The Burden of Uncontrolled Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Men With Prostate Cancer: A RADICAL-PC Analysis.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence is higher in men with prostate cancer (PC) than without. Objectives: We describe the rate and correlates of poor cardiovascular risk factor control among men with PC. Methods: We prospectively characterized 2,811 consecutive men (mean age 68 ± 8 years) with PC from 24 sites in Canada, Israel, Brazil, and Australia. We defined poor overall risk factor control as ≥3 of the following: suboptimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (>2 mmol/L if Framingham Risk Score [FRS] ≥15 and ≥3.5 mmol/L if FRS <15), current smoker, physical inactivity (<600 MET min/wk), suboptimal blood pressure (BP) (≥140/90 mm Hg if no other risk factors, systolic BP ≥120 mm Hg if known CVD or FRS ≥15, and ≥130/80 mm Hg if diabetic), and waist:hip ratio >0.9. Results: Among participants (9% with metastatic PC and 23% with pre-existing CVD), 99% had ≥1 uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factor, and 51% had poor overall risk factor control. Not taking a statin (odds ratio [OR]: 2.55; 95% CI: 2.00-3.26), physical frailty (OR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.51-3.71), need for BP drugs (OR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.84-3.03), and age (OR per 10-year increase: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.14-1.59) were associated with poor overall risk factor control after adjustment for education, PC characteristics, androgen deprivation therapy, depression, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group functional status. Conclusions: Poor control of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors is common in men with PC, highlighting the large gap in care and the need for improved interventions to optimize cardiovascular risk management in this population.

"Non-metastatic, Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic and Treatment Recommendations by an Expert Panel from Brazil".

INTRODUCTION: Non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is an important clinical stage of prostate cancer, prior to morbidity and mortality from clinical metastases. In particular, the introduction of novel androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSi) has changed the therapeutic landscape in nmCRPC. Given recent developments in this field, we update our recommendations for the management of nmCRPC. METHODS: A panel of 51 invited medical oncologists and urologists convened in May of 2021 with the aim of discussing and providing recommendations regarding the most relevant issues concerning staging methods, antineoplastic therapy, osteoclast-targeted therapy, and patient follow-up in nmCRPC. Panel members considered the available evidence and their practical experience to address the 73 multiple-choice questions presented. RESULTS: Key recommendations and findings include the reliance on prostate-specific antigen doubling time for treatment decisions, the absence of a clear preference between conventional and novel (i.e., positron-emission tomography-based) imaging techniques, the increasing role of ARSis in various settings, the general view that ARSis have similar efficacy. Panelists highlighted the slight preference for darolutamide, when safety is of greater concern, and a continued need to develop high-level evidence to guide the intensity of follow-up in this subset of prostate cancer. DISCUSSION: Despite the limitations associated with a consensus panel, the topics addressed are relevant in current practice, and the recommendations can help practicing clinicians to provide state-of-the-art treatment to patients with nmCRPC in Brazil and other countries with similar healthcare settings.

Adjuvant atezolizumab versus placebo for patients with renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence following resection (IMmotion010): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard of care for locoregional renal cell carcinoma is surgery, but many patients experience recurrence. The objective of the current study was to determine if adjuvant atezolizumab (vs placebo) delayed recurrence in patients with an increased risk of recurrence after resection. METHODS: IMmotion010 is a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial conducted in 215 centres in 28 countries. Eligible patients were patients aged 18 years or older with renal cell carcinoma with a clear cell or sarcomatoid component and increased risk of recurrence. After nephrectomy with or without metastasectomy, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo (both intravenous) once every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or 1 year. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice-web response system. Stratification factors were disease stage (T2 or T3a vs T3b-c or T4 or N+ vs M1 no evidence of disease), geographical region (north America [excluding Mexico] vs rest of the world), and PD-L1 status on tumour-infiltrating immune cells (<1% vs ≥1% expression). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were randomised, regardless of whether study treatment was received. The safety-evaluable population included all patients randomly assigned to treatment who received any amount of study drug (ie, atezolizumab or placebo), regardless of whether a full or partial dose was received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03024996, and is closed to further accrual. FINDINGS: Between Jan 3, 2017, and Feb 15, 2019, 778 patients were enrolled; 390 (50%) were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 388 (50%) to the placebo group. At data cutoff (May 3, 2022), the median follow-up duration was 44·7 months (IQR 39·1-51·0). Median investigator-assessed disease-free survival was 57·2 months (95% CI 44·6 to not evaluable) with atezolizumab and 49·5 months (47·4 to not evaluable) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·93, 95% CI 0·75-1·15, p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (seven [2%] patients who received atezolizumab vs 15 [4%] patients who received placebo), hyperglycaemia (ten [3%] vs six [2%]), and diarrhoea (two [1%] vs seven [2%]). 69 (18%) patients who received atezolizumab and 46 (12%) patients who received placebo had a serious adverse event. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy after resection for patients with renal cell carcinoma with increased risk of recurrence showed no evidence of improved clinical outcomes versus placebo. These study results do not support adjuvant atezolizumab for treatment of renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech, a member of the Roche group.

Consensus on the Treatment and Follow-Up for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Global Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: To present a summary of the recommendations for the treatment and follow-up for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) as acquired through a questionnaire administered to 99 physicians working in the field of prostate cancer in developing countries who attended the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries. METHODS: A total of 106 questions out of more than 300 questions addressed the use of imaging in staging mCRPC, treatment recommendations across availability and response to prior drug treatments, appropriate drug treatments, and follow-up, and those same scenarios when limited resources needed to be considered. Responses were compiled and the percentages were presented by clinicians to support each response. Most questions had five to seven relevant options for response including abstain and/or unqualified to answer, or in the case of yes or no questions, the option to abstain was offered. RESULTS: Most of the recommendations from this panel were in line with prior consensus, including the preference of a new antiandrogen for first-line therapy of mCRPC. Important aspects highlighted in the scenario of limited resources included the option of docetaxel as treatment preference as first-line treatment in several scenarios, docetaxel retreatment, consideration for reduced doses of abiraterone, and alternative schedules of an osteoclast-targeted therapy. CONCLUSION: There was wide-ranging consensus in the treatment for men with mCRPC in both optimal and limited resource settings.

Consensus on the Treatment and Follow-Up for the Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries.

PURPOSE: To present a summary of the recommendations for the treatment and follow-up for the biochemical recurrence of castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) as acquired through a questionnaire administered at the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries. METHODS: A total of 27 questions were identified as relating to this topic. Responses from the clinician were tallied and are presented in percentage format. Topics included the use of imaging in staging, treatment recommendations across different patient scenarios of life expectancy and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time, and follow-up for nonmetastatic castration-resistant PCa. RESULTS: A consensus agreed that in optimal conditions, positron emission tomography-computed tomography with prostate-specific membrane antigen would be used although in limited resource situations the combined use of CT of the abdomen and pelvic (or pelvic MRI), a bone scan, and a CT of the thorax or chest x-ray was recommended. In cases when PSA levels double in < 10 months, more than 90% of clinicians agreed on the use of apalutamide or enzalutamide, regardless of life expectancy. With a doubling time of more than 10 months, > 54% of experts recommended no treatment independent of life expectancy. More than half of the experts, regardless of resources, recommended follow-up with a physical examination and PSA levels every 3-6 months and imaging only in the case of symptoms. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for biochemical recurrence of castration-resistant PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data.

Metronomic oral cyclophosphamide plus prednisone in docetaxel-pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of metronomic oral cyclophosphamide (CTX) and prednisone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. We analyzed retrospectively patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel, and who received metronomic CTX (from 50 mg PO daily to 150 mg PO, 14 days/7 days off) and prednisone 10 mg PO daily between September 2009 and April 2014 were analyzed. The primary endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decrease ≥50 %. Secondary analysis included PSA decrease ≥30 %, time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and toxicity. Demographics and baseline characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics. PSA response and adverse events were reported as relative rates. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated and plotted for time-to-event endpoints. Forty patients were evaluated. The median age was 69 years old (52-86), 12 (30.0 %) patients presented a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of <80 %, and 34 (85 %) presented with bone with or without nodal metastases. Median pre-treatment PSA was 192 ng/dL (7-2696 ng/dL). All patients were previously exposed to docetaxel, including 33 (82.5 %) with docetaxel-refractory disease. PSA response rate was achieved in eight (20.0 %) out of 40 patients. Additionally, PSA declines of ≥30 % occurred in 14 (35.0 %) patients. The median TTF was 3 months (95 % confidence interval 2.5-3.5). The treatment was well tolerated. Grade 3/4 lymphopenia was reported in 11 (27.5 %) patients and was the only grade 3-4 toxicity reported. Metronomic oral CTX showed activity and safety in docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC patients. This regimen deserves further investigation in this setting.

Exploring the role of novel agents in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

Renal cell carcinoma represents nearly 3% of all cancers, predominantly affecting individuals >or=50 years of age, and until recently, few treatments options were available for metastatic disease. The 5-year median survival for these patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma has been estimated at <10%. This review explores the data of the most relevant trials focusing on new approaches with novel agents, including sunitinib, sorafenib, bevacizumab, temsirolimus, as well as their combinations with traditional agents. We describe mechanisms of action, activity, and toxicity profile of those agents, as well as administration schedules that have been studied in clinical trials.