Monitoring Glucocorticoid Receptor in Plasma-derived Extracellular Vesicles as a Marker of Resistance to Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibition in Prostate Cancer.

Disease progression following androgen ablation was shown to be associated with upregulation of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR). Longitudinal monitoring of GR expression in circulating extracellular vesicles (EV) may reflect changes in the tumor cell and facilitates detection of acquired resistance. We utilized LNCaP, LREX cells and a patient-derived xenograft, MDA PDX 322-2-6a, for in vitro and in vivo experiments. Plasma-derived EVs were isolated from patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer undergoing androgen ablation. The mRNA levels of GR in EVs and their responsive genes were detected by transcriptome analysis, qRT-PCR and the protein levels by Western blot analysis. We detected changes in GR expression at mRNA and protein levels in EVs derived from LNCaP and LREX cells in in vitro studies. In in vivo experiments, LNCaP and the PDX MDA 322-2-6a-bearing mice were treated with enzalutamide. GR levels in plasma-derived EVs were increased only in those tumors that did not respond to enzalutamide. Treatment of mice bearing enzalutamide-resistant tumors with a GR inhibitor in combination with enzalutamide led to a transient pause in tumor growth in a subset of tumors and decreased GR levels intracellular and in plasma-derived EVs. In a subgroup of patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer treated with androgen signaling inhibition, GR was found upregulated in matching tissue and plasma EVs. These analyses showed that GR levels in plasma-derived EVs may be used for monitoring the transition of GR expression allowing for early detection of resistance to androgen ablation treatment. SIGNIFICANCE: Longitudinal monitoring of GR expression in plasma-derived EVs from patients with prostate cancer treated with androgen signaling inhibitors facilitates early detection of acquisition of resistance to androgen receptor signaling inhibition in individual patients.

The biology behind combining poly [ADP ribose] polymerase and androgen receptor inhibition for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

For about a decade, poly [ADP ribose] polymerases (PARP) inhibitors have been used almost exclusively to treat tumours that are deficient in one of the BRCA genes. In advanced prostate cancer, which is largely driven by the activity of the androgen receptor (AR), accumulating preclinical evidence has suggested an interplay between the AR and PARP, which could be therapeutically exploited independently of defects in the tumour's DNA homologous recombination repair (HRR) machinery. This includes the regulation of HRR genes by the AR, a mutual influence between the activities of PARP and the AR, and the co-localisation of BRCA2 to the retinoblastoma gene in the human genome. Based on these findings, randomised clinical trials have been initiated to study the addition of a PARP inhibitor to AR pathway inhibitor therapy. Three of four randomised studies demonstrated a significantly increased anti-tumour activity in men with metastatic prostate cancer, irrespective of HRR gene alterations. In this review, we summarise the available preclinical evidence that provides the rationale for the combination of inhibitors for PARP and the AR and discuss how it might contribute to the efficacy observed in the clinic.

Plain language summary: Can declines in prostate-specific antigen level indicate how long patients with advanced prostate cancer will live when treated with enzalutamide?

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a research article originally published in the Journal of Urology. The PROSPER study involved men who had a type of advanced prostate cancer called non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In patients with nmCRPC, their prostate cancer keeps growing even after traditional hormone treatments. In these patients, rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels suggest that cancer is active but CT and bone scans show that it has not spread to other parts of the body. Everyone in this study received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) either with the medicine enzalutamide or a placebo. Enzalutamide is a medicine that can slow or stop androgens, such as testosterone, from making prostate cancer grow. The main results of the PROSPER study showed that patients with nmCRPC treated with enzalutamide and ADT lived longer than patients treated with placebo and ADT. In this study, researchers wanted to know if the findings were different depending on how much patients' PSA level declined after enzalutamide treatment. Researchers also wanted to know if this made a difference in how long patients lived without the cancer spreading to other parts of their body. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers found that patients with a large decline in PSA level after treatment were more likely to live longer and without their cancer spreading. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: This study shows a link between PSA level changes and how long patients with nmCRPC live when treated with enzalutamide and ADT. These results may help health professionals monitor patients with different PSA level changes after enzalutamide treatment. Patients with a large decline in PSA level may not need to be monitored as closely as patients with a small decline in PSA level.

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.

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.

Niraparib and Abiraterone Acetate for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease with current standard-of-care therapies. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, including BRCA1/2 alterations, can sensitize cancer cells to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition, which may improve outcomes in treatment-naïve mCRPC when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibition. METHODS: MAGNITUDE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03748641) is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded study that evaluates niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (niraparib + AAP) in patients with (HRR+, n = 423) or without (HRR-, n = 247) HRR-associated gene alterations, as prospectively determined by tissue/plasma-based assays. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib + AAP or placebo + AAP. The primary end point, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) assessed by central review, was evaluated first in the BRCA1/2 subgroup and then in the full HRR+ cohort, with secondary end points analyzed for the full HRR+ cohort if rPFS was statistically significant. A futility analysis was preplanned in the HRR- cohort. RESULTS: Median rPFS in the BRCA1/2 subgroup was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.6 v 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79; P = .001). In the overall HRR+ cohort, rPFS was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.5 v 13.7 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .022). These findings were supported by improvement in the secondary end points of time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In the HRR- cohort, futility was declared per the prespecified criteria. Treatment with niraparib + AAP was tolerable, with anemia and hypertension as the most reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with niraparib + AAP significantly lengthened rPFS in patients with HRR+ mCRPC compared with standard-of-care AAP.[Media: see text].

Nadir Prostate-specific Antigen as an Independent Predictor of Survival Outcomes: A Post Hoc Analysis of the PROSPER Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: This post hoc analysis of PROSPER evaluated the relationship between depth of PSA decline and clinical outcomes in enzalutamide-treated men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PROSPER was an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial that demonstrated significantly improved metastasis-free survival and overall survival with androgen deprivation therapy plus enzalutamide vs placebo. A total of 905 enzalutamide-treated men were included in this post hoc analysis. Metastasis-free survival (primary endpoint) and overall survival (secondary endpoint) were evaluated for 4 mutually exclusive subgroups defined by PSA decline: <50% (reference); ≥50% to <90%; ≥90%, nadir ≥0.2 ng/mL; and ≥90%, nadir <0.2 ng/mL. Medians and 95% confidence intervals were determined using a 12-month landmark analysis; hazard ratios and P values were based on an unstratified Cox proportional analysis model. RESULTS: In enzalutamide-treated men, PSA declines of <50%, ≥50% to <90%, ≥90% with nadir ≥0.2 ng/mL, and ≥90% with nadir <0.2 ng/mL were associated with median metastasis-free survival in months (95% confidence intervals) of 22.1 (14.8-not reached), 34.2 (29.4-not reached), 36.6 (33.4-not reached), and not reached, respectively, and overall survival in months (95% confidence intervals) of 40.8 (31.7-44.9), 54.4 (49.0-67.0), 64.3 (63.4-not reached), and not reached, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistically significant correlation between greater depth of PSA decline and improved clinical outcomes, suggesting a previously underappreciated relationship between changes in PSA levels and clinical outcomes in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Comparative real-world survival outcomes of metastatic papillary and clear cell renal cell carcinoma treated with immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and combination therapy.

INTRODUCTION: While there are a plethora of studies supporting novel treatment approaches in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), much of the data used to inform care of patients with metastatic papillary RCC (pRCC) is extrapolated from ccRCC. Several recent phase III trials have supported the use of immunotherapy (IO) and targeted therapy (TT)+IO in ccRCC, without corresponding data for pRCC. Using ccRCC as a comparison group, we sought to describe real-world trends in the utilization of systemic therapy and its impact on overall survival (OS) among patients with metastatic pRCC. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified cases of metastatic pRCC and ccRCC between 2015 and 2018. Patients were stratified into groups based on histology and first-line treatments (TT, IO, TT + IO). Differences in baseline characteristics were assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables, and the Chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 6,920 patients with a diagnosis of metastatic RCC were identified: 594 (8.6%) with pRCC and 6,326 (91.4%) with ccRCC. Overall, 4,710 patients received TT (455 pRCC and 4,255 ccRCC), 1,585 received IO (77 pRCC and 1,508 ccRCC), and 625 received TT+IO (62 pRCC and 563 ccRCC). Temporal trend between 2015 and 2018 revealed an increased utilization of IO and TT + IO for pRCC and ccRCC. In patients with metastatic pRCC, neither IO (HR 1.03; 95% CI 0.75-1.42) nor TT+IO (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.63-1.28) were associated with better OS compared to TT alone. In contrast, both IO and combination TT and IO were associated with significantly better OS than TT for patients with metastatic ccRCC (IO group: hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.82; TT+IO group: HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.93). Cytoreductive nephrectomy was associated with better OS in both pRCC (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.77) and ccRCC (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.50-0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Although IO and TT + IO were associated with better OS among patients with metastatic ccRCC, this same effect was not observed among patients with pRCC.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) 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 health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.

Which traits affect how long patients with advanced prostate cancer live when treated with enzalutamide?

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a research article originally published in European Journal of Cancer. The PROSPER study involved men who had a type of advanced prostate cancer called nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In men with nmCRPC, their cancer has progressed on traditional hormone therapy but scans show that it has not spread to other parts of the body. The main results of the PROSPER study showed that patients treated with enzalutamide lived longer than patients treated with placebo. For this analysis, researchers looked at whether this was different depending on patients' traits. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers found that age and location did not affect how long patients lived when treated with enzalutamide. They found three patient traits that did make a difference. Being able to carry out daily activities, low prostate-specific antigen level (PSA level), and receiving no other prostate cancer treatments after the study meant that patients were more likely to live longer. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Patients with nmCRPC treated with enzalutamide lived longer than patients treated with placebo. Age and location did not affect how long these patients lived, but other traits did. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02003924 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Estimation of tumor cell total mRNA expression in 15 cancer types predicts disease progression.

Single-cell RNA sequencing studies have suggested that total mRNA content correlates with tumor phenotypes. Technical and analytical challenges, however, have so far impeded at-scale pan-cancer examination of total mRNA content. Here we present a method to quantify tumor-specific total mRNA expression (TmS) from bulk sequencing data, taking into account tumor transcript proportion, purity and ploidy, which are estimated through transcriptomic/genomic deconvolution. We estimate and validate TmS in 6,590 patient tumors across 15 cancer types, identifying significant inter-tumor variability. Across cancers, high TmS is associated with increased risk of disease progression and death. TmS is influenced by cancer-specific patterns of gene alteration and intra-tumor genetic heterogeneity as well as by pan-cancer trends in metabolic dysregulation. Taken together, our results indicate that measuring cell-type-specific total mRNA expression in tumor cells predicts tumor phenotypes and clinical outcomes.

A phase II clinical trial of neoadjuvant sasanlimab and stereotactic body radiation therapy as an in situ vaccine for cisplatin-ineligible MIBC: the RAD VACCINE MIBC trial.

The utilization of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, specifically anti-PD-1/L1 agents, prior to radical cystectomy is an emerging paradigm in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). In situ vaccination represents a strategy to manipulate the tumor in order to augment the immune response toward improved local and distant cancer control. The authors describe the study rationale, design and objectives for RAD VACCINE MIBC, a single-arm, single-institution, phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of combination neoadjuvant sasanlimab (humanized IgG monoclonal antibody that targets PD-1) with stereotactic body radiotherapy as an in situ vaccine in cisplatin-ineligible patients with MIBC. The results from this trial will establish the safety profile of this combination strategy and evaluate pathologic complete response rates.

RAD VACCINE MIBC is a phase II clinical trial that aims to determine the safety and effectiveness of a study drug called sasanlimab (an immune checkpoint inhibitor), combined with radiation therapy (stereotactic body radiation therapy) prior to surgery to remove the bladder (known as radical cystectomy [RC]) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients. For this type of cancer, patients typically receive chemotherapy followed by RC as the standard of care. However, many patients who have pre-existing medical conditions such as poor kidney function are unable to receive chemotherapy. These patients undergo RC alone at the risk of less optimal cancer control. Bladder cancer is known to inhibit the immune cells (T cells) from attacking it, which is an important way in which the body controls cancer cells. Sasanlimab allows T cells that are specific to the cancer to potentially reactivate. Ongoing studies have shown that drugs similar to sasanlimab can be used to achieve improvement in cancer control in the bladder (as measured by shrinking the cancer or eradicating it) before surgery. The authors are studying the use of the study drug with the addition of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as a combined therapy. The role of SBRT as a combined therapy to immune checkpoint inhibition has been well studied to help improve the process of how immune cells recognize cancer cells. By giving both the study drug and SBRT together before RC, the authors aim to demonstrate the safety of this technique and its effectiveness in eradicating all cancer in the bladder. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05241340 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Clinical outcomes and patterns of population-based management of urachal carcinoma of the bladder: An analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Given the low incidence of urachal carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), there is limited published data from contemporary population-based cohorts. This study aimed to describe demographic, clinicopathological features, and survival outcomes of patients diagnosed with UCB. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2004-2016) was queried for UCB patients. Descriptive analyses characterized demographics and clinicopathologic features. We assessed 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of the entire cohort and subgroups of localized/locally advanced and metastatic disease. We utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess the association between covariates of interest and all-cause mortality and to examine the impact of surgical technique and chemotherapy. RESULTS: We identified 841 patients with UCB. The most common histologic subtype was non-mucinous adenocarcinoma (39.6%). Approximately 50% had ≥cT2 disease, and 14.3% were metastatic at diagnosis. Altogether, partial cystectomy (60%) was most performed, and lymph node dissection was performed in 377 patients (44.8%), with specific temporal increase in utilization over the study period (p < 0.001). Overall, median OS was 59 months, and 5-year OS was 49%. In patients with localized/locally advanced disease, we found no association between partial and radical cystectomy (Hazards ratio [HR] 1.75; 95% CI 0.72-4.3) as well as receipt of perioperative chemotherapy (HR 1.97, 95% CI 0.79-4.90) and outcomes. Lastly, receipt of systemic therapy was not associated with survival benefit (HR 0.785, 95% CI 0.37-1.65) in metastatic disease cohort. CONCLUSION: This large population-based cohort provides insight into the surgical management and systemic therapy, without clear evidence on the association of chemotherapy and survival in the perioperative and metastatic setting.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but various areas of management still lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The 2021 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) addressed some of these questions to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results from APCCC 2021. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts identified three major areas of controversy related to management of advanced prostate cancer: newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the use of prostate-specific membrane antigen ligands in diagnostics and therapy, and molecular characterisation of tissue and blood. A panel of 86 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 107 pre-defined questions, which were developed by both voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflected the opinions of 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 reported in the Supplementary material. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients to navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised according to patient characteristics, such as the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), comorbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations, and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Enrolment in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2021 once again identified salient questions that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference is a forum for discussing current diagnosis and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. An expert panel votes on predefined questions focused on the most clinically relevant areas for treatment of advanced prostate cancer for which there are gaps in knowledge. The voting results provide a practical guide to help clinicians in discussing treatment options with patients as part of shared decision-making.

MTAP deficiency creates an exploitable target for antifolate therapy in 9p21-loss cancers.

Methylthioadenosine phosphorylase, an essential enzyme for the adenine salvage pathway, is often deficient (MTAPdef) in tumors with 9p21 loss and hypothetically renders tumors susceptible to synthetic lethality by antifolates targeting de novo purine synthesis. Here we report our single arm phase II trial (NCT02693717) that assesses pemetrexed in MTAPdef urothelial carcinoma (UC) with the primary endpoint of overall response rate (ORR). Three of 7 enrolled MTAPdef patients show response to pemetrexed (ORR 43%). Furthermore, a historic cohort shows 4 of 4 MTAPdef patients respond to pemetrexed as compared to 1 of 10 MTAP-proficient patients. In vitro and in vivo preclinical data using UC cell lines demonstrate increased sensitivity to pemetrexed by inducing DNA damage, and distorting nucleotide pools. In addition, MTAP-knockdown increases sensitivity to pemetrexed. Furthermore, in a lung adenocarcinoma retrospective cohort (N = 72) from the published BATTLE2 clinical trial (NCT01248247), MTAPdef associates with an improved response rate to pemetrexed. Our data demonstrate a synthetic lethal interaction between MTAPdef and de novo purine inhibition, which represents a promising therapeutic strategy for larger prospective trials.

What Experts Think About Prostate Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021.

Patients with advanced prostate cancer (APC) may be at greater risk for severe illness, hospitalisation, or death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to male gender, older age, potential immunosuppressive treatments, or comorbidities. Thus, the optimal management of APC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is complex. In October 2021, during the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2021, the 73 voting members of the panel members discussed and voted on 13 questions on this topic that could help clinicians make treatment choices during the pandemic. There was a consensus for full COVID-19 vaccination and booster injection in APC patients. Furthermore, the voting results indicate that the expert's treatment recommendations are influenced by the vaccination status: the COVID-19 pandemic altered management of APC patients for 70% of the panellists before the vaccination was available but only for 25% of panellists for fully vaccinated patients. Most experts (71%) were less likely to use docetaxel and abiraterone in unvaccinated patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For fully vaccinated patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer, there was a consensus (77%) to follow the usual treatment schedule, whereas in unvaccinated patients, 55% of the panel members voted for deferring radiation therapy. Finally, there was a strong consensus for the use of telemedicine for monitoring APC patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021, the panellists reached a consensus regarding the recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccine in prostate cancer patients and use of telemedicine for monitoring these patients.

Mesenchymal and stem-like prostate cancer linked to therapy-induced lineage plasticity and metastasis.

Bioinformatic analysis of 94 patient-derived xenografts (PDXs), cell lines, and organoids (PCOs) identifies three intrinsic transcriptional subtypes of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: androgen receptor (AR) pathway + prostate cancer (PC) (ARPC), mesenchymal and stem-like PC (MSPC), and neuroendocrine PC (NEPC). A sizable proportion of castration-resistant and metastatic stage PC (M-CRPC) cases are admixtures of ARPC and MSPC. Analysis of clinical datasets and mechanistic studies indicates that MSPC arises from ARPC as a consequence of therapy-induced lineage plasticity. AR blockade with enzalutamide induces (1) transcriptional silencing of TP53 and hence dedifferentiation to a hybrid epithelial and mesenchymal and stem-like state and (2) inhibition of BMP signaling, which promotes resistance to AR inhibition. Enzalutamide-tolerant LNCaP cells re-enter the cell cycle in response to neuregulin and generate metastasis in mice. Combined inhibition of HER2/3 and AR or mTORC1 exhibits efficacy in models of ARPC and MSPC or MSPC, respectively. These results define MSPC, trace its origin to therapy-induced lineage plasticity, and reveal its sensitivity to HER2/3 inhibition.

Association Between Perioperative Chemotherapy and Survival in Men Undergoing Radical Resection for Primary Urethral Urothelial Carcinoma: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment landscape in invasive primary carcinoma of the urethra of urothelial histology closely aligns that of locally advanced urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. The survival benefit of perioperative chemotherapy for men undergoing radical surgery for primary urethral urothelial carcinoma (UUC) has not yet been well-elucidated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified men diagnosed with non-metastatic invasive UUC (T2-4 N0-2 M0) from 2004 to 2016 treated with radical extirpative surgery. We compared OS between patients who had received peri-operative neoadjuvant (NAC) or adjuvant (AC) chemotherapy and those who had not using Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients met inclusion criteria. 113 patients (59.2%) did not receive chemotherapy, while 39 (20.4%) and 39 (20.4%) received NAC and AC, respectively. Median follow-up was 28.0 months. Upon multivariable analysis, receipt of NAC (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28-0.91, P = .02) decreased the risk of all-cause mortality, while receipt of AC (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.41-1.41) was not significantly associated with an OS benefit, as compared to no chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our study is the first to evaluate treatment specific outcomes in male patients with primary carcinoma of the urethra. We observed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy in men with UUC was associated with OS benefit. The utilization of NAC may improve survival, consistent with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.

Niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA repair gene defects (GALAHAD): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers are enriched for DNA repair gene defects (DRDs) that can be susceptible to synthetic lethality through inhibition of PARP proteins. We evaluated the anti-tumour activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers and DRDs who progressed on previous treatment with an androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mixed histology accepted, with the exception of the small cell pure phenotype) and DRDs (assessed in blood, tumour tissue, or saliva), with progression on a previous next-generation androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 or Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were eligible. Enrolled patients received niraparib 300 mg orally once daily until treatment discontinuation, death, or study termination. For the final study analysis, all patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis population; patients with germline pathogenic or somatic biallelic pathogenic alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) or biallelic alterations in other prespecified DRDs (non-BRCA cohort) were included in the efficacy analysis population. The primary endpoint was objective response rate in patients with BRCA alterations and measurable disease (measurable BRCA cohort). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02854436. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2016, and June 26, 2020, 289 patients were enrolled, of whom 182 (63%) had received three or more systemic therapies for prostate cancer. 223 (77%) of 289 patients were included in the overall efficacy analysis population, which included BRCA (n=142) and non-BRCA (n=81) cohorts. At final analysis, with a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 6·6-13·3), the objective response rate in the measurable BRCA cohort (n=76) was 34·2% (95% CI 23·7-46·0). In the safety analysis population, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were nausea (169 [58%] of 289), anaemia (156 [54%]), and vomiting (111 [38%]); the most common grade 3 or worse events were haematological (anaemia in 95 [33%] of 289; thrombocytopenia in 47 [16%]; and neutropenia in 28 [10%]). Of 134 (46%) of 289 patients with at least one serious treatment-emergent adverse event, the most common were also haematological (thrombocytopenia in 17 [6%] and anaemia in 13 [4%]). Two adverse events with fatal outcome (one patient with urosepsis in the BRCA cohort and one patient with sepsis in the non-BRCA cohort) were deemed possibly related to niraparib treatment. INTERPRETATION: Niraparib is tolerable and shows anti-tumour activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DRDs, particularly in those with BRCA alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.