Emerging racial disparities among Medicare beneficiaries and Veterans with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that Black men receive worse prostate cancer care than White men. This has not been explored in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) in the current treatment era. METHODS: We evaluated treatment intensification (TI) and overall survival (OS) in Medicare (2015-2018) and Veterans Health Administration (VHA; 2015-2019) patients with mCSPC, classifying first-line mCSPC treatment as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + novel hormonal therapy; ADT + docetaxel; ADT + first-generation nonsteroidal antiandrogen; or ADT alone. RESULTS: We analyzed 2226 Black and 16,071 White Medicare, and 1020 Black and 2364 White VHA patients. TI was significantly lower for Black vs White Medicare patients overall (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.81) and without Medicaid (adjusted OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.57-0.87). Medicaid patients had less TI irrespective of race. OS was worse for Black vs White Medicare patients overall (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% CI 1.09-1.31) and without Medicaid (adjusted HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.01-1.27). OS was worse in Medicaid vs without Medicaid, with no significant OS difference between races. TI was significantly lower for Black vs White VHA patients (adjusted OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61-0.92), with no significant OS difference between races. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-recommended TI was low for all patients with mCSPC, with less TI in Black patients in both Medicare and the VHA. Black race was associated with worse OS in Medicare but not the VHA. Medicaid patients had less TI and worse OS than those without Medicaid, suggesting poverty and race are associated with care and outcomes.

Real-world overall survival with abiraterone acetate versus enzalutamide in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are no large head-to-head phase 3 clinical trials comparing overall survival (OS) for abiraterone and enzalutamide. This study used Medicare claims data to compare OS in patients with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who initiated abiraterone or enzalutamide. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of the Medicare database (2009-2020) included adult men with ≥1 claim for prostate cancer, metastatic diagnosis, and no prior chemotherapy or novel hormone therapy who initiated first-line (1L) abiraterone or enzalutamide in the index period (September 10, 2014 to May 31, 2017). Cox proportional-hazards models with inverse probability treatment-weighting (IPTW) were used to compare OS between abiraterone- and enzalutamide-treated patients, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Subgroup analyses by baseline characteristics were also conducted. RESULTS: Overall, 5506 patients who received 1L abiraterone (n = 2911) or enzalutamide (n = 2595) were included. Median follow-up was comparable in both cohorts (abiraterone, 19.1 months; enzalutamide, 20.3 months). IPTW-adjusted median OS (95% CI) was 20.6 months (19.7‒21.4) for abiraterone and 22.5 months (21.2‒23.8) for enzalutamide, with an IPTW-adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) of 1.10 (1.04-1.16). Median OS was significantly shorter for abiraterone versus enzalutamide in patients ≥75 years old; White patients; patients with baseline diabetes, cardiovascular disease, both diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and renal disease; and across all socioeconomic strata. CONCLUSIONS: In the Medicare chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC population, 1L abiraterone was associated with worse OS versus enzalutamide in the overall population and among subgroups with older age and comorbidities, supporting findings from previous real-world studies and demonstrating a disparity in outcomes.

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.

A phase 2 study of AZD4635 in combination with durvalumab or oleclumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of the adenosine 2A receptor (A2AR) diminishes the immunosuppressive effects of adenosine and may complement immune-targeting drugs. This phase 2 study evaluated the A2AR antagonist AZD4635 in combination with durvalumab or oleclumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed disease progressing within 6 months on ≥ 2 therapy lines were randomly assigned to either Module 1 (AZD4635 + durvalumab) or Module 2 (AZD4635 + oleclumab). Primary endpoints were objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate. Secondary endpoints included radiological progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were treated (Module 1, n = 29; Module 2, n = 30). Median number of prior therapies was 4. One confirmed complete response by RECIST (Module 1) and 2 confirmed PSA responses (1 per module) were observed. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) possibly related to AZD4635 were nausea (37.9%), fatigue (20.7%), and decreased appetite (17.2%) in Module 1; nausea (50%), fatigue (30%), and vomiting (23.3%) in Module 2. No dose-limiting toxicities or treatment-related serious AEs were observed. In Module 1, AZD4635 geometric mean trough concentration was 124.9 ng/mL (geometric CV% 69.84; n = 22); exposures were similar in Module 2. In Modules 1 and 2, median (95% CI) rPFS was 2.3 (1.6 -3.8) and 1.5 (1.3- 4.0) months, respectively. Median PFS was 1.7 versus 2.3 months for patients with high versus low blood-based adenosine signature. CONCLUSION: In this heavily pretreated population, AZD4635 with durvalumab or oleclumab demonstrated minimal antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL: gov identifier: NCT04089553.

Prognostic and predictive analyses of circulating plasma biomarkers in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer treated with docetaxel/prednisone with or without bevacizumab.

BACKGROUND: CALGB 90401 (Alliance) was a phase III trial of 1050 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) comparing docetaxel, prednisone, bevacizumab (DP+B) versus DP alone. While this trial did not show an improvement in overall survival (OS), there were improved intermediate outcomes suggesting that subsets of men may derive benefit from this combination. The purpose of this analysis was to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers associated with OS and progression-free survival (PFS) benefit from DP+B. METHODS: Baseline EDTA plasma samples from 650 consenting patients were analyzed for 24 biomarkers. The proportional hazards model was utilized to test for the prognostic and predictive importance of the biomarkers for OS. The statistically significant biomarkers of OS were further investigated for prognostic and predictive importance for other secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 15 markers [ICAM-1, VEGF-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, Ang-2, Her-3, Osteopontin (OPN), PlGF, VCAM-1, HGF, VEGF, Chromogranin A, IL-6, VEGF-R1, BMP-9] were prognostic of OS, while 9 markers (ICAM-1, VEGF-R3, Her-3, TIMP-1, Ang-2, OPN, PlGF, HGF, and VEGF) were also prognostic of PFS. All markers were statistically significant in univariate analyses after adjustment for multiplicity (FDR < 0.1). In multivariable analyses of OS adjusting for risk score, seven markers had FDR < 0.1, including ICAM-1, VEGF-R3, TIMP-1, Ang-2, VEGF, TSP-2 and HGF. In unadjusted analysis, OPN was predictive of PFS improvement with DP+B, in both univariate and multivariable analysis. However, none of the biomarkers tested were predictive of clinical outcomes after adjusting for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple biomarkers were identified in CALGB 90401 as prognostic of clinical outcomes but not predictive of OS. While OPN may have promise as a potential biomarker for anti-angiogenic therapies, further mechanistic and clinical studies are needed to determine the underlying biology and potential clinical application.

Updated 5-year results for short course abiraterone acetate and LHRH agonist for unfavorable intermediate and favorable high-risk prostate cancer.

Combined androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) improves outcomes for intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer. Treatment intensification with abiraterone acetate/prednisone (AAP) provides additional benefit for high-risk disease. We previously reported 3-year outcomes of a single-arm prospective multicenter trial (AbiRT trial) of 33 patients with unfavorable intermediate risk (UIR) and favorable high risk (FHR) prostate cancer undergoing short course, combination therapy with ADT, AAP, and RT. Here we report the final analysis demonstrating a high rate of testosterone recovery (97%) and excellent biochemical progression-free survival (97%) at 5 years. These data support comparative prospective studies of shorter, more potent ADT courses in favorable high-risk prostate cancer.

Real-world economic burden of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer before and after first-line therapy initiation.

AIMS: To describe healthcare costs of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) initiating first-line (1 L) therapies from a US payer perspective. METHODS: Patients initiating a Flatiron oncologist-defined 1 L mCRPC therapy (index date) on or after mCRPC diagnosis were identified from linked electronic medical records/claims data from the Flatiron Metastatic Prostate Cancer (PC) Core Registry and Komodo's Healthcare Map. Patients were excluded if they initiated a clinical trial drug in 1 L, had <12 months of insurance eligibility prior to index, or no claims in Komodo's Healthcare Map for the Flatiron oncologist-defined index therapy. All-cause and PC-related total costs per-patient-per-month (PPPM), including costs for services and procedures from medical claims (i.e. medical costs) and costs from pharmacy claims (i.e. pharmacy costs), were described in the 12-month baseline period before 1 L therapy initiation (including the baseline pre- and post- mCRPC progression periods) and during 1 L therapy (follow-up). RESULTS: Among 459 patients with mCRPC (mean age 70 years, 57% White, 16% Black, 45% commercially-insured, 43% Medicare Advantage-insured, and 12% Medicaid-insured), average baseline all-cause total costs (PPPM) were $4,576 ($4,166 pre-mCRPC progression, $8,278 post-mCRPC progression). Average baseline PC-related total costs were $2,935 ($2,537 pre-mCRPC progression, $6,661 post-mCRPC progression). During an average 1 L duration of 8.5 months, mean total costs were $13,746 (all-cause) and $12,061 (PC-related) PPPM. The cost increase following 1 L therapy initiation was driven by higher PC-related outpatient and pharmacy costs. PC-related medical costs PPPM increased from $1,504 during baseline to $5,585 following 1 L mCRPC therapy initiation. LIMITATIONS: All analyses were descriptive; statistical testing was not performed. CONCLUSION: Incremental costs of progression to mCRPC are significant, with the majority of costs driven by higher PC-related costs. Using contemporary data, this study highlights the importance of utilizing effective therapies that slow progression and reduce healthcare resource demands despite the initial investment in treatment costs.

The Impact of Circulating Tumor Cell HOXB13 RNA Detection in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) Treated with Abiraterone or Enzalutamide.

PURPOSE: HOXB13 is an androgen receptor (AR) coregulator specifically expressed in cells of prostatic lineage. We sought to associate circulating tumor cell (CTC) HOXB13 expression with outcomes in men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the multicenter prospective PROPHECY trial of mCRPC men (NCT02269982, n = 118) treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide. CTC detection and HOXB13 complementary DNA (cDNA) expression was measured using a modified Adnatest, grouping patients into 3 categories: CTC 0 (undetectable); CTC+ HOXB13 CTC low (<4 copies); or CTC+ HOXB13 CTC high. The HOXB13 threshold was determined by maximally selected rank statistics for prognostic associations with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We included 102 men with sufficient CTC HOXB13 cDNA, identifying 25%, 31%, and 44% of patients who were CTC 0, CTC+ HOXB13 low, and CTC+ HOXB13 high, respectively. Median OS were 25.7, 27.8, and 12.1 months whereas the median PFS were 9.0, 7.7, and 3.8 months, respectively. In subgroup analysis among men with CellSearch CTCs ≥5 copies/mL and adjusting for prior abi/enza treatment and Halabi clinical risk score, the multivariate HR for HOXB13 CTC detection was 2.39 (95% CI, 1.06-5.40) for OS and 2.78 (95% CI, 1.38-5.59) for PFS, respectively. Low HOXB13 CTC detection was associated with lower CTC PSA, PSMA, AR-FL, and AR-V7 detection, and more liver/lung metastases (41% vs. 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Higher CTC HOXB13 expression is associated with AR-dependent biomarkers in CTCs and is adversely prognostic in the context of potent AR inhibition in men with mCRPC.

Marital Status, Living Arrangement, and Survival among Individuals with Advanced Prostate Cancer in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown improved survival among individuals with cancer with higher levels of social support. Few studies have investigated social support and overall survival (OS) in individuals with advanced prostate cancer in an international cohort. We investigated the associations of marital status and living arrangements with OS among individuals with advanced prostate cancer in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer (IRONMAN). METHODS: IRONMAN is enrolling participants diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer (metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, mHSPC; castration-resistant prostate cancer, CRPC) from 16 countries. Participants in this analysis were recruited between July 2017 and January 2023. Adjusting for demographics and tumor characteristics, the associations were estimated using Cox regression and stratified by disease state (mHSPC, CRPC), age (<70, ≥70 years), and continent of enrollment (North America, Europe, Other). RESULTS: We included 2,119 participants with advanced prostate cancer, of whom 427 died during up to 5 years of follow-up (median 6 months). Two-thirds had mHSPC. Most were married/in a civil partnership (79%) and 6% were widowed. Very few married participants were living alone (1%), while most unmarried participants were living alone (70%). Married participants had better OS than unmarried participants [adjusted HR: 1.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-2.02]. Widowed participants had the worst survival compared with married individuals (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.22-2.94). CONCLUSIONS: Among those with advanced prostate cancer, unmarried and widowed participants had worse OS compared with married participants. IMPACT: This research highlighted the importance of social support in OS within this vulnerable population.

Phase 1b study of enzalutamide plus CC-115, a dual mTORC1/2 and DNA-PK inhibitor, in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

BACKGROUND: CC-115, a dual mTORC1/2 and DNA-PK inhibitor, has promising antitumour activity when combined with androgen receptor (AR) inhibition in pre-clinical models. METHODS: Phase 1b multicentre trial evaluating enzalutamide with escalating doses of CC-115 in AR inhibitor-naive mCRPC patients (n = 41). Primary endpoints were safety and RP2D. Secondary endpoints included PSA response, time-to-PSA progression, and radiographic progression. RESULTS: Common adverse effects included rash (31.7% Grades 1-2 (Gr); 31.7% Gr 3), pruritis (43.9% Gr 1-2), diarrhoea (37% Gr 1-2), and hypertension (17% Gr 1-2; 9.8% Gr 3). CC-115 RP2D was 5 mg twice a day. In 40 evaluable patients, 80% achieved ≥50% reduction in PSA (PSA50), and 58% achieved ≥90% reduction in PSA (PSA90) by 12 weeks. Median time-to-PSA progression was 14.7 months and median rPFS was 22.1 months. Stratification by PI3K alterations demonstrated a non-statistically significant trend towards improved PSA50 response (PSA50 of 94% vs. 67%, p = 0.08). Exploratory pre-clinical analysis suggested CC-115 inhibited mTOR pathway strongly, but may be insufficient to inhibit DNA-PK at RP2D. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of enzalutamide and CC-115 was well tolerated. A non-statistically significant trend towards improved PSA response was observed in patients harbouring PI3K pathway alterations, suggesting potential predictive biomarkers of response to a PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway inhibitor. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02833883.

Pain and Its Association with Survival for Black and White Individuals with Advanced Prostate Cancer in the United States.

Bone pain is a well-known quality-of-life detriment for individuals with prostate cancer and is associated with survival. This study expands previous work into racial differences in multiple patient-reported dimensions of pain and the association between baseline and longitudinal pain and mortality. This is a prospective cohort study of individuals with newly diagnosed advanced prostate cancer enrolled in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer (IRONMAN) from 2017 to 2023 at U.S. sites. Differences in four pain scores at study enrollment by race were investigated. Cox proportional hazards models and joint longitudinal survival models were fit for each of the scale scores to estimate HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association with all-cause mortality. The cohort included 879 individuals (20% self-identifying as Black) enrolled at 38 U.S. sites. Black participants had worse pain at baseline compared with White participants, most notably a higher average pain rating (mean 3.1 vs. 2.2 on a 10-point scale). For each pain scale, higher pain was associated with higher mortality after adjusting for measures of disease burden, particularly for severe bone pain compared with no pain (HR, 2.47; 95% CI: 1.44-4.22). The association between pain and all-cause mortality was stronger for participants with castration-resistant prostate cancer compared with those with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and was similar among Black and White participants. Overall, Black participants reported worse pain than White participants, and more severe pain was associated with higher mortality independent of clinical covariates for all pain scales. SIGNIFICANCE: Black participants with advanced prostate cancer reported worse pain than White participants, and more pain was associated with worse survival. More holistic clinical assessments of pain in this population are needed to determine the factors upon which to intervene to improve quality of life and survivorship, particularly for Black individuals.

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.

Assessing the utility of molecular diagnostic classification for cancers of unknown primary.

BACKGROUND: Roughly 5% of metastatic cancers present with uncertain origin, for which molecular classification could influence subsequent management; however, prior studies of molecular diagnostic classifiers have reported mixed results with regard to clinical impact. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the utility of a novel molecular diagnostic classifier by assessing theoretical changes in treatment and additional testing recommendations from oncologists before and after the review of classifier predictions. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed de-identified records from 289 patients with a consensus diagnosis of cancer of uncertain/unknown primary (CUP). Two (or three, if adjudication was required) independent oncologists separately reviewed patient clinical information to determine the course of treatment before they reviewed results from the molecular diagnostic classifier and subsequently evaluated whether the predicted diagnosis would alter their treatment plan. RESULTS: Results from the molecular diagnostic classifier changed the consensus oncologist-reported treatment recommendations for 235 out of 289 patients (81.3%). At the level of individual oncologist reviews (n = 414), 64.7% (n = 268) of treatment recommendations were based on CUP guidelines prior to review of results from the molecular diagnostic classifier. After seeing classifier results, 98.1% (n = 207) of the reviews, where treatment was specified (n = 211), were guided by the tissue of origin-specific guidelines. Overall, 89.9% of the 414 total reviews either expressed strong agreement (n = 242) or agreement (n = 130) that the molecular diagnostic classifier result increased confidence in selecting the most appropriate treatment regimen. CONCLUSIONS: A retrospective review of CUP cases demonstrates that a novel molecular diagnostic classifier could affect treatment in the majority of patients, supporting its clinical utility. Further studies are needed to prospectively evaluate whether the use of molecular diagnostic classifiers improves clinical outcomes in CUP patients.

Plain language summary: Does the amount of time it takes for prostate-specific antigen to double affect how long men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer live and their healthcare costs?

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of a research article originally published in Clinical Genitourinary Cancer. The original article described the effect of rapidly rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels on how long men with a type of advanced prostate cancer live and their healthcare costs. The prostate is a part of the male body that helps make semen. PSA is a protein produced by the prostate that can show how advanced prostate cancer has become. One measure of prostate cancer growth is assessing how quickly a patient's PSA level doubles. This is known as the PSA doubling time (PSADT). People with a shorter PSADT usually have faster-growing prostate cancer compared with people who have a longer PSADT of more than 12 months (long PSADT). Researchers wanted to know if PSADT can predict cancer spread (known as metastasis) or death for people with a type of advanced prostate cancer called non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Researchers also wanted to know if PSADT can predict healthcare costs. This could help doctors choose the right treatment for their patients with nmCRPC. This was a real-world study, not a clinical trial. This means that researchers looked at what happened when men received the treatments prescribed by their own doctor as part of their usual healthcare treatment. In this study, researchers used insurance claim information. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers looked at information for 2800 men with nmCRPC. Six out of every 10 men (60%) had a long PSADT of more than 12 months. Researchers found that it took longer for the cancer to spread to other parts of the body in men with a longer PSADT than men with PSADT of 12 months or less. Researchers also found that men with a longer PSADT lived longer than men with PSADT of 12 months or less. The long PSADT group had fewer healthcare visits overall than men with PSADT of 10 months or less. Over time, it cost less to treat men with a long PSADT than men with PSADT of 10 months or less. Generally, if PSADT was shorter, patients tended to do worse. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: In this real-world study, researchers found that men with nmCRPC lived longer and had lower healthcare costs if they had a long PSADT of more than 12 months compared with men who had a shorter PSADT. Men with nmCRPC and a shorter PSADT may benefit from approved treatments that slow cancer spread and help them live longer. However, these treatments may have side effects and cost more than standard treatment. Doctors take all these things into account when choosing treatments for their patients. Most men in this study had a long PSADT of more than 12 months. Standard treatment may be the right choice for them because they are more likely to have better outcomes than men with a shorter PSADT.

Transcriptomic Signatures Associated With Outcomes in Recurrent Prostate Cancer Treated With Salvage Radiation, Androgen-Deprivation Therapy, and Enzalutamide: Correlative Analysis of the STREAM Trial.

PURPOSE: Men with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy (RP) may progress despite radiation and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Tissue-based transcriptomic signatures can identify who may benefit from a more aggressive systemic approach. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective phase II multicenter trial of enzalutamide, ADT, and salvage radiotherapy in men with rising PSA after RP. Tumor tissue was analyzed using the Decipher platform for gene expression, including a novel prostate subtyping classifier, PTEN loss, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), and ADT response. Cox models were used to associate signature scores with progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Of the 38 men enrolled, 31 had tissue with sufficient-quality RNA for genomic analysis. Luminal differentiated (LD) subtype tumors had the longest 3-year PFS at 89% compared with 19% in the luminal proliferating subtype. Men with signatures of PTEN loss (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.64; P = .01) or HRD (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.39; P = .009) had worse PFS, while those with higher ADT response signature scores (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.94; P = .01) were associated with improved PFS. Analysis of these signatures in a large cohort (n = 5,330) of RP samples from patients with biochemical recurrence found that these signatures provide complementary information related to outcomes with salvage radiation. CONCLUSION: Despite aggressive systemic therapy with salvage radiation, nearly 50% of high-risk men relapse within 3 years. We show that LD and higher ADT sensitivity tumors had favorable outcomes. Those with a luminal proliferating subtype, PTEN loss, and/or HRD signatures had poor outcomes despite ADT/radiation and enzalutamide and may benefit from alternative approaches.

Discrete-Choice Experiment to Understand the Preferences of Patients with Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer in the USA, Canada, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) have broadened, and treatment decisions can have a long-lasting impact on patients' quality of life. Data on patient preferences can improve therapeutic decision-making by helping physicians suggest treatments that align with patients' values and needs. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantify patient preferences for attributes of chemohormonal therapies among patients with mHSPC in the USA, Canada, and the UK. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment survey instrument was developed and administered to patients with high- and very-high-risk localized prostate cancer and mHSPC. Patients chose between baseline androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) alone and experimentally designed, hypothetical treatment alternatives representing chemohormonal therapies. Choices were analyzed using logit models to derive the relative importance of attributes for each country and to evaluate differences and similarities among patients across countries. RESULTS: A total of 550 respondents completed the survey (USA, 200; Canada, 200; UK, 150); the mean age of respondents was 64.3 years. Treatment choices revealed that patients were most concerned with treatment efficacy. However, treatment-related convenience factors, such as route of drug administration and frequency of monitoring visits, were as important as some treatment-related side effects, such as skin rash, nausea, and fatigue. Patient preferences across countries were similar, although patients in Canada appeared to be more affected by concomitant steroid use. CONCLUSION: Patients with mHSPC believe the use of ADT alone is insufficient when more effective treatments are available. Efficacy is the most significant driver of patient choices. Treatment-related convenience factors can be as important as safety concerns for patients.

Health-related quality of life in GALAHAD: A multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of niraparib for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA-repair gene defects.

BACKGROUND: Niraparib is a highly selective poly (adenosine diphosphateribose) polymerase-1 and poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase-2 inhibitor indicated for select patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. The phase 2 GALAHAD trial (NCT02854436) demonstrated that niraparib monotherapy is tolerable and efficacious in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, particularly those with breast cancer gene (BRCA) alterations who had progressed on prior androgen signaling inhibitor therapy and taxane-based chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To report the prespecified patient-reported outcomes analysis from GALAHAD. METHODS: Eligible patients with alterations to BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) and with pathogenic alterations in other HRR genes (other HRR cohort) were enrolled and received niraparib 300 mg once daily. Patient-reported outcome instruments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate and the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. Changes from baseline were compared using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. RESULTS: On average, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved in the BRCA cohort by cycle 3 (mean change = 6.03; 95% CI = 2.76-9.29) and was maintained above baseline until cycle 10 (mean change = 2.84; 95% CI = -1.95 to 7.63), whereas the other HRR cohort showed no early change in HRQoL from baseline (mean change = -0.07; 95% CI = -4.69 to 4.55) and declined by cycle 10 (mean change = -5.10; 95% CI = -15.3 to 5.06). Median time to deterioration in pain intensity and pain interference could not be estimated in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced mCRPC and BRCA alterations treated with niraparib experienced more meaningful improvement in overall HRQoL, pain intensity, and pain interference compared with those with other HRR alterations. In this population of castrate, heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC and HRR alterations, stabilization, and improvement in HRQoL may be relevant to consider when making treatment decisions. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Janssen Research & Development, LLC (no grant number). Dr Smith has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, Janssen, and Lilly; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Sandhu has received grants from Amgen, Endocyte, and Genentech; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Merck; and has received personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck Serono. Dr George has received personal fees from the American Association for Cancer Research, Axess Oncology, Capio Biosciences, Constellation Pharma, EMD Serono, Flatiron, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Michael J. Hennessey Association, Millennium Medical Publishing, Modra Pharma, Myovant Sciences, Inc., NCI Genitourinary, Nektar Therapeutics, Physician Education Resource, Propella TX, RevHealth, LLC, and UroGPO; has received grants and personal fees from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bayer and UroToday; has received grants from Calithera and Novartis; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Exelixis, Inc., Sanofi, and Janssen Pharma. Dr Chi has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, POINT Biopharma, Roche, and Sanofi; and has received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Saad has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen during the conduct of the study; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Bayer, Myovant, Sanofi, and Novartis. Dr Thiery-Vuillemin has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Astellas Pharma; and has received personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Olmos has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and has received nonfinancial support from Astellas Pharma, F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Genentech, and Ipsen. Dr Danila has received research support from the US Department of Defense, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, Stand Up to Cancer, Janssen Research & Development, Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Agensys, Genentech, and CreaTV. Dr Gafanov has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study. Dr Castro has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Janssen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Clovis. Dr Moon has received research funding from SeaGen, HuyaBio, Janssen, BMS, Aveo, Xencor, and has received personal fees from Axess Oncology, MJH, EMD Serono, and Pfizer. Dr Joshua has received nonfinancial support from Janssen; consulted or served in an advisory role for Neoleukin, Janssen Oncology, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Noxopharm, IQvia, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, and Eisai; and received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mayne Pharma, Roche/Genentech, Bayer, MacroGenics, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Corvus Pharmaceuticals. Drs Mason, Liu, Bevans, Lopez-Gitlitz, and Francis and Mr Espina are employees of Janssen Research & Development. Dr Mason owns stocks with Janssen. Dr Fizazi has participated in advisory boards and talks for Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, MSD, Novartis/AAA, Pfizer, and Sanofi, with honoraria to his institution (Institut Gustave Roussy); has participated in advisory boards for, with personal honoraria from, Arvinas, CureVac, MacroGenics, and Orion. Study registration number: NCT02854436.

Quality of life in the year after new diagnosis with advanced prostate cancer for Black and White individuals living in the US.

PURPOSE: To assess differences in baseline and longitudinal quality of life among Black and White individuals in the US with advanced prostate cancer. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer (IRONMAN) including US participants newly diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer and identifying their race as Black or White from 2017 to 2023. Participants completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 Quality of Life (QoL) Survey at study enrollment and every 3 months thereafter for up to 1 year of follow-up reporting 15 scale scores ranging from 0 to 100 (higher functioning and lower symptom scores represent better quality of life). Linear mixed effects models with race and month of questionnaire completion were fit for each scale, and model coefficients were used to assess differences in baseline and longitudinal QoL by race. RESULTS: Eight hundred and seventy-nine participants were included (20% identifying as Black) at 38 US sites. Compared to White participants at baseline, Black participants had worse constipation (mean 6.3 percentage points higher; 95% CI 2.9-9.8), financial insecurity (5.7 (1.4-10.0)), and pain (5.1 (0.9-9.3)). QoL decreased over time similarly by race; most notably, role functioning decreased by 0.7 percentage points (95% CI -0.8, -0.5) per month. CONCLUSION: There are notable differences in quality of life at new diagnosis of advanced prostate cancer for Black and White individuals, and quality of life declines similarly in the first year for both groups. Interventions that address specific aspects of quality of life in these patients could meaningfully improve the overall survivorship experience.