in their efficacy profiles remain to be evaluated. Therefore, this retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of these drugs in patients with nmCRPC. METHODS: This study evaluated 191 patients with nmCRPC treated with enzalutamide (n = 137) or apalutamide (n = 54) in the first-line setting at Jikei University Hospital or its affiliated hospitals between May 2014 and November 2022. Endpoints were defined as oncological outcomes (i.e., PSA response, PFS, PSA-PFS, MFS, CSS, and OS) and AEs. RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in patient backgrounds between the two groups. Patients exhibiting a maximum PSA response of >50% and >90% accounted for 74.5% and 48.9% of patients in the enzalutamide group, and 75.9% and 42.6% of patients in the apalutamide group, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups. The median PSA-PFS was 10 months in the enzalutamide group but not in the apalutamide group, with no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.48). No significant differences were observed in MFS, CSS, or OS between the groups. Patients reporting AEs of all grades and grade 3 or higher accounted for 56.2% and 4.3% of those in the enzalutamide group and 57.4% and 7.4% of those in the apalutamide group, respectively. The most common AE was fatigue (26.3%) in the enzalutamide group and skin rash (27.8%) in the apalutamide group. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study of their efficacy and safety, enzalutamide and apalutamide were shown to exhibit comparable oncological outcomes but quite different AE profiles, suggesting that their differential use may be warranted based on these findings.

The treatment landscape of nonmetastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer: A contemporary perspective.

OBJECTIVES: The incidence of nonmetastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is not well defined in contemporary practice. The aim of this study is to describe the incidence and patterns of treatment of nmCRPC over the last 6 years at a single high-volume Australian health institution. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer at Western Health, Melbourne from January 2016 to December 2021 were included in the study. Those diagnosed with nonmetastatic prostate cancer and treated with medical or surgical castration for biochemical failure post attempted curative therapy were retrospectively reviewed for signs of castration resistance using prostate specific antigen (PSA) and testosterone biochemical markers up until October 2022. RESULTS: From January 2016 to December 2021, 822 patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer, 590 had localized disease, 373 underwent definitive locoregional therapy, and 31 went on to have biochemical recurrence and were commenced on androgen deprivation therapy. Twenty-five patients had undetectable PSA levels and were classified as having nonmetastatic castrate sensitive prostate cancer (nmCSPC), whilst the remaining 6 patients experienced a rising PSA and were thus classified as nmCRPC. The incidence rate of nmCRPC was 228 cases per 100,000 person-years. The median age at the time of prostate biopsy was 74 years (interquartile range [IQR] 64-79) in the nmCRPC group and 62 years (IQR 57-69) in the nmCSPC group. The median prebiopsy PSA (ng/ml) in the nmCRPC and nmCSPC groups were 27.5 (IQR 19.9-50.4), and 16.5 (IQR 9.0-26.0), respectively. The median duration from prostate cancer diagnosis to onset of nmCRPC was 24 months (IQR 17-29) and the median PSA doubling time was 3.4 months (IQR 2.2-5.7). CONCLUSIONS: Thus, nmCRPC is an uncommon disease. Further population-based studies are required to better understand the incidence of nmCRPC.

Real-world effects of novel androgen receptor axis-targeted agents on oncological outcomes in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A multi-institutional retrospective study.

Background: The benefits of novel androgen receptor axis-targeted agents (ARATs) on oncological outcomes in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in real-world settings are unclear. Methods: This multi-institutional retrospective study included 178 patients with nmCRPC treated between September 2003 and August 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: those who were treated with any novel ARATs, including apalutamide, enzalutamide, darolutamide, and abiraterone acetate, during any line of nmCRPC treatment (novel ARATs group) and those who were not (control group). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of novel ARATs on metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: The median age and follow-up period after nmCRPC diagnosis were 76 years and 37 months, respectively. Of the 178 patients, 122 (69%) were treated with novel ARATs after nmCRPC diagnosis. The MFS and OS in the novel ARATs group were significantly longer than those in the control group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.020, respectively). In multivariable analyses, a prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) of <3 months and novel ARATs were independently and significantly associated with MFS and OS. The effects of novel ARATs on MFS were consistently observed across subgroups stratified by age (<75 years or ≥75 years), history of radical treatment (no or yes), biopsy Gleason score (<9 or ≥9), clinical stage (≤cT3 and cN0, or cT4 or cN1), and PSADT (≥3 months or <3 months). Conclusion: Novel ARATs were significantly associated with improved oncological outcomes in patients with nmCRPC in a real-world setting, regardless of tumor aggressiveness.

Drug-drug interaction potential among patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) treated with novel androgen receptor inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients are often older and use concurrent medications that increase the potential for drug-drug interactions (pDDIs). This study assessed pDDI prevalence in real-world nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide, darolutamide, or enzalutamide. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Castrated prostate cancer patients without metastases prior to androgen receptor inhibitor initiation were identified retrospectively via Optum Clinformatics Data Mart claims data (8/2019-3/2021). The top 100 concomitant medications were assessed for pDDIs. RESULTS: Among 1,515 patients (mean age: 77 ± 8 years; mean Charlson Comorbidity Index: 3 ± 3), 340 initiated apalutamide, 112 darolutamide, and 1,063 enzalutamide. Common concomitant medication classes were cardiovascular (80%) and central nervous system (52%). Two-thirds of the patients received ≥5 concomitant medications; 30 (30/100 medications) pDDIs were identified for apalutamide and enzalutamide each and 2 (2/100 medications) for darolutamide. Most pDDIs had risk ratings of C or D, but four for apalutamide were rated X. Approximately 58% of the patients on apalutamide, 5% on darolutamide, and 54% on enzalutamide had ≥1 identified pDDI. CONCLUSIONS: Results showed a higher frequency of pDDIs in patients receiving apalutamide and enzalutamide vs darolutamide. The impact of these could not be determined retrospectively. DDI risk should be carefully evaluated when discussing optimal therapy for patients with nmCRPC.

Prostate cancer management in Southeast Asian countries: a survey of clinical practice patterns.

Background: Prostate cancer (PC) has a serious public health impact, and its incidence is rising due to the aging population. There is limited evidence and consensus to guide the management of PC in Southeast Asia (SEA). We present real-world data on clinical practice patterns in SEA for advanced PC care. Method: A paper-based survey was used to identify clinical practice patterns and obtain consensus among the panelists. The survey included the demographics of the panelists, the use of clinical guidelines, and clinical practice patterns in the management of advanced PC in SEA. Results: Most panelists (81%) voted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as the most effective test for early PC diagnosis and risk stratification. Nearly 44% of panelists agreed that prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography imaging for PC diagnostic and staging information aids local and systemic therapy decisions. The majority of the panel preferred abiraterone acetate (67%) or docetaxel (44%) as first-line therapy for symptomatic mCRPC patients. Abiraterone acetate (50%) is preferred over docetaxel as a first-line treatment in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer patients with high-volume disease. However, the panel did not support the use of abiraterone acetate in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients. Apalutamide (75%) is the preferred treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The cost and availability of modern treatments and technologies are important factors influencing therapeutic decisions. All panelists supported the use of generic versions of approved therapies. Conclusion: The survey results reflect real-world management of advanced PC in a SEA country. These findings could be used to guide local clinical practices and highlight the financial challenges of modern healthcare.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts voted on controversial questions where high-level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. TWITTER SUMMARY: Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer is summarised here.

nmCRPC, a look in the continuous care of prostate cancer patients: state of art and future perspectives.

Non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is a clinical setting defined as confirmed rising levels of PSA in patients treated with ADT but without detectable metastases on conventional imaging with computerized tomography (CT) and technetium-99 m scintigraphy. Men with nmCRPC and a PSA doubling time (PSADT) ≤ 10 months are considered at high risk of rapidly developing metastases with a consequent possible impact on survival. Three recent phase III trials have demonstrated, in this setting, the efficacy of adding a next-generation androgen receptor targeted agent (ARTA) to ADT in respect to ADT only, in delaying the development of metastases (metastasis-free survival, MFS) and prolong overall survival. The magnitude of clinical benefit of these agents was even more meaningful if considering the low incidence of drug related adverse events. Our review described the latest advances in the management of nmCRPC, deriving from the pivotal clinical trials, SPARTAN, PROSPER and ARAMIS, in order to support clinicians to optimally manage these patients. Of note, the emergence of novel, more accurate, next-generation imaging techniques (including Ga PSMA-PET/CT), as well as eventual future tumor biomarkers, is modifying the entity and definition of the nmCRPC setting, with a consequent impact on patient's diagnosis and management.

Survival and Economic Impact of Rapid Prostate-Specific Antigen Doubling Time in Patients With Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) is associated with risk of metastasis and survival. This study evaluated the association of PSADT with clinical and economic outcomes in a real-world setting among patients with nmCRPC not receiving novel hormonal therapy (NHT), using 2-month PSADT thresholds. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified Veterans Health Administration patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer and ≥2 PSA increases after medical/surgical castration (2012-2016). The third measurement was the index (CRPC) date. Patients with ≥3 postindex PSA measurements, including index, were followed until death or ≥12 months until disenrollment, study end, or death, and grouped into 2-month cohorts based on postindex PSADT. Cox regression models assessed association between PSADT, time to metastasis, and death. Healthcare resource utilization and costs were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 2800 evaluable patients, median follow-up was 30 months and median PSADT was 17 months. Relative to the reference cohort (PSADT >12 months), all cohorts had significantly higher metastasis risk. PSADT ≤10-month cohorts had significantly greater mortality risk than the reference; hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) ranged from 12.3 (9.2, 16.4) in the PSADT ≤2-month cohort to 1.3 (0.9, 2.0) in the >10 to ≤12-month cohort. Total costs were significantly higher for cohorts up to and including the PSADT >8 to ≤10-month cohort, than for the reference cohort. Mean per patient per month all-cause medical plus pharmacy costs were $6623, $4768, and $4049 in the PSADT ≤2-month, >2 to ≤4-month cohort, and >4 to ≤6-month cohorts, respectively, versus $1911 in the PSADT >12-month cohort (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: Most patients with nmCRPC have PSADT >12 months and a long natural history. For those with shorter PSADT, the risk of metastasis, death, and costs increased. These data can help select patients for NHT and conversely those who can safely delay NHT for nmCRPC.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Darolutamide Combined with Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Patients with High-Risk Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in China.

INTRODUCTION: The increasing incidence of prostate cancer (PC) in China leads to a significant disease burden. Although three novel androgen inhibitors (darolutamide, apalutamide, and enzalutamide) have been approved for patients with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), the economic evaluation of these novel treatments in China remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of darolutamide combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), comparing with apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT, in patients with high-risk nmCRPC from a healthcare system perspective in China. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was developed to capture time spent by patients in three health states: nmCRPC, metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), and death. Clinical outcomes from the ARAMIS, PROSPER, and SPARTAN studies were obtained. In the absence of head-to-head studies, indirect treatment comparisons were conducted to capture the comparative effectiveness between darolutamide + ADT, apalutamide + ADT, and enzalutamide + ADT. The prices of apalutamide and enzalutamide were assumed to be the same as the initial launch price of darolutamide, since post-negotiation prices after national reimbursement drug list (NRDL) inclusion remain confidential. Other health resources costs, baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and utility were collected through literature or clinical expert interviews. Selected sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: For a 20-year time horizon, darolutamide + ADT was associated with lower cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT (202,897 Chinese yuan (CNY)/QALY vs. 228,998 CNY/QALY and 221,409 CNY/QALY, respectively) (exchange rate, 1 USD = 6.7871 CNY). Darolutamide + ADT had better health outcomes and lower total costs compared to both apalutamide + ADT (+ 0.22 QALYs and - 72,818 CNY) and enzalutamide + ADT (+ 0.09 QALYs and - 67,451 CNY). Across the modelled sensitivity analyses (including hazard ratios and drug costs), darolutamide + ADT remained dominant or cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: This economic evaluation suggested that, in comparison with apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT, darolutamide + ADT was a dominant or cost-effective treatment option for patients with high-risk nmCRPC in China.

Sequential therapy with darolutamide in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer resistant to enzalutamide or apalutamide.

Enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide are currently recommended for patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), but cross-resistance of androgen receptor-axis-targeted therapies (ARAT) occurs. Because darolutamide has a distinct chemical structure to other non-steroidal antiandrogens, it may be effective for nmCRPC patients resistant to enzalutamide or apalutamide. We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of switching to darolutamide in patients with nmCRPC. We included nine nmCRPC patients who experienced biochemical progression on enzalutamide or apalutamide and were switched over to darolutamide. Five patients (55.5%) had a PSA response >50% decline after starting darolutamide, with an average of 73% PSA decline. Median progression-free survival was 6 months. In conclusion, an ARAT switch from enzalutamide or apalutamide to darolutamide might be effective for nmCRPC. Although the validation in a large-scale cohort is necessary, the switch to darolutamide could be a promising therapeutic option after the progression of 1st line ARAT in nmCRPC patients.

Early prostate-specific antigen response among Black and non-Black patients with advanced prostate cancer treated with apalutamide.

Aim: To assess reduction in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels among Black and non-Black patients treated with apalutamide for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) or metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). Patients & methods: Patients were identified from electronic medical data. PSA reduction (≥50%, ≥90% or below 0.2 ng/ml) after apalutamide initiation was assessed. Results: A total of 313 patients with nmCRPC and 260 patients with mCSPC were identified. The majority of patients treated with apalutamide achieved a 90% reduction in PSA regardless of indication or race. The proportion of patients achieving a PSA reduction at any level was similar among Black and non-Black patients and was consistent with apalutamide phase III trials. Conclusion: In routine clinical practice, apalutamide consistently produced reduction in PSA levels in Black and non-Black men with nmCRPC or mCSPC.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer: The radiation oncologist's perspective.

Prostate cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality in men. In patients undergoing a failure after radical treatment, one of the therapeutic option is androgen deprivation: despite initial response rates, a progression to a state of castration resistance is observed in most of the patients. In the present article, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all clinical trials assessing treatment for nmCRPC with next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. We performed a review and meta-analysis of phase III randomized controlled trials comparing new agents (apalutamide, enzalutamide, darolutamide) with placebo as control arm, in the setting of nmCRPC. Patients treated with next-generation ARIs had a 26% reduction in the risk of death compared with placebo; compared with other ARIs, darolutamide had the lowest rate of grade 3 and 4 AEs and the lowest therapy discontinuation rate due to any grade AEs. This meta-analysis shows that treatment with new ARIs is safe and significantly reduces the risk of death and of metastasis onset in nmCRPC patients. Under way studies on new biomarkers such as genomic classifiers will probably allow the stratification in more specific subsets of disease. New imaging modalities such as PSMA-PET have shown greater sensibility and specificity than conventional imaging in metastases detection. All patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion, with a total of 2,694 who underwent next-generation ARIs (806 apalutamide, 955 darolutamide, 933 enzalutamide) and 1,423 in the placebo arm.

The Health Economics of Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive and Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer-A Systematic Literature Review with Application to the Canadian Context.

Background: Health economic evaluations are needed to assess the impact on the healthcare system of emerging treatment patterns for advanced prostate cancer. The objective of this study is to review the scientific literature identifying cost-effectiveness and cost analyses that are assessing treatments for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Methods: On 29 June 2021, we searched the scientific (MEDLINE, Embase, and EBSCO) and grey literature for health economic studies targeting mHSPC and nmCRPC. We used the CHEC-extended checklist and the Welte checklist for risk-of-bias assessment and transferability analysis, respectively. Results: We retained 20 cost-effectiveness and 4 cost analyses in the mHSPC setting, and 14 cost-effectiveness and 6 cost analyses in the nmCRPC setting. Docetaxel in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was the most cost-effective treatment in the mHSPC setting. Apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide presented similar results vs. ADT alone and were identified as cost-effective treatments for nmCRPC. An increase in costs as patients transitioned from nmCRPC to mCRPC was noted. Conclusions: We concluded that there is an important unmet need for health economic evaluations in the mHSPC and nmCRPC setting incorporating real-world data to support healthcare decision making.

Decisions and dilemmas in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer management.

Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) indicates a condition characterized by the progression of the prostate-specific antigen without radiographic evidence of distant metastasis on conventional imaging during androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Recently, 3 phase III trials have shown that the addition of next-generation androgen-receptor inhibitors (ARIs) apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide to ADT allows patients with high-risk nmCRPC to delay the appearance of metastasis and to obtain long-term clinical benefits. However, the lack of head-to head comparison makes it difficult to choose one among these agents. We reviewed the literature and explained the rationale of the possible therapeutic choices. In any case, the availability of novel ARIs means that patients with nmCRPC have now a new effective treatment option that provides them a renewed hope.

Apalutamide, Darolutamide and Enzalutamide for Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (nmCRPC): A Critical Review.

Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) represents a condition in which patients with prostate cancer show biochemical progression during treatment with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) without signs of radiographic progression according to conventional imaging. The SPARTAN, ARAMIS and PROSPER trials showed that apalutamide, darolutamide and enzalutamide, respectively, prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) of nmCRPC patients with a short PSA doubling time, and these antiandrogens have been recently introduced in clinical practice as a new standard of care. No direct comparison of these three agents has been conducted to support treatment choice. In addition, a significant proportion of nmCRPC on conventional imaging is classified as metastatic with new imaging modalities such as the prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET). Some experts posit that these "new metastatic" patients should be treated as mCRPC, resizing the impact of nmCRPC trials, whereas other authors suggest that they should be treated as nmCRPC patients, based on the design of pivotal trials. This review discusses the most convincing evidence regarding the use of novel antiandrogens in patients with nmCRPC and the implications of novel imaging techniques for treatment selection.

Prospects of Treating Prostate Cancer through Apalutamide: A Mini-Review.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is considered the second most diagnosed cancer, and one of the most common causes of death from cancer in men. Apalutamide is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated agent used for the treatment of men with non-metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (nmCRPC) and metastatic Hormone-Naive Prostate Cancer (mHNPC). Androgen receptor signaling is a leading factor that drives these prostate tumors. USFDA has approved apalutamide on 14 February 2018 as an agent that targets androgen receptor signaling through inhibition causing significant improvement in metastasis-free survival in patients with prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: In this review, various aspects related to apalutamide have been summarized which involve the mechanism of action, chemistry, synthesis, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, adverse reactions, and safety parameters. METHODS: The literature was thoroughly searched in the relevant databases to identify studies published in this field during recent years. Special attention has been given to apalutamide clinical trials phases and its promising future as one of the first-line agents for the treatment of patients with advanced prostate cancer. RESULTS: Ongoing trials are progressing for apalutamide monotherapy and also for its combinations in other disease settings. The expected results of such trials will shape the future scenario of prostate cancer therapy. CONCLUSION: This review article has highlighted different aspects of Apalutamide like its mechanism of action, adverse effects, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical trials among others. The contents of this article should make an excellent read for prospective researchers in this field.