Clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer treated with abiraterone with or without ongoing androgen deprivation therapy: A retrospective case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Abiraterone and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are used in the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Recently, it has been suggested that the use of abiraterone alone (without ADT) may have comparable efficacy to abiraterone with ongoing ADT. Here, we sought to assess the impact of ADT cessation in patients beginning abiraterone for castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: We identified 39 patients at our institution who received abiraterone alone (with discontinuation of ADT) between 2011 and 2022. We then procured a comparable group of 39 patients (matched by age, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level) who received abiraterone with ongoing ADT during the same period. We assessed and compared clinical outcomes in the two groups (abiraterone-alone vs. abiraterone-ADT) with respect to PSA response rates, PSA progression-free survival, and overall survival. Results were adjusted using Cox proportional-hazards multivariable models. RESULTS: The median PSA before treatment initiation was 12.7 (range: 0.2-199) ng/mL in the abiraterone-alone group and 15.5 (range: 0.6-212) ng/mL in the abiraterone-ADT group. Use of abiraterone alone adequately suppressed testosterone levels in 35/37 (94.6%) patients. Patients receiving abiraterone alone had a median PSA reduction of 80.2% versus 79.5% in patients receiving abiraterone plus ADT. The median PSA progression-free survival in patients receiving abiraterone alone was 27.4 versus 25.8 months in patients receiving abiraterone plus ADT (hazard ratio [HR] 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.71; p = 0.82). In addition, abiraterone alone was associated with an overall survival of 3.6 versus 3.1 years in patients receiving abiraterone plus ADT (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.50-1.62; p = 0.72). There were no differences in PFS or OS between groups after performing Cox multivariable regression analyses. CONCLUSION: Use of abiraterone alone was associated with comparable clinical outcomes to patients who received abiraterone together with ADT. Further prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the impact of abiraterone alone on treatment outcomes and cost savings.

Comparison of continuous versus intermittent infusion cyclosporine and impact on transplant related outcomes in allogeneic transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Continuous infusion (CIVI) cyclosporine (CsA) is an alternative for allograft recipients intolerant of twice daily infusions (TDI). The importance of achieving therapeutic levels of CsA early after allogeneic HCT has been demonstrated in previous studies. Our study evaluated the incidence of acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) and survival among patients receiving CIVI vs. TDI CsA during their first allogeneic HCT. METHODS: A retrospective study of adult patients undergoing first allogeneic HCT at the University of Minnesota Medical Center between 2011 and 2017. Patients were grouped according to the administration method. The primary outcome was the occurrence of acute grade II-IV GVHD by day +180. Secondary outcomes included the 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD, relapse, and overall survival. RESULTS: 42 patients intolerant of TDI CsA received CsA via CIVI for >48 hours for a median of 9 days (range, 3-32 days). CsA concentrations were similar between groups. We found no difference between the rates of grade II-IV acute (45% vs 53%, p = 0.59) or chronic (17% vs 30%, p = 0.20) GVHD or overall survival (57% vs 67%, p = 0.10). Subgroup analysis of patients that received myeloablative conditioning or umbilical cord blood did not reveal significant differences in GVHD or overall survival. Cumulative incidence of relapse was higher among the continuous infusion group (39% vs. 23%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Due to the finding of increased risk of relapse, cyclosporine should be administered as traditional twice daily infusion unless necessary. A prospective clinical trial is needed to confirm these results.

Assessment of adherence and relative dose intensity with oral chemotherapy in oncology clinical trials at an academic medical center.

Background/Aims Oral chemotherapy is increasingly utilized leaving the patient responsible for self-administering an often complex regimen where adverse effects are common. Non-adherence and reduced relative dose intensity are both associated with poorer outcomes in the community setting but are rarely reported in clinical trials. The purpose of this study is to quantify adherence and relative dose intensity in oncology clinical trials and to determine patient and study related factors that influence adherence and relative dose intensity. Methods Patients were identified from non-industry-funded clinical trials conducted between 1 January 2009 and 31 March 2013 at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center. Data were extracted from primary research records. Descriptive statistics and linear regression modeling was performed using SAS 9.4. Results A total of 17 clinical trials and 266 subjects were included. Mean adherence was greater than 97% for the first eight cycles. Mean relative dose intensity was less than 90% for the first cycle and declined over time. Male gender, a performance status of 1 or 2, metastatic disease, and traveling more than 90 miles to reach the cancer center were associated with higher relative dose intensity. Conclusions Patients with cancer enrolled in clinical trials are highly adherent but unlikely to achieve protocol specified relative dose intensity. Given that determining the phase II dose is the primary endpoint of phase I trials, incorporating relative dose intensity into this determination should be considered.

Sirolimus and mirabegron interaction in a hematopoietic cell transplant patient.

PURPOSE: Hematopoietic cell transplant patients are exposed to numerous classes of medications. Transplant practitioners must vigilantly monitor for drug interactions especially involving immunosuppressants. We report a hematopoietic cell transplant patient receiving sirolimus who developed supratherapeutic serum concentrations after initiating mirabegron. SUMMARY: A 31-year-old, 98 kg female received a second umbilical cord blood transplant four years after the first transplant for relapsed acute myeloid leukemia. Mycophenolate mofetil and sirolimus were utilized for graft versus host disease prophylaxis. The patient was receiving sirolimus 2 mg daily and the serum concentration on day 26 post-transplant (day + 26) was within therapeutic range (6.7 µg/L, goal range 3-12 µg/L). Her post-transplant course was complicated by BK viruria-associated cystitis for which she was started on mirabegron. Six days after starting the new medication (day + 33), the sirolimus serum concentration increased to 19.2 µg/L. Thus mirabegron was discontinued and sirolimus was held. Sirolimus was restarted once the serum concentration was within goal and subsequently stabilized with a combination of 1 mg and 2 mg daily for a total weekly dose of 10 mg. The proposed mechanisms of interaction include: (1) sirolimus inhibition of organic anion transporting polypeptide leading to increased mirabegron in the intestinal lumen; (2) mirabegron inhibition of P-glycoprotein leading to increased absorption of sirolimus and; (3) increased sirolimus absorption leading to increased sirolimus serum concentrations. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first report of a potential drug interaction between sirolimus and mirabegron. Transplant specialists should be aware of this potential interaction when considering the concurrent use of these medications.

Afatinib: A first-line treatment for selected patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety, adverse effects, dosage and administration, and role in therapy of afatinib in the management of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are reviewed. SUMMARY: Afatinib (Gilotrif, Boehringer Ingelheim) is a novel oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) recently approved for the first-line treatment of patients with NSCLC whose tumors are driven by activating mutations of genes coding for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Afatinib is also an inhibitor of a specific EGFR mutation (T790M) that causes resistance to first-generation EGFR-targeted TKIs in about half of patients receiving those drugs. The recommended dosage is 40 mg once daily. In a Phase III trial completed last year, patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who were treated with afatinib had a twofold higher response rate than those receiving standard combination chemotherapy (56% versus 23%) and significantly longer progression-free survival (11.0 months versus 5.6 months). Other studies indicated that afatinib may offer advantages over standard chemotherapy for NSCLC in terms of enhanced symptom control and quality of life and is modestly effective in cases involving EGFRT790M-related acquired resistance to the TKIs erlotinib and gefitinib. Among clinical trial participants, afatinib was generally well tolerated, with the most common grade I or II adverse events being diarrhea and rash or acne; grade III or IV events were infrequent. CONCLUSION: Afatinib is a novel TKI that is efficacious and well tolerated in patients with NSCLC associated with activating EGFR mutations, including cases involving the T790M resistance mutation. It has possible applications in other EGFR mutation- positive cancers.