Efficacy and Safety of Radiotherapy Plus Relugolix in Men With Localized or Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Combination androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy is commonly used for patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist relugolix with radiotherapy for treating prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter post hoc analysis of patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy in 2 randomized clinical trials (a phase 2 trial of relugolix vs degarelix, and a subset of the phase 3 HERO trial of relugolix vs leuprolide acetate) included men who were receiving radiotherapy and short-term (24 weeks) ADT (n = 103) from 2014 to 2015 and men receiving radiotherapy and longer-term (48 weeks) ADT (n = 157) from 2017 to 2019. The data were analyzed in November 2022. Interventions: Patients receiving short-term ADT received relugolix, 120 mg, orally once daily (320-mg loading dose) or degarelix, 80 mg, 4-week depot (240-mg loading dose) for 24 weeks with 12 weeks of follow-up. Patients receiving longer-term ADT received relugolix, 120 mg, orally once daily (360-mg loading dose) or leuprolide acetate injections every 12 weeks for 48 weeks, with up to 90 days of follow-up. Main Outcomes and Measures: Castration rate (testosterone level <50 ng/dL [to convert to nmol/L, multiply by 0.0347) at all scheduled visits between weeks 5 and 25 for patients receiving short-term ADT and weeks 5 and 49 for patients receiving longer-term ADT. Results: Of 260 patients (38 Asian [14.6%], 23 Black or African American [8.8%], 21 Hispanic [8.1%], and 188 White [72.3%] individuals), 164 (63.1%) received relugolix. Relugolix achieved castration rates of 95% (95% CI, 87.1%-99.0%) and 97% (95% CI, 90.6%-99.0%) among patients receiving short-term and longer-term ADT, respectively. Twelve weeks post-short-term relugolix, 34 (52%) achieved testosterone levels to baseline or more than 280 ng/dL. Ninety days post longer-term ADT, mean (SD) testosterone levels were 310.5 (122.4) (106.7) ng/dL (relugolix; n = 15) vs 53.0 ng/dL (leuprolide acetate; n = 8) among the subset assessed for testosterone recovery. Castration resistance-free survival was not statistically different between the relugolix and leuprolide acetate cohorts (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.35-2.72; P = .62). Adverse events grade 3 or greater for short-term or longer-term relugolix (headache, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation) were uncommon (less than 5%). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of these 2 randomized clinical trials suggest that relugolix rapidly achieves sustained castration in patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy. No new safety concerns were identified when relugolix was used with radiotherapy.

CREST: phase III study of sasanlimab and Bacillus Calmette-Guérin for patients with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-naïve high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the standard of care for patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). BCG in combination with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors may yield greater anti-tumor activity compared with either agent alone. CREST is a phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of the subcutaneous PD-1 inhibitor sasanlimab in combination with BCG for patients with BCG-naive high-risk NMIBC. Eligible participants are randomized to receive sasanlimab plus BCG (induction ± maintenance) or BCG alone for up to 25 cycles within 12 weeks of TURBT. The primary outcome is event-free survival. Secondary outcomes include additional efficacy end points and safety. The target sample size is around 1000 participants.

Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is the most common type of bladder cancer. Most people have surgery to remove the cancer cells while leaving the rest of the bladder intact. This is called transurethral resection of a bladder tumor (TURBT). For people with high-risk NMIBC, a medicine called Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is placed directly inside the bladder after TURBT. A 'high risk' classification means that the cancer is more likely to spread or come back after treatment. Some people's cancer does not respond to BCG or returns after BCG treatment. Researchers are currently looking at whether BCG combined with other immunotherapies may prevent cancer growth more than BCG on its own. Immunotherapy helps the immune system recognize and kill cancer cells. Sasanlimab is an immunotherapy medicine that is not yet approved to treat people with NMIBC. It is given as an injection under the skin. In this CREST study, researchers are looking at how safe and effective sasanlimab plus BCG is for people with high-risk NMIBC. Around 1000 people are taking part in CREST. They must have had TURBT 12 weeks or less before joining the study. Researchers want to know how long people live without certain events occurring, such as bladder cancer cells returning. A plain language summary of this article can be found as Supplementary Material. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04165317; 2019-003375-19 (EudraCT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Testosterone Recovery for Relugolix Versus Leuprolide in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Results from the Phase 3 HERO Study.

BACKGROUND: In the HERO study, relugolix demonstrated sustained testosterone suppression superior to that of leuprolide acetate (97% vs 89%; difference 7.9% [95% confidence interval, 4.1-12%; p < 0.001]). OBJECTIVE: To analyze testosterone recovery in a prespecified subset of men from the HERO study not indicated to continue androgen deprivation therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men (N = 934) were randomized (2:1) to receive relugolix 120 mg orally daily or leuprolide acetate injections every 12 wk for 48 wk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Testosterone recovery was assessed in 184 men who completed 48 wk of treatment. During the 90-d recovery period, assessments included time to testosterone recovery (>280 ng/dl; ≥80% of baseline testosterone), serum levels of prostate-specific antigen and pituitary hormones, and adverse events. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The cumulative incidence rate of testosterone recovery to >280 ng/dl at 90 d following drug discontinuation was significantly higher in the relugolix cohort (n = 137) than in the leuprolide acetate cohort (n = 47; 54% vs 3.2%; nominal p = 0.002). The median time to testosterone recovery was faster following relugolix treatment than with leuprolide acetate treatment (86.0 d vs 112.0 d). Compared with leuprolide acetate, more men treated with relugolix achieved ≥80% of baseline testosterone levels (39% vs 2.1%). Men ≤65 yr and those with baseline testosterone greater than the median had a higher incident rate of testosterone recovery. Adverse events were generally similar between treatment groups. One limitation is the short testosterone recovery follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Oral relugolix had faster and more complete recovery of testosterone to normal levels after treatment discontinuation than leuprolide acetate in a subset of men from the HERO study. The clinical implications of a faster testosterone recovery with relugolix may be significant for men being treated with androgen deprivation therapy and influence treatment decisions. PATIENT SUMMARY: The male hormone testosterone is reduced during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Reduced testosterone levels cause side effects, impacting patient quality of life. When treatment is stopped, the side effects lessen over time as the levels of testosterone come back to pretreatment range (testosterone recovery). In this study, we found that the time to testosterone recovery was faster with relugolix than with leuprolide acetate.

Relugolix vs. Leuprolide Effects on Castration Resistance-Free Survival from the Phase 3 HERO Study in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Background: Relugolix is an oral GnRH receptor antagonist approved for men with advanced prostate cancer. Relugolix treatment has demonstrated an ability to lower testosterone to sustained castration levels in the phase 4 HERO study. Herein, we describe the results of a secondary endpoint of castration resistance-free survival (CRFS) during 48 weeks of treatment and profile patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Methods: Subjects were 2:1 randomized to either relugolix 120 mg orally once daily (after a single 360 mg loading dose) or 3-monthly injections of leuprolide for 48 weeks. CRFS, defined as the time from the date of first dose to the date of confirmed prostate-specific antigen progression while castrated or death due to any reason was conducted in the metastatic disease population and the overall modified intention-to-treat (mITT) populations. Results: The CRFS analysis (mITT population) included 1074 men (relugolix: n = 717; leuprolide: n = 357) with advanced prostate cancer as well as 434 men (relugolix: n = 290; leuprolide: n = 144) with metastatic prostate cancer. In the metastatic disease populations, CRFS rates were 74.3% (95% CI: 68.6%, 79.2%) and 75.3% (95% CI: 66.7%, 81.9%) in the relugolix and leuprolide groups, respectively (hazard ratio: 1.03 [0.68, 1.57]; p = 0.84) at week 48. Results in the overall mITT population were similar to the metastatic population. No new safety findings were identified. Conclusions: In men with metastatic disease or in the overall population of the HERO study, CRFS assessed during the 48-week treatment with relugolix was not significantly different than standard-of-care leuprolide. Relugolix had similar efficacy for men with/without CRFS progression events.

Development and evaluation of the MiCheck® Prostate test for clinically significant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is a clinical need to identify patients with an elevated PSA who would benefit from prostate biopsy due to the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSCaP). We have previously reported the development of the MiCheck® Test for clinically significant prostate cancer. Here, we report MiCheck's further development and incorporation of the Roche Cobas standard clinical chemistry analyzer. OBJECTIVES: To further develop and adapt the MiCheck® Prostate test so it can be performed using a standard clinical chemistry analyzer and characterize its performance using the MiCheck-01 clinical trial sample set. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: About 358 patient samples from the MiCheck-01 US clinical trial were used for the development of the MiCheck® Prostate test. These consisted of 46 controls, 137 non-CaP, 62 non-CSCaP, and 113 CSCaP. METHODS: Serum analyte concentrations for cellular growth factors were determined using custom-made Luminex-based R&D Systems multi-analyte kits. Analytes that can also be measured using standard chemistry analyzers were examined for their ability to contribute to an algorithm with high sensitivity for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Samples were then re-measured using a Roche Cobas analyzer for development of the final algorithm. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Logistic regression modeling with Monte Carlo cross-validation was used to identify Human Epidydimal Protein 4 (HE4) as an analyte able to significantly improve the algorithm specificity at 95% sensitivity. A final model was developed using analyte measurements from the Cobas analzyer. RESULTS: The MiCheck® logistic regression model was developed and consisted of PSA, %free PSA, DRE, and HE4. The model differentiated clinically significant cancer from no cancer or not-clinically significant cancer with AUC of 0.85, sensitivity of 95%, and specificity of 50%. Applying the MiCheck® test to all evaluable 358 patients from the MiCheck-01 study demonstrated that up to 50% of unnecessary biopsies could be avoided while delaying diagnosis of only 5.3% of Gleason Score (GS) ≥3+4 cancers, 1.8% of GS≥4+3 cancers and no cancers of GS 8 to 10. CONCLUSIONS: The MiCheck® Prostate test identifies clinically significant prostate cancer with high sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV). It can be performed in a clinical laboratory using a Roche Cobas clinical chemistry analyzer. The MiCheck® Prostate test could assist in reducing unnecessary prostate biopsies with a marginal number of patients experiencing a delayed diagnosis.

Impact of Concomitant Cardiovascular Therapies on Efficacy and Safety of Relugolix vs Leuprolide: Subgroup Analysis from HERO Study in Advanced Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular (CV) events are the leading cause of death in prostate cancer. Men with prostate cancer are likely to have CV risk factors and use CV-related concomitant medications. In the phase 3 HERO study, a 54% lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events was reported in men treated with the oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, relugolix, vs leuprolide. Herein, we characterize the impact of concomitant CV therapies on efficacy and safety in the HERO study. METHODS: In HERO, 930 men with advanced prostate cancer (APC) were randomized 2:1 and treated with relugolix (120 mg orally once daily; after single 360 mg loading dose) or leuprolide (injections every 3 months) for 48 weeks. Subgroups analyzed included men who received antihypertensives, antithrombotics, or lipid-modifying therapies (LMAs), as well as the most common drug classes (> 10%) and single most common agent within each class. Assessments included sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (< 50 ng/dL) through 48 weeks and safety. RESULTS: Antihypertensives, antithrombotics, and LMAs were utilized by 52.7%, 39.1%, and 39.6% of men in HERO, respectively. In the main subgroups, point estimates for sustained castration rates were generally consistent with overall estimates of relugolix and leuprolide observed in the overall population. Sustained castration rates were also mostly consistent for men taking the most common drug classes and individual agents in each class (losartan [n = 103]: relugolix, 95.4% vs leuprolide, 80.6%; amlodipine [n = 229]: 97.2% vs 85.5%; metoprolol [n = 88]: 95.7% vs 86.9%; acetylsalicylic acid [n = 259]: 97.0% vs 92.1%; clopidogrel [n = 43]: 96.4% vs 86.7%; simvastatin [n = 78]: 98.0% vs 87.3%). Incidence and types of adverse events (AEs) among men who received these medications were mostly consistent with overall population results, with some increases in grade ≥ 3 and fatal AEs. CONCLUSION: Relugolix suppressed testosterone and was generally well tolerated when given with concomitant CV agents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial ID NCT03085095. PRIOR PRESENTATION: Data presented at 15th Annual Genitourinary Cancers Symposium; February 17-19, 2022, San Francisco, CA, USA [Abstract 101, Poster board E11]. The published abstract from this presentation can be found at https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.6_suppl.101 .

Diagnostic Performance and Safety of 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 Positron Emission Tomography in Men With Suspected Prostate Cancer Recurrence: Results From a Phase 3, Prospective, Multicenter Study (SPOTLIGHT).

PURPOSE: SPOTLIGHT (NCT04186845) evaluated diagnostic performance and safety of radiohybrid 18F-rhPSMA-7.3, a novel high-affinity positron emission tomography radiopharmaceutical. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men with prostate cancer recurrence underwent positron emission tomography/CT 50-70 minutes after intravenous administration of 296±20% MBq 18F-rhPSMA-7.3. To assess the coprimary end points (verified detection rate and combined region-level positive predictive value), 3 blinded, independent central readers evaluated the scans. Verified detection rate is equivalent to the overall detection rate × positive predictive value. Standard of truth was established for each patient using histopathology or confirmatory imaging. Statistical thresholds (lower bounds of the confidence intervals) of 36.5% and 62.5% were prespecified for verified detection rate and combined region-level positive predictive value, respectively. Additional end points included detection rate, verified detection rate, and combined region-level positive predictive value in patients with histopathology standard of truth, and safety. RESULTS: The overall 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 detection rate among all 389 patients with an evaluable scan was 83% (majority read). Among the 366 patients (median prostate-specific antigen 1.27 ng/mL) for whom a standard of truth (histopathology [n=69]/confirmatory imaging only [n=297]) was available, verified detection rate ranged from 51% (95% CI 46.1-56.6) to 54% (95% CI 48.8-59.3), exceeding the prespecified statistical threshold. Combined region-level positive predictive value ranged from 46% (95% CI 42.0-50.3) to 60% (95% CI 55.1-65.5) across the readers, not meeting the threshold. In the subset of patients with histopathology standard of truth, the verified detection rate and combined region-level positive predictive value were both above the prespecified thresholds (majority read, 81% [95% CI 69.9-89.6] and 72% [95% CI 62.5-80.7], respectively). No significant safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: 18F-rhPSMA-7.3 offers a clinically meaningful verified detection rate for localization of recurrent prostate cancer. Despite missing the coprimary end point of combined region-level positive predictive value, the totality of the data support the potential clinical utility of 18F-rhPSMA-7.3.

Impact of Concomitant Prostate Cancer Medications on Efficacy and Safety of Relugolix Versus Leuprolide in Men With Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: To characterize the impact of concomitant prostate cancer treatments with the use of relugolix, the oral GnRH receptor antagonist, in advanced prostate cancer, a subgroup and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses of the HERO study was undertaken. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 934 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive relugolix 120 mg orally once daily or leuprolide injections every 12 weeks for 48 weeks. In the setting of rising PSA, patients could receive enzalutamide or docetaxel 2 months after study initiation. Assessments included sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (<50 ng/dL) through 48 weeks and safety parameters. Subgroups analyzed included patients with or without concomitant enzalutamide or docetaxel. A sensitivity analysis of the primary endpoint was performed excluding patients who received concomitant therapies that may affect testosterone. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses of 20 participants in the relugolix treatment group assessed the net effect of enzalutamide on exposure to relugolix. RESULTS: Overall, 125 patients (13.4%) took concomitant therapies that could impact testosterone levels. Enzalutamide (n = 23) was the most frequently used therapy in the relugolix (2.7%) and leuprolide groups (1.9%). Docetaxel (n = 13) was used by 1.3% and 1.6% of patients in the relugolix and leuprolide groups, respectively. All other relevant concomitant therapy were used in <1% of population. Sensitivity analysis showed concomitant therapy did not impact the testosterone levels. Castration rates were similar with and without concomitant use of enzalutamide or docetaxel. No clinically relevant differences in adverse events were observed between subgroups in either treatment group. No differences in relugolix Ctrough or testosterone concentrations were observed, suggesting that any induction or inhibition properties of enzalutamide on relugolix metabolism result in a neutral net effect on relugolix exposure and testosterone suppression. CONCLUSION: Treatment with relugolix was associated with similar efficacy and safety profiles with and without concomitant enzalutamide or docetaxel. Standard-of-care use of relugolix in combination with these agents is supported by these data.

Coadministration of Apalutamide and Relugolix in Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer at High Risk for Metastases.

BACKGROUND: The single-arm, open-label, multicenter, phase II Apa-RP study evaluates the biochemical recurrence (confirmed prostate-specific antigen [PSA] > 0.2 ng/mL)-free rate in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer (HR-LPC) after radical prostatectomy following adjuvant apalutamide and androgen-deprivation therapy. In this substudy, relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, was evaluated in combination with apalutamide. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the approved standard maintenance dose of relugolix in combination with apalutamide sustains castrate testosterone levels (< 50 ng/dL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twelve patients with HR-LPC who met all the main study criteria were included in the substudy. Patients received relugolix monotherapy for 2 weeks (loading dose [360 mg] at Day - 14 then 120 mg/day daily until Day - 1), then daily relugolix (120 mg) with apalutamide (240 mg) from Day 1 to Day 28. Endpoints were rate of maintained castration (testosterone < 50 ng/dL) through Day 28 (primary) and safety (secondary). RESULTS: All 12 patients received relugolix and apalutamide and achieved castrate testosterone levels after 2-week relugolix monotherapy (median testosterone 348.5 ng/dL and 8.7 ng/dL at Days - 14 and - 1). All 11 patients who had testosterone measured at Day 28 maintained castrate testosterone (median 10.0 ng/dL) without relugolix dose adjustment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in nine patients during relugolix monotherapy and in eight patients during relugolix + apalutamide coadministration. Hot flush was the most common TEAE reported, in six and four patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Relugolix administered at approved standard doses concurrently with apalutamide was effective in maintaining castrate testosterone levels in HR-LPC without new safety signals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE: NCT04523207, 21 August 2020.

The Apa-RP study evaluates the combination of apalutamide with drugs that lower male sex hormones for reducing the risk of prostate cancer recurrence. Patients in this study had their prostate gland surgically removed and were at high risk for disease recurrence. Relugolix, a newly approved oral drug for advanced prostate cancer, lowers blood testosterone (the primary male sex hormone) and, in combination with apalutamide, may reduce the risk of prostate cancer recurrence. The Apa-RP substudy goal was to test whether relugolix lowers blood testosterone and maintains these low levels when administered with apalutamide. Researchers looked at the testosterone levels of 12 patients with early prostate cancer who received standard doses of relugolix alone for 2 weeks followed by apalutamide and relugolix for an additional 28 days. Testosterone was measured before and after 2 weeks of relugolix treatment, and then again 28 days after apalutamide was added. All 12 substudy patients achieved low testosterone levels (< 50 ng/dL) after 2 weeks of relugolix treatment. Testosterone was measured at Day 28 of relugolix + apalutamide treatment in 11 patients, all of whom maintained low testosterone without adjustment of their relugolix dose. Adverse effects were consistent with those previously reported for each drug when administered alone. All 12 patients completed the substudy and moved onto the main study, the longer-term results of which will be reported in the future. In summary, relugolix administered at the same time as apalutamide was effective in maintaining low testosterone levels in patients with prostate cancer, without any new safety concerns.

A Phase Ib/II Study of Sabizabulin, a Novel Oral Cytoskeleton Disruptor, in Men with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer with Progression on an Androgen Receptor-targeting Agent.

PURPOSE: Sabizabulin, an oral cytoskeleton disruptor, was tested in a phase Ib/II clinical study in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The phase Ib portion utilized a 3+3 design with escalating daily oral doses of 4.5-81 mg and increasing schedule in 39 patients with mCRPC treated with one or more androgen receptor-targeting agents. Prior taxane chemotherapy was allowed. The phase II portion tested a daily dose of 63 mg in 41 patients with no prior chemotherapy. Efficacy was assessed using PCWG3 and RECIST 1.1 criteria. RESULTS: The MTD was not defined in the phase Ib and the recommended phase II dose was set at 63 mg/day. The most common adverse events (>10% frequency) at the 63 mg oral daily dosing (combined phase Ib/II data) were predominantly grade 1-2 events. Grade ≥3 events included diarrhea (7.4%), fatigue (5.6%), and alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase elevations (5.6% and 3.7%, respectively). Neurotoxicity and neutropenia were not observed. Preliminary efficacy data in patients treated with ≥1 continuous cycle of 63 mg or higher included objective response rate in 6 of 29 (20.7%) patients with measurable disease (1 complete, 5 partial) and 14 of 48 (29.2%) patients had PSA declines. The Kaplan-Meier median radiographic progression-free survival was estimated to be 11.4 months (n = 55). Durable responses lasting >2.75 years were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical trial demonstrated that chronic oral daily dosing of sabizabulin has a favorable safety profile with preliminary antitumor activity. These data support the ongoing phase III VERACITY trial of sabizabulin in men with mCRPC.

Primary Chemoablation of Low-Grade Intermediate-Risk Nonmuscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Using UGN-102, a Mitomycin-Containing Reverse Thermal Gel (Optima II): A Phase 2b, Open-Label, Single-Arm Trial.

PURPOSE: Low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (LG IR NMIBC) is a recurrent disease, thus requiring repeated transurethral resection of bladder tumor under general anesthesia. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of UGN-102, a mitomycin-containing reverse thermal gel, as a primary chemoablative therapeutic alternative to transurethral resection of bladder tumor for patients with LG IR NMIBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, phase 2b, open-label, single-arm trial recruited patients with biopsy-proven LG IR NMIBC to receive 6 once-weekly instillations of UGN-102. The primary end point was complete response (CR) rate, defined as the proportion of patients with negative endoscopic examination, negative cytology and negative for-cause biopsy 3 months after treatment initiation. Patients with CR were followed quarterly up to 12 months to assess durability of treatment effect. Safety and adverse events were monitored throughout the trial. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients (38 males and 25 females 33-96 years old) enrolled and received ≥1 instillation of UGN-102. Among the patients 41 (65%) achieved CR at 3 months, of whom 39 (95%), 30 (73%) and 25 (61%) remained disease-free at 6, 9 and 12 months after treatment initiation, respectively. A total of 13 patients had documented recurrences. The probability of durable response 9 months after CR (12 months after treatment initiation) was estimated to be 73% by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Common adverse events (incidence ≥10%) included dysuria, urinary frequency, hematuria, micturition urgency, urinary tract infection and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Nonsurgical primary chemoablation of LG IR NMIBC using UGN-102 resulted in significant treatment response with sustained durability. UGN-102 may provide an alternative to repetitive surgery for patients with LG IR NMIBC.

A phase II randomized placebo-controlled trial of pomegranate fruit extract in men with localized prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance.

INTRODUCTION OR OBJECTIVE: Men with favorable-risk prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance may benefit from intervention strategies to slow or prevent disease progression and the need for definitive treatment. Pomegranate and its extracts have shown antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in cell lines and animal models, but its effect on human prostate cancer as a target tissue remain unclear. Objectives of this trial include pomegranate's ability to alter serum and prostate tissue biomarkers and the ability of an active surveillance cohort to adhere to a chemoprevention trial for 1 year. METHODS: Men with organ-confined, favorable-risk PCa on AS were randomly assigned to receive pomegranate fruit extract (PFE) 1000 mg (n = 15) or placebo (n = 15) once daily for twelve months. Prostate biopsies were performed at study entry and upon completion of the 1-year intervention. Plasma and urinary biomarkers were analyzed utilizing immunoassays and HPLC. Tissue proteins were assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and measured by automated quantitation. RESULTS: PFE was well-tolerated with no significant toxicities. One patient withdrew before study initiation and 29 completed the 1-year intervention. No differences in plasma insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) levels, prostate-specific antigen doubling time, or biopsy kinetics were observed. Metabolites including urolithin A and urolithin A-gluc were detected more frequently in the PFE arm in both urine and plasma (p < .001 and p = .006, respectively). IHC analyses revealed reductions from baseline in 8-OHdG (a DNA damage marker) (p = .01) and androgen receptor expression (p = .04) in prostate tumor associated with PFE treatment. CONCLUSION: PFE administration for 12-month was well-tolerated and the protocol followed in an active surveillance population. Analyses suggest that PFE contains bioactive compounds capable of altering biomarkers involving oxidative stress and androgen signaling in prostate tumor and normal-appearing adjacent tissue. No alterations in the IGF axis were noted. This finding of study adherence and target activity provides a rationale for the further investigation of PFE in the active surveillance population.

Oral Relugolix for Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Injectable luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (e.g., leuprolide) are the standard agents for achieving androgen deprivation for prostate cancer despite the initial testosterone surge and delay in therapeutic effect. The efficacy and safety of relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, as compared with those of leuprolide are not known. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with advanced prostate cancer, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive relugolix (120 mg orally once daily) or leuprolide (injections every 3 months) for 48 weeks. The primary end point was sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (<50 ng per deciliter) through 48 weeks. Secondary end points included noninferiority with respect to the primary end point, castrate levels of testosterone on day 4, and profound castrate levels (<20 ng per deciliter) on day 15. Testosterone recovery was evaluated in a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: A total of 622 patients received relugolix and 308 received leuprolide. Of men who received relugolix, 96.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.9 to 97.9) maintained castration through 48 weeks, as compared with 88.8% (95% CI, 84.6 to 91.8) of men receiving leuprolide. The difference of 7.9 percentage points (95% CI, 4.1 to 11.8) showed noninferiority and superiority of relugolix (P<0.001 for superiority). All other key secondary end points showed superiority of relugolix over leuprolide (P<0.001). The percentage of patients with castrate levels of testosterone on day 4 was 56.0% with relugolix and 0% with leuprolide. In the subgroup of 184 patients followed for testosterone recovery, the mean testosterone levels 90 days after treatment discontinuation were 288.4 ng per deciliter in the relugolix group and 58.6 ng per deciliter in the leuprolide group. Among all the patients, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was 2.9% in the relugolix group and 6.2% in the leuprolide group (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving men with advanced prostate cancer, relugolix achieved rapid, sustained suppression of testosterone levels that was superior to that with leuprolide, with a 54% lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. (Funded by Myovant Sciences; HERO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03085095.).

A comparison of prostate health index, total PSA, %free PSA, and proPSA in a contemporary US population-The MiCheck-01 prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of patients are presenting with aggressive prostate cancer (CaP); therefore, there exists a need to optimally identify these patients pre-biopsy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of total prostate specific antigen (PSA), %free PSA, and prostate health index (PHI) to differentiate between patients without CaP, with non-aggressive (Gleason 3 + 3, non-AgCaP) and with aggressive (Gleason ≥ 3 + 4, AgCaP) in a contemporary US population. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Serum samples were collected from 332 US patients scheduled for biopsy due to an elevated age-adjusted PSA. Site and Central biopsy pathologic assessment were performed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Testing of PSA, free PSA, proPSA, and PHI was performed along with central pathology review. Test performance using logistic regression analysis for differentiating CaP from non-CaP as well as non-AgCaP from AgCaP was evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Central pathology review resulted in 32 upgrades including 14 Gleason 3 + 3 scores being upgraded to AgCaP with final distribution of 148 no-CaP, 64 non-AgCaP, and 120 AgCaP patients. Receiver operator curve (ROC) analysis of the different tests showed that PHI performed best at differentiating CaP from no-CaP subjects (area under the receiver operator curve 0.79). In contrast, the different tests were essentially equivalent in differentiating AgCaP vs. non-AgCaP. CONCLUSIONS: In this recent US study of prebiopsy patients we observed a high proportion of AgCaP patients consistent with previous studies in contemporary US populations. Central Gleason review is recommended for multi-institutional studies comparing biomarkers. PHI was superior to PSA, free PSA, %free PSA, and proPSA in detecting CaP in this population but was not superior at differentiating AgCaP from non-AgCaP.

Development and evaluation of the MiCheck test for aggressive prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: A clinical need exists for a biomarker test to accurately delineate aggressive prostate cancer (AgCaP), and thus better assist clinicians and patients decision-making on whether to proceed to prostate biopsy. OBJECTIVES: To develop a blood test for AgCaP and compare to PSA, %free PSA, proPSA, and prostate health index (PHI) tests. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Patient samples from the MiCheck-01 trial were used for development of the MiCheck test. METHODS: Serum analyte concentrations for cellular growth factors were determined using a custom-made Luminex-based R&D Systems multianalyte kit. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Bayesian model averaging and random forest approaches were used to identify clinical factors and growth factors able to distinguish between men with AgCaP (Gleason Score [GS] ≥3+4) from those with non-AgCaP (GS 3+3). Logistic regression and Monte Carlo cross-validation identified variable combinations in order to able to maximize differentiation of AgCaP from non-AgCaP. RESULTS: The MiCheck logistic regression model was developed and comprises the following variables: serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), patient age, Digital Rectal Exam (DRE) status, Leptin, IL-7, vascular endothelial growth factor, and Glypican-1. The model differentiated AgCaP from non-AgCaP with an area under the curve of 0.83 and was superior to PSA, %free PSA and PHI in all patient groups, regardless of PSA range. Applying the MiCheck test to all evaluable biopsy patients from the MiCheck-01 study demonstrated that up to 30% of biopsies could be avoided while delaying diagnosis of only 6.8% of GS ≥3+4 cancers, 5% of GS ≥4+3 cancers and no cancers of GS 8 or higher. CONCLUSIONS: The MiCheck test outperforms PSA, %free PSA and PHI tests in differentiating AgCaP vs. non-AgCaP patients. The MiCheck test could result in a significant number of biopsies being avoided with a low number of patients experiencing a delayed diagnosis.

The Oral Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Receptor Antagonist Relugolix as Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy to External Beam Radiotherapy in Patients with Localised Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: A Randomised, Open-label, Parallel-group Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with neoadjuvant/adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is an established treatment option to prolong survival for patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, was evaluated in this clinical setting in comparison with degarelix, an injectable GnRH antagonist. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of relugolix to achieve and maintain castration. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A phase 2 open-label study was conducted in 103 intermediate-risk PCa patients undergoing primary EBRT and neoadjuvant/adjuvant ADT between June 2014 and December 2015. INTERVENTION: Patients randomly assigned (3:2) to 24-wk treatment with either daily oral relugolix or 4-wk subcutaneous depot degarelix (reference control). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was the rate of effective castration (testosterone <1.73nmol/l) in relugolix patients between 4 and 24 wk of treatment. Secondary endpoints included rate of profound castration (testosterone <0.7nmol/l), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, prostate volume, quality of life (QoL) assessed using the Aging Males' Symptoms scale, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (30-item EORTC core questionnaire [EORTC QLQ-C30] and 25-item EORTC prostate cancer module [EORTC QLQ-PR25]) questionnaires, and safety. No formal statistical comparisons with degarelix were planned. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Castration rates during treatment were 95% and 82% with relugolix and 89% and 68% with degarelix for 1.73 and 0.7nmol/l thresholds, respectively. Median time to castration in the relugolix arm was 4 d. During treatment, PSA levels and prostate volumes were reduced in both groups. Three months after discontinuing treatment, 52% of men on relugolix and 16% on degarelix experienced testosterone recovery (statistical significance of differences not tested). Mean and median QoL scores improved following treatment discontinuation. The most common adverse event was hot flush (relugolix 57%; degarelix 61%). Lack of blinding was a potential limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Relugolix achieved testosterone suppression to castrate levels within days and maintained it over 24 wk with a safety profile consistent with its mechanism of action. PATIENT SUMMARY: Oral once-daily relugolix may be a novel oral alternative to injectable androgen deprivation therapies.

Optimizing the role of androgen deprivation therapy in advanced prostate cancer: Challenges beyond the guidelines.

BACKGROUND: For specific clinical indications, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) will induce disease prostate cancer (PC) regression, relieve symptoms and prolong survival; however, ADT has a well-described range of side effects, which may have a detrimental effect on the patient's quality of life, necessitating additional interventions or changes in PC treatment. The risk-benefit analysis for initiating ADT in PC patients throughout the PC disease continuum warrants review. METHODS: A 14-member panel comprised of urologic and medical oncologists were chosen for an expert review panel, to provide guidance on a more judicious use of ADT in advanced PC patients. Panel members were chosen based upon their academic and community experience and expertise in the management of PC patients. Four academic members of the panel served as group leaders; the remaining eight panel members were from Large Urology Group Practice Association practices with proven experience in leading their advanced PC clinics. The panel members were assigned to four separate working groups, and were tasked with addressing the role of ADT in specific PC settings. RESULTS: This article describes the practical recommendations of an expert panel for the use of ADT throughout the PC disease continuum, as well as an algorithm summarizing the key recommendations. The target for this publication is all providers (urologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, or advanced practice providers) who evaluate and manage advanced PC patients, regardless of their practice setting. CONCLUSION: The panel has provided recommendations for monitoring PC patients while on ADT, recognizing that PC patients will progress despite testosterone suppression and, therefore, early identification of conversion from castrate-sensitive to castration resistance is critical. Also, the requirement to both identify and mitigate side effects of ADT as well as the importance of quality of life maintenance are essential to the optimization of patient care, especially as more combinatorial therapeutic strategies with ADT continue to emerge.

Results of a Real-world Study of Enzalutamide and Abiraterone Acetate With Prednisone Tolerability (REAAcT).

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in tolerability in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide (ENZA) or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA+P). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase IV, prospective, open-label, multicenter, real-world study. Patients were prescribed ENZA or AA+P at the treating physician's discretion. Computerized tests of 4 cognitive domains (Cogstate), patient-reported outcomes (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 [EORTC QLQ-30], Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-Fatigue], Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function [FACT-Cog]), and patient/caregiver surveys were assessed at baseline and 2 months. Safety data were collected. RESULTS: Of 100 treated patients, 92 were evaluable (46/arm). Baseline characteristics were similar, with mild cognitive impairment observed in ∼20% of patients. The FACIT-Fatigue demonstrated a statistically significant worsening from baseline of -4.00 (95% confidence interval, -6.61 to -1.39) for ENZA compared with AA+P, -0.01 (95% confidence interval, -2.40 to 2.38). Overall, more adverse events (AEs) and more AEs of fatigue were reported with ENZA versus AA+P (52% vs. 36% and 26% vs. 8%, respectively). Grade 3/4 AEs were similar (4% vs. 6%). Unique neuropsychiatric AEs reported with ENZA included amnesia, cognitive disorders, memory impairment, and confusional state; those for AA+P included cerebrovascular accident, presyncope, and spinal cord compression. Clinically meaningful cognitive decline was seen in 4 patients on ENZA versus 1 patient on AA+P. However, the overall mean changes from baseline for the Cogstate tests, the EORTC QLQ-C30, and the FACT-Cog assessment were similar and showed no meaningful change. Caregiver survey responses noted more fatigue with ENZA and more moodiness with AA+P compared with patient responses. CONCLUSIONS: Although baseline values were similar, more fatigue and neurocognitive differences were observed with ENZA compared with AA+P.