Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline with apalutamide therapy is associated with longer survival and improved outcomes in individuals with metastatic prostate cancer: a plain language summary of the TITAN study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from an additional (or post hoc) analysis of the TITAN study. The TITAN study looked at whether the prostate cancer treatment apalutamide could be used to treat individuals with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (or mCSPC). A total of 1052 participants with mCSPC were included in the TITAN study. Treatment with apalutamide was compared with treatment with placebo. All participants received androgen deprivation therapy (or ADT), which is a type of hormone therapy that has been part of the main treatment for mCSPC for many years. The results showed that apalutamide plus ADT increased the length of time that participants remained alive compared with placebo plus ADT. Apalutamide plus ADT also controlled the growth of the cancer for a longer length of time compared with placebo plus ADT. Additionally, participants who received apalutamide plus ADT experienced a greater reduction in the blood levels of prostate-specific antigen (or PSA), called a deep PSA decline, compared with those who received placebo plus ADT. An additional (or post hoc) analysis was carried out to understand whether a decrease in blood PSA levels, in response to treatment, was associated with improved outcomes, including longer survival time. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS?: In participants who received apalutamide plus ADT, a deep PSA decline in response to treatment was associated with longer survival time and improved outcomes. WHAT DO THESE RESULTS MEAN FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MCSPC?: These results demonstrate that individuals with mCSPC can benefit from treatment with apalutamide plus ADT. The association seen between deep PSA decline and the longer survival time and improved outcomes highlights how PSA measurements can be used to help monitor cancer disease evolution in response to treatment. Monitoring PSA levels will assist doctors and other healthcare professionals to understand how effectively a treatment is working for a patient and to tailor their treatment approach to improve PSA decline.

Daratumumab Improves Depth of Response and Progression-free Survival in Transplant-ineligible, High-risk, Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with high-risk, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (HR-NDMM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) have limited first-line treatment options. Recent meta-analyses evaluating the impact of incorporating daratumumab in the backbone regimen on progression-free survival (PFS) have found mixed results in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pooled analysis of patient-level data for ASCT-ineligible patients with HR-NDMM [ie, del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16)] from the MAIA and ALCYONE trials; stratified by study identifier and adjusting for cytogenetic abnormality subtype, baseline performance status, International Staging System stage, myeloma type, and renal impairment; was conducted. Impact of daratumumab on PFS and rates of complete response or better (≥CR), minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative CR, very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), and overall response (ORR) was compared to control. RESULTS: Among 101 patients in the daratumumab and 89 patients in the control cohort, median follow-up was 43.7 months. Daratumumab reduced the risk of progression or death by 41% (adjusted hazard ratio for PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.59 [0.41-0.85]) versus control. At 36 months, the estimated proportion of patients who did not progress and were still alive was 41.3% in the daratumumab and 19.9% in the control cohort. Rates of ≥CR (41.6% vs. 22.5%), MRD-negative CR (24.8% vs. 5.6%), ≥VGPR (75.2% vs. 46.1%), and ORR (92.1% vs. 74.2%) were higher for daratumumab versus control. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that incorporation of daratumumab in frontline treatment regimens reduced the risk of progression or death and improved response rates among ASCT-ineligible HR-NDMM patients.

Results of an early access treatment protocol of daratumumab in United States patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab is a human CD38-directed monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: A multicenter, open-label treatment protocol provided early access to daratumumab for patients who had progressive MM after they received ≥3 prior lines of therapy that included a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent or if they were refractory to both a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent. Patients received daratumumab 16 mg/kg weekly for 8 weeks, every other week for 16 weeks, and monthly until they developed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 60 days after the drug gained US approval. Treatment-emergent grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs of special interest were collected. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-eight patients were enrolled at 39 US sites between June and December 2015. Patients received study therapy for a median of 1.9 months (range, 0.03-6.0 months). Fifty-two percent of patients transitioned to commercially-available daratumumab and 37% discontinued because of progressive disease. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 50% of patients, including thrombocytopenia (15%) and anemia (14%). Serious AEs occurred in 35% of patients (12% were drug-related), including infections (11%). Infusion reactions occurred in 56%, 2%, and 2% of patients during the first, second, and all subsequent infusions, respectively; respiratory symptoms (cough, dyspnea, throat irritation, nasal congestion) were common. The infusion reaction rate for the first infusion was 38% in 50 patients at 2 sites who received montelukast as premedication for their first infusion and 59% in patients who did not receive montelukast. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings are consistent with previously reported trials and confirm the safety profile of daratumumab in heavily pretreated US patients who have relapsed or refractory MM. Cancer 2018;124:000-000.

The IMAAGEN Study: Effect of Abiraterone Acetate and Prednisone on Prostate Specific Antigen and Radiographic Disease Progression in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the use of abiraterone acetate (1,000 mg) plus prednisone (5 mg) in patients with high risk, nonmetastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients considered at high risk for progression to metastatic disease (prostate specific antigen 10 ng/ml or greater, or prostate specific antigen doubling time 10 months or less) received abiraterone acetate plus prednisone daily in 28-day cycles. The primary study end point was the proportion of patients in whom a 50% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction was achieved during cycles 1 to 6. Secondary end points included time to prostate specific antigen progression, time to radiographic evidence of disease progression and safety. RESULTS: Of the 131 enrolled patients 44 (34%) remained on treatment with a median followup of 40.0 months. Median age was 72 years (range 48 to 90). Of the patients 82.4% were white and 14.5% were black. Median screening prostate specific antigen was 11.9 ng/dl and median prostate specific antigen doubling time was 3.4 months. Prostate specific antigen was significantly reduced (p <0.0001) with a 50% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction in 86.9% of cases and a 90% or greater reduction in 59.8%. Median time to prostate specific antigen progression was 28.7 months (95% CI 21.2-38.2). Median time to radiographic evidence of disease progression was not reached but on sensitivity analysis in 15 patients it was estimated to be 41.4 months (95% CI 27.6-not estimable). Baseline testosterone 12.5 ng/dl or greater and a 90% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction at cycle 3 were associated with longer time to prostate specific antigen progression and radiographic evidence of disease progression. Outcomes in black patients were similar to those in other patients. Adverse events, grade 3 or greater adverse events and serious adverse events were reported in 96.2%, 61.1% and 43.5% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high risk, nonmetastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer treatment with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone demonstrated a significant 50% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction with encouraging results for the secondary end points, including the safety of 5 mg prednisone.

Association between complete response and outcomes in transplant-eligible myeloma patients in the era of novel agents.

OBJECTIVES: Achieving complete response (CR) has been linked to improved progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival in myeloma. A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether this holds true in the era of novel agents (bortezomib, lenalidomide, thalidomide). METHODS: A total of 24 studies in newly diagnosed patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) that reported associations between responses and long-term outcomes (PFS/OS rates post-ASCT by response, or hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals from Cox models) were identified and analyzed. RESULTS: Achievement of CR vs.

Abiraterone acetate for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after chemotherapy: final analysis of a multicentre, open-label, early-access protocol trial.

BACKGROUND: In the final analysis of the phase 3 COU-AA-301 study, abiraterone acetate plus prednisone significantly prolonged overall survival compared with prednisone alone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after chemotherapy. Here, we present the final analysis of an early-access protocol trial that was initiated after completion of COU-AA-301 to enable worldwide preapproval access to abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after chemotherapy. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, early-access protocol trial in 23 countries. We enrolled patients who had metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after taxane chemotherapy. Participants received oral doses of abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and prednisone (5 mg twice a day) in 28-day cycles until disease progression, development of sustained side-effects, or abiraterone acetate becoming available in the respective country. The primary outcome was the number of adverse events arising during study treatment and within 30 days of discontinuation. Efficacy measures (time to prostate-specific antigen [PSA] progression and time to clinical progression) were gathered to guide treatment decisions. We included in our analysis all patients who received at least one dose of abiraterone acetate. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01217697. FINDINGS: Between Nov 17, 2010, and Sept 30, 2013, 2314 patients were enrolled into the early-access protocol trial. Median follow-up was 5·7 months (IQR 3·5-10·6). 952 (41%) patients had a grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event, and grade 3 or 4 serious adverse events were recorded in 585 (25%) people. The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were hepatotoxicity (188 [8%]), hypertension (99 [4%]), cardiac disorders (52 [2%]), osteoporosis (31 [1%]), hypokalaemia (28 [1%]), and fluid retention or oedema (23 [1%]). 172 (7%) patients discontinued the study because of adverse events (64 [3%] were drug-related), as assessed by the investigator, and 171 (7%) people died. The funder assessed causes of death, which were due to disease progression (85 [4%]), an unrelated adverse experience (72 [3%]), and unknown reasons (14 [1%]). Of the 86 deaths not attributable to disease progression, 18 (<1%) were caused by a drug-related adverse event, as assessed by the investigator. Median time to PSA progression was 8·5 months (95% CI 8·3-9·7) and median time to clinical progression was 12·7 months (11·8-13·8). INTERPRETATION: No new safety signals or unexpected adverse events were found in this early-access protocol trial to assess abiraterone acetate for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who progressed after chemotherapy. Future work is needed to ascertain the most effective regimen of abiraterone acetate to optimise patients' outcomes. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Drug therapies and the risk of malignancy in Crohn's disease: results from the TREAT™ Registry.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed potential associations between malignancy and antitumor necrosis factor therapy in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), as this relationship is currently poorly defined. METHODS: Utilizing data from the Crohn's Therapy, Resource, Evaluation, and Assessment Tool (TREAT™) Registry, a prospective cohort study examining long-term outcomes of CD treatments in community and academic settings, influences of baseline patient/disease characteristics and medications were assessed by survival analysis and multivariate models. Standardized incidence ratios and exact 95 % confidence intervals were determined as the ratio of events observed (TREAT) vs. expected (general population of USA). RESULTS: As of 23 February 2010, 6,273 CD patients (infliximab during registry=3,420 (during or within 1 year before registry=3,764); other-treatments-only: 2,509), were enrolled and, on average, had been followed for 5.2/7.6 years, respectively, for all/currently active patients. Crude cancer incidences were similar between infliximab- and other-treatments-only-exposed patients. Multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated that baseline age (hazard ratio (HR)=1.59/10 years; P<0.001), disease duration (HR=1.64/10 years; P=0.012), and smoking (HR=1.38; P=0.045) but neither immunosuppressive therapy alone (HR=1.43; P=0.11), infliximab therapy alone (HR=0.59; P=0.16), nor their combination (HR=1.22, P=0.34) were independently associated with the risk of malignancy. When compared with the general population, no significant increase in incidence was observed in any malignancy category. In an exposure-based analysis, use of immunosuppressants alone (odds ratio=4.19) or in combination with infliximab (3.33) seemed to be associated with a numerically, but not significantly, greater risk of malignancy than did treatment with infliximab alone (1.96) relative to treatment with neither. CONCLUSIONS: In the TREAT Registry, age, disease duration, and smoking were independently associated with increased risk of malignancy. Although results for immunosuppressant use were equivocal, no significant association between malignancy and infliximab was observed.

Bortezomib cumulative dose, efficacy, and tolerability with three different bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone regimens in previously untreated myeloma patients ineligible for high-dose therapy.

Substantial efficacy has been demonstrated with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone in phase III studies in transplant-ineligible myeloma patients using various twice-weekly and once-weekly bortezomib dosing schedules. In VISTA, the regimen comprised four 6-week twice-weekly cycles, plus five 6-week once-weekly cycles. In the GIMEMA MM-03-05 study, the bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone regimen was either per VISTA ('GIMEMA twice-weekly'), or comprised nine 5-week once-weekly cycles ('GIMEMA once-weekly'). In the GEM2005MAS65 study, the regimen comprised one 6-week twice-weekly cycle, plus five 5-week once-weekly cycles. We evaluated the cumulative bortezomib dose administered during bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, as well as efficacy and tolerability, using patient-level study data. Over all bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone cycles (nine in VISTA/GIMEMA; six in GEM2005MAS65), the median cumulative bortezomib dose administered was 38.5, 42.1, 40.3, and 32.9 mg/m(2) in VISTA, GIMEMA twice-weekly, GIMEMA once-weekly, and GEM2005MAS65, respectively, and the respective proportions of planned bortezomib dose actually delivered were 57.0%, 62.3%, 86.1%, and 90.4%. Response rates following bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone were 74-87% and appeared generally similar between studies. Three-year survival rates were 67.9-75.7% across studies. Grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy rates were 13% in VISTA and 14% in GIMEMA twice-weekly, but were lower at 2% in GIMEMA once-weekly and 7% in GEM2005MAS65. Discontinuations and bortezomib dose reductions due to peripheral neuropathy were reduced in GIMEMA once-weekly versus VISTA and GIMEMA twice-weekly. Exclusive or predominant use of once-weekly bortezomib dosing in GIMEMA once-weekly and GEM2005MAS65 resulted in high efficacy, comparable with that demonstrated in VISTA, and similar cumulative bortezomib dose with reduced toxicity. Trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: VISTA (Identifier:00111319), GIMEMA MM-03-05 (Identifier:01063179), and GEM2005MAS65 (Identifier:00443235).

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-term Follow-up of APOLLO, POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy and were triple-class exposed (TCE) are being evaluated in the single-arm, multicohort, phase I/II MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus physician's choice (PC) of therapy in TCE RRMM patients. METHODS: Individual patient-level data from MajesTEC-1 patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cutoff March 16, 2022) were included. An external control arm was created from patients in long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab who were treated with PC therapy after discontinuation of trial treatments. In the primary analysis, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in 9 baseline covariates. A fully adjusted model included 5 additional prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to next treatment (TTNT). RESULTS: After adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. In the primary analysis, outcomes were significantly improved with teclistamab versus PC: ORR (OR [95% CI] 4.81 [3.04-7.72]; P < .0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR, 12.07 [6.91-22.11]; P < .0001); OS (HR, 0.54 [0.40-0.73]; P < .0001); PFS (HR, 0.59 [0.46-0.78]; P = .0001); and TTNT (HR, 0.32 [0.24-0.42]; P < .0001). Results of the fully adjusted model were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSION: Teclistamab showed significantly improved effectiveness versus PC on all outcomes, highlighting its clinical benefit in patients with TCE RRMM and limited treatment options.

Clinical characteristics associated with falls in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with apalutamide.

BACKGROUND: The phase III SPARTAN study demonstrated that apalutamide significantly improves metastasis-free survival and overall survival vs. placebo in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). However, patients receiving apalutamide experienced falls more frequently vs. those receiving placebo (15.6% vs. 9.0%). METHODS: 806 patients with nmCRPC randomized to apalutamide in SPARTAN and treated with apalutamide in addition to ongoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were included in this post-hoc analysis investigating clinical variables associated with a subsequent fall. Time to a fall was assessed with Cox proportional-hazards models adjusted for baseline characteristics and time-varying factors. Statistical inference was based on final multivariable models. RESULTS: Falls were reported for 125/803 (15.6%) patients treated with apalutamide and ADT. Most falls were grade 1 or 2 and did not require hospitalization. Median time from randomization to first fall was 9.2 months (range 0.1-25.3 months). In the final multivariable model of both baseline and after-baseline covariates, baseline patient characteristics (older age, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, history of neuropathy, and α-blocker use before study treatment) remained significantly associated with fall; after-baseline clinical characteristics significantly associated with time to fall were development of neuropathy, arthralgia, and weight loss before fall. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis identified risk factors for fall among nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide. Clinical management can minimize these identified risks while enhancing patient outcomes. Preventive interventions should be considered when the identified baseline conditions and post-treatment neuropathy, arthralgia, or weight decrease are present, to reduce risk of fall. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01946204.

Teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Aim: We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Materials & methods: MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria were applied to the RWPC cohort. Baseline covariate imbalances were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Overall survival, progression-free survival and time to next treatment were compared. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (teclistamab, n = 165; RWPC, n = 364 [766 observations]). Teclistamab treated patients had numerically better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.59-1.14]; p = 0.233) and significantly greater progression-free survival (HR: 0.43 [0.33-0.56]; p < 0.0001) and time to next treatment (HR: 0.36 [0.27-0.49]; p < 0.0001) versus the RWPC cohort. Conclusion: Teclistamab offered clinical benefit over RWPC in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Serious infection and mortality in patients with Crohn's disease: more than 5 years of follow-up in the TREAT™ registry.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to contribute long-term safety data for infliximab and other therapies in Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: We prospectively evaluated CD patients enrolled in the large, observational Crohn's Therapy, Resource, Evaluation, and Assessment Tool registry, established to compare infliximab safety with conventional nonbiological medications in CD. RESULTS: A total of 6,273 patients were enrolled and evaluated on or before 23 February 2010; 3,420 received infliximab (17,712 patient-years; 89.9% received ≥ 2 infusions) and 2,853 received other-treatments-only (13,251 patient-years). Mean length of patient follow-up was 5.2 years. More infliximab- than other-treatments-only-treated patients had moderate-to-severe (30.6% vs. 10.7%) or severe-to-fulminant (2.5% vs. 0.6%) disease severity (P < 0.001). In the year before enrollment, more infliximab- than other-treatments-only-treated patients required surgical intervention (17.4% vs. 13.6%), medical hospitalization (14.2% vs. 8.8%), prednisone (47.8% vs. 31.4%), immunomodulators (52.0% vs. 32.1%), and narcotic analgesics (17.3% vs. 9.1%). Patient mortality was similar for infliximab- and other-treatments-only-treated patients (0.58 vs. 0.59/100 patient-years). In multivariate logistic regression analyses, treatment with prednisone (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.55, 2.95; P < 0.001) or narcotic analgesics (HR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.29, 2.48; P < 0.001) and age (HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.07, 1.09; P < 0.001) were associated with increased mortality risk. Neither infliximab nor immunomodulator treatment was associated with increased mortality risk. Factors independently associated with serious infections included moderate-to-severe disease activity (HR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.57, 3.19; P < 0.001), narcotic analgesic treatment (HR = 1.98, 95% CI = 1.44, 2.73; P < 0.001), prednisone therapy (HR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.17, 2.10; P = 0.002), and infliximab treatment (HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.11, 1.84; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality was similar between infliximab- and other-treatments-only-treated CD patients. An increased risk of serious infection with infliximab was observed, although CD severity and use of prednisone or narcotic analgesics carried higher risks.

A phase II clinical trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and carboplatin plus bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), carboplatin, plus bevacizumab in patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. METHODS: Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent disease received PLD 30 mg/m(2) and carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 on Day 1 plus bevacizumab 10mg/kg on Days 1 and 15 of every 28-day cycle, for a maximum of 10 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) [complete+partial response]; additional endpoints were safety, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and time to progression (TTP). RESULTS: Of the 54 patients enrolled, 15 (27.8%) completed the study treatment as planned. Intent-to-treat (all enrolled patients) ORR was 72.2% (95% CI: 58.4, 83.5). Median duration of response was 11.9 months (95% CI: 9.3, not estimable) and median TTP was 13.9 months (95% CI: 11.4, 16.0). PFS was virtually the same as TTP. Three (5.6%) patients discontinued therapy due to disease progression, and another 3 (5.6%) patients discontinued therapy due to serious adverse events (Grade 4 thrombocytopenia, Grade 3 small/large intestinal obstruction/small intestinal perforation, and Grade 3 abdominal abscess). Fifty (92.6%) patients had ≥1 adverse event of interest, most commonly neutropenia (42.6%), hypertension (37.0%), stomatitis (37.0%), proteinuria (37.0%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (27.8%). No appreciable decreases in left-ventricular ejection fraction were observed. CONCLUSION: Most patients responded to PLD, carboplatin, and bevacizumab combination therapy. The safety profile was consistent with the known toxicities of these agents. These findings present a potential treatment option for women with ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer.

PSOLAR: design, utility, and preliminary results of a prospective, international, disease-based registry of patients with psoriasis who are receiving, or are candidates for, conventional systemic treatments or biologic agents.

BACKGROUND: Long-term observational studies can better characterize the impact of systemic agents on psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To describe the on-going Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR) study. METHODS: PSOLAR is a large, international, long-term, prospective, disease-based registry enrolling patients with psoriasis who are receiving, or are candidates for, treatment with systemic therapies. The registry fulfills postmarketing regulatory commitments and charges a global Steering Committee to manage epidemiological research on psoriasis and its therapies. Key demographics, disease characteristics, and medication history are collected at enrollment. Adverse events and efficacy data are collected longitudinally. RESULTS: The August 2011 annual database extract includes 9,495 patients enrolled at 266 global centers. At entry, mean percent of body surface area affected by psoriasis was 12.3% (peak, 29.5%). Approximately 80% of patients were overweight/obese, more than one-third had cardiovascular disease (38.8%) or psoriatic arthritis as captured by the treatment center (37.1%), and over half had received one or two biologic agents (58.8%) or phototherapy (54.8%). Mean duration of participation is 1.3 years, and annual withdrawal rates are less than 6.5%. Of 9,495 patients, 7,476 have been exposed to at least one biologic agent. Serious infections, malignancies, all-cause mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular events (ie, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular death) occurred at rates of 1.40, 0.61, 0.37, and 0.36 per 100 patient-years of follow-up, respectively. LIMITATIONS: PSOLAR may be subject to limitations common to observational studies (eg, participation bias and potential confounders). CONCLUSION: PSOLAR is a disease-based registry designed to assess therapeutic risk and benefit in the general psoriasis population.

Deep Prostate-specific Antigen Response following Addition of Apalutamide to Ongoing Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Long-term Clinical Benefit in SPARTAN.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression in the placebo-controlled SPARTAN study of high-risk nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationships between PSA kinetics, outcomes, and molecular subtypes in SPARTAN. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The authors conducted a post hoc analysis of nmCRPC patients randomized to receive apalutamide (n = 806) or placebo (n = 401) plus ADT and a subset stratified by molecular classifiers. INTERVENTION: Apalutamide 240 mg/d. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association between PSA kinetics and MFS, OS, time to PSA progression, and molecular subtypes was evaluated using the landmark analysis and Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: By 3 mo, PSA decreased in most apalutamide-treated patients and increased in most placebo-treated patients. After apalutamide, the median time to PSA nadir, confirmed ≥50% PSA reduction, ≥90% PSA reduction, and PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml were 7.4, 1.0, 1.9, and 2.8 mo, respectively. By 6 mo, 90%, 57%, and 32% of apalutamide patients had ≥50% PSA reduction, ≥90% PSA reduction, and PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml, respectively, while only 1.5% of placebo patients experienced ≥50% PSA reduction. PSA reductions were observed within 3 mo and up to 12 mo of apalutamide treatment, and were similar across molecular subtypes. Deep PSA responses (≥90% PSA reduction or PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml) at landmark 6-mo apalutamide treatment were significantly associated with improved time to PSA progression (hazard ratio {HR} [95% confidence interval {CI}] 0.25 [0.18-0.33] or 0.13 [0.08-0.21]), MFS (0.41 [0.29-0.57] or 0.3 [0.19-0.47]), and OS (0.45 [0.35-0.59] or 0.26 [0.18-0.38]; p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Apalutamide plus ADT produced rapid, deep, and durable PSA responses by 6-mo treatment regardless of assessed molecular prognostic markers. An early PSA response with apalutamide was associated with clinical benefits, supporting prognostic value of PSA monitoring. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we describe how prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels relate to outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We found that treatment with apalutamide plus ADT resulted in rapid, deep, and durable PSA responses in the majority of patients, including those with high-risk molecular subtypes, which were associated with improved survival.

Comparative Clinical Outcomes Between EGFR Ex20ins and Wildtype NSCLC Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations (ex20ins) has not been closely examined due to the frequent exclusion of patients with EGFR mutations from large immunotherapy-based NSCLC trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A real-world, retrospective study was conducted to compare outcomes of ICI-treated patients with EGFR ex20ins and wildtype NSCLC (wt-NSCLC; defined as EGFR and ALK test negative). Patients with advanced NSCLC from the Flatiron Health database (2015-2020) were included in the analysis. Real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and overall survival (rwOS), stratified by ICI initiation line of therapy, were the prespecified primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. RESULTS: Among 59 patients with EGFR ex20ins NSCLC and 5365 with wt-NSCLC, ICI treatment was received as first-line therapy in 25% and 39%, respectively. Patients with EGFR ex20ins had a 58% increased risk of shorter time to next-line therapy compared with wt-NSCLC (adjusted hazard ratio of 1.58 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1]; P = .0012). The median rwTTNT for first ICI line was 3.7 months (95% CI, 3.0-4.9) for EGFR ex20ins NSCLC compared with 5.8 months (95% CI, 5.6-6.0) for wt-NSCLC. No meaningful difference in rwOS between the groups was observed. CONCLUSIONS: ICI therapy may be less effective for patients with EGFR ex20ins compared with wt-NSCLC. Consistent with prior data on exon 19 deletion and L858R substitution, tumors harboring ex20ins appear to be less responsive to immune checkpoint inhibition than wt-NSCLC.

Comparative Efficacy of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in CARTITUDE-1 vs Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-Term Follow-Up of POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is a novel agent being investigated in the single-arm CARTITUDE-1 trial (NCT03548207) for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who are triple-class exposed to an immunomodulatory drug, proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. The objective of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of cilta-cel vs physician's choice of treatment, as no head-to-head trials have been conducted. METHODS: An external control arm for CARTITUDE-1 was created from patients in the long-term follow-up for three clinical trials of daratumumab (POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS) who satisfied the eligibility criteria of CARTITUDE-1. These patients received physician's choice of treatment following the discontinuation of study drugs. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to align the external control and CARTITUDE-1 populations on important baseline characteristics. Overall response rate, complete response or better rate, progression-free survival, time to next treatment, and overall survival were assessed. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: After propensity score weighting, baseline characteristics were comparable between cohorts. Patients showed improved results with cilta-cel vs physician's choice of treatment: overall response rate (relative risk: 2.95 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.27, 3.84; p < 0.0001]), complete response or better (relative risk: 111.70 [95% CI 29.08, 429.06; p < 0.0001]), progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.24 [95% CI 0.15, 0.37; p < 0.0001]), time to next treatment (HR: 0.14 [95% CI 0.09, 0.22; p < 0.0001]), and overall survival (HR: 0.21 [95% CI 0.13, 0.35; p < 0.0001]). Results were consistent across all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Cilta-cel showed superior efficacy compared with physician's choice of treatment, making it a promising new treatment option for patients with triple-class exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Comparative effectiveness of ciltacabtagene autoleucel in CARTITUDE-1 versus physician's choice of therapy in the Flatiron Health multiple myeloma cohort registry for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Introduction: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is a novel chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy that is being evaluated in the CARTITUDE-1 trial (NCT03548207) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who received as part of their previous therapy an immunomodulatory drug, proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (i.e., triple-class exposed). Given the absence of a control arm in CARTITUDE-1, this study assessed the comparative effectiveness of cilta-cel and physician's choice of treatment (PCT) using an external real-world control arm from the Flatiron Health multiple myeloma cohort registry. Methods: Given the availability of individual patient data for cilta-cel from CARTITUDE-1 and PCT in Flatiron, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for unbalanced baseline covariates of prognostic significance: refractory status, cytogenetic profile, International Staging System stage, time to progression on last regimen, number of prior lines of therapy, years since diagnosis, and age. Comparative effectiveness was estimated for progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS). A range of sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two cohorts after propensity score weighting. Patients with cilta-cel had improved PFS (HR: 0.18 [95% CI: 0.12, 0.27; p < 0.0001]), TTNT (HR: 0.15 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.22; p < 0.0001]), and OS (HR: 0.25 [95% CI: 0.13, 0.46; p < 0.0001]) versus PCT. Cilta-cel treatment benefit was robust and consistent across all sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Cilta-cel demonstrated significantly superior effectiveness over PCT for all outcomes, highlighting its potential as an effective therapy in patients with triple-class exposed RRMM.

Rapid early monoclonal protein reduction after therapy with bortezomib or bortezomib and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in relapsed/refractory myeloma is associated with a longer time to progression.

BACKGROUND: A rapid and early monoclonal (M) protein response during initial therapy in patients with multiple myeloma had been identified as a predictor of superior long-term outcome in some--but not all--studies. METHODS: To determine if the parameter of M protein reduction was of value in the relapsed and/or refractory setting, retrospective landmark analyses were performed at the end of cycles 2 and 4 of a phase 3 study, which randomized such patients to receive bortezomib alone or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) with bortezomib. RESULTS: Compared with a <25% reduction in M protein at the landmark time point, patients with a 50% to <75% reduction after cycle 2 had a significantly lower hazard ratio (HR) for time to progression (HR = 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.64; P <.001), as did those with a ≥75% reduction (HR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.45; P < .001). In all of these groups, PLD + bortezomib provided superior outcomes to bortezomib alone, and did so without an increase in the risk of adverse events overall and with a predictable toxicity profile. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses supported the possibility that a robust early M protein response is a good prognostic factor for long-term outcome of myeloma patients with relapsed and/or refractory disease receiving bortezomib or PLD + bortezomib.