Metabolic, cardiac, and bone health testing in patients with prostate cancer on androgen-deprivation therapy: A population-based assessment of adherence to therapeutic monitoring guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) remains a cornerstone in treatment for patients with advanced prostate cancer. ADT is associated with several adverse effects, including osteoporosis, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular events, leading to guidelines recommending routine testing to monitor for these toxicities. There is a lack of data assessing adherence to these recommendations. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study using administrative data from Ontario, Canada between 2008 and 2021. They identified all older men (aged 65 years and older) who received ADT for prostate cancer using comprehensive provincial health databases. The primary outcomes were the use of testing for lipids, dysglycemia (glucose), bone health serum, and bone density between 6 weeks before and 1 year after the initiation of ADT. RESULTS: In total, 29,097 patients were examined, of whom 52.8% were prescribed ADT by urologists, 37.9% were prescribed ADT by radiation oncologists, 2.8% were prescribed ADT by medical oncologists, and 2.4% were prescribed ADT by other physicians. Adherence to guidelines was low: only 21.3% of patients received a bone density scan, 41.2% underwent bone health-related serum tests, 51.3% completed a lipid profile, and 65.9% underwent dysglycemia testing within 1 year of diagnosis. Overall, only 11.9% of patients received all of the recommended investigations. Adherence to testing did not appear to improve over time (2008-2021) or with guideline publication. Patient (age) and physician (specialty) factors had important associations with adherence to testing. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients receiving ADT for prostate cancer do not receive recommended testing to monitor for treatment-related toxicity. Further study is required to address barriers to therapeutic monitoring of men on ADT and to reduce treatment-associated adverse events.

Early Prostate-Specific Antigen Response by 6 Months Is Predictive of Treatment Effect in Metastatic Hormone Sensitive Prostate Cancer: An Exploratory Analysis of the TITAN Trial.

PURPOSE: Early PSA response has been found to be prognostic of outcomes in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer. We performed a secondary analysis of the TITAN trial to determine if early PSA response was predictive of treatment efficacy in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Early PSA response was defined as achieving a PSA level of ≤ 0.2 ng/mL by 6 months of random assignment. A Cox proportional hazard model was constructed in a landmark population with an interaction term between the treatment and early PSA response to determine differential treatment effect on overall survival (OS). We applied multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model with time to early PSA response fitted with restricted cubic spline to determine the association of time to early PSA response with OS. RESULTS: Approximately 24% (124/524) of patients in the androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone group and 61% (321/524) in the apalutamide group had PSA response ≤ 0.2 ng/mL by 6 months. Longer time to early PSA response was associated with significantly superior OS in the apalutamide group. There was a significant difference in treatment effect from apalutamide on OS (P = .03 for interaction) among 6-month PSA responders (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.44-1.00) vs nonresponders (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.89-1.46). This difference in treatment effect was not statistically significant at 3 months (P = .17 for interaction). Among 6-month PSA responders, 3-year confounder-adjusted OS was 84% (80%-88%) for the apalutamide group and 74% (66%-82%) for the ADT alone group. Among nonresponders, 3-year adjusted OS for the 2 treatment arms were 58% (52%-65%) and 56% (51%-60%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early PSA response by 6 months was a predictor of treatment efficacy from ADT plus apalutamide on OS. Longer time to early PSA response was associated with superior OS in the apalutamide arm.

Implications of metastatic stage at presentation in docetaxel naïve metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: We performed a secondary analysis of ACIS study to determine if synchronous versus metachronous metastatic presentation has any association with survival and treatment response to dual androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) in docetaxel naïve metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODOLOGY: In this phase III randomized controlled trial, docetaxel naïve mCRPC patients were randomized to either apalutamide or placebo combined with abiraterone and prednisone. Multivariable Cox regression models were applied to determine the adjusted association of M-stage with radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). To determine the heterogeneity of treatment effect based on metastatic stage (M-stage) at presentation, Cox regression was applied with interaction terms between M-stage and treatment. RESULTS: Among 972 patients, 432 had M0, 334 had M1, while M-stage at presentation was unknown in 206. There was no association of M-stage at presentation with rPFS in patients with prior local therapy (LT) (hazard ratio for M1-stage: 1.22 [95% confidence interval: 0.82-1.82]; unknown: 1.03 [0.77-1.38]) or without prior LT (M1-stage: 0.87 [0.64-1.19]; unknown: 1.15 [0.77-1.72]) with no significant heterogeneity. Similarly, there was no association of M-stage with OS in patients with prior LT (M1-stage: 1.04 [0.81-1.33]; unknown: 0.98 [0.79-1.21]) or without prior LT (M1-stage: 0.95 [0.70-1.29]; unknown: 1.17 [0.80-1.71]) with no significant heterogeneity. Based on M-stage at presentation, we did not find any significant heterogeneity in treatment effect on rPFS (interaction p = 0.13), and OS (interaction p = 0.87). CONCLUSION: M-stage at presentation had no association with survival in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. We did not find any statistically significant heterogeneity in efficacy of dual ARAT based on synchronous versus metachronous presentation.

Association of PSA kinetics after testosterone recovery with subsequent recurrence: secondary analysis of a phase III randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: After cessation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), testosterone gradually recovers to supracastrate levels (> 50 ng/dL). After this, rises in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are often seen. However, it remains unknown whether early PSA kinetics after testosterone recovery are associated with subsequent biochemical recurrence (BCR). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of a phase III randomized controlled trial in which newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer patients were randomly allocated to ADT for 6 months starting 4 months prior to or simultaneously with prostate RT. We calculated the PSA doubling time (PSADT) based on PSA values up to 18 months after supracastrate testosterone recovery. Competing risk regression was used to evaluate the association of PSADT with relative incidence of BCR, considering deaths as competing events. RESULTS: Overall, 313 patients were eligible. Median PSADT was 8 months. Cumulative incidence of BCR at 10 years from supracastrate testosterone recovery was 19% and 11% in patients with PSADT < 8 months and ≥ 8 months (p = 0.03). Compared to patients with PSADT of < 4 months, patients with higher PSADT (sHR for PSADT 4 to < 8 months: 0.36 [95% CI 0.16-0.82]; 8 to < 12 months: 0.26 [0.08-0.91]; ≥ 12 months: 0.20 [0.07-0.56]) had lower risk of relative incidence of BCR. CONCLUSIONS: Early PSA kinetics, within 18 months of recovery of testosterone to a supracastrate level, can predict for subsequent BCR. Taking account of early changes in PSA after testosterone recovery may allow for recognition of potential failures earlier in the disease course and thereby permit superior personalization of treatment.

Web-Based Asynchronous Tool to Facilitate Communication Between Primary Care Providers and Cancer Specialists: Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cancer poses a significant global health burden. With advances in screening and treatment, there are now a growing number of cancer survivors with complex needs, requiring the involvement of multiple health care providers. Previous studies have identified problems related to communication and care coordination between primary care providers (PCPs) and cancer specialists. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine whether a web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) could facilitate communication between PCPs and cancer specialists (oncologists and oncology nurses) to improve patient-reported continuity of care among patients receiving treatment or posttreatment survivorship care. METHODS: In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, a total of 173 patients were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (eOncoNote plus usual methods of communication between PCPs and cancer specialists) or a control group (usual communication only), including 104 (60.1%) patients in the survivorship phase (breast and colorectal cancer) and 69 (39.9%) patients in the treatment phase (breast and prostate cancer). The primary outcome was patient-reported team and cross-boundary continuity (Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire). Secondary outcome measures included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire on Major Depression, and Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire. Patients completed the questionnaires at baseline and at 2 points following randomization. Patients in the treatment phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 1 month and at either 4 months (patients with prostate cancer) or 6 months following randomization (patients with breast cancer). Patients in the survivorship phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 6 months and at 12 months following randomization. RESULTS: The results did not show an intervention effect on the primary outcome of team and cross-boundary continuity of care or on the secondary outcomes of depression and patient experience with their health care. However, there was an intervention effect on anxiety. In the treatment phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score from baseline to the 1-month follow-up for GAD-7 (mean difference -2.3; P=.03). In the survivorship phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score for GAD-7 between baseline and the 6-month follow-up (mean difference -1.7; P=.03) and between baseline and the 12-month follow-up (mean difference -2.4; P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs' and cancer specialists' access to eOncoNote is not significantly associated with patient-reported continuity of care. However, PCPs' and cancer specialists' access to the eOncoNote intervention may be a factor in reducing patient anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03333785; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03333785.

5-year outcomes after stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy for primary renal cell carcinoma: an individual patient data meta-analysis from IROCK (the International Radiosurgery Consortium of the Kidney).

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a non-invasive treatment option for primary renal cell carcinoma, for which long-term data are awaited. The primary aim of this study was to report on long-term efficacy and safety of SABR for localised renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: This study was an individual patient data meta-analysis, for which patients undergoing SABR for primary renal cell carcinoma across 12 institutions in five countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, and the USA) were eligible. Eligible patients had at least 2 years of follow-up, were aged 18 years or older, had any performance status, and had no previous local therapy. Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma or upper-tract urothelial carcinoma were excluded. SABR was delivered as a single or multiple fractions of greater than 5 Gy. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed local failure per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, and was evaluated using cumulative incidence functions. FINDINGS: 190 patients received SABR between March 23, 2007, and Sept 20, 2018. Single-fraction SABR was delivered in 81 (43%) patients and multifraction SABR was delivered in 109 (57%) patients. Median follow-up was 5·0 years (IQR 3·4-6·8). 139 (73%) patients were men, and 51 (27%) were women. Median age was 73·6 years (IQR 66·2-82·0). Median tumour diameter was 4·0 cm (IQR 2·8-4·9). 96 (75%) of 128 patients with available operability details were deemed inoperable by the referring urologist. 56 (29%) of 190 patients had a solitary kidney. Median baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 60·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (IQR 42·0-76·0) and decreased by 14·2 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (IQR 5·4-22·5) by 5 years post-SABR. Seven (4%) patients required dialysis post-SABR. The cumulative incidence of local failure at 5 years was 5·5% (95% CI 2·8-9·5) overall, with single-fraction SABR yielding fewer local failures than multifraction (Gray's p=0·020). There were no grade 3 toxic effects or treatment-related deaths. One (1%) patient developed an acute grade 4 duodenal ulcer and late grade 4 gastritis. INTERPRETATION: SABR is effective and safe in the long term for patients with primary renal cell carcinoma. Single-fraction SABR might yield less local failure than multifraction, but further evidence from randomised trials is needed to elucidate optimal treatment schedules. These mature data lend further support for renal SABR as a treatment option for patients unwilling or unfit to undergo surgery. FUNDING: None.

Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Executive Summary of an ASTRO, ASCO and AUA Evidence-Based Guideline.

PURPOSE: The aim of this guideline is to present recommendations regarding moderately hypofractionated (240-340 cGy per fraction) and ultrahypofractionated (500 cGy or more per fraction) radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 8 key questions on appropriate indications and dose-fractionation for moderately and ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy, as well as technical issues, including normal tissue dose constraints, treatment volumes, and use of image guided and intensity modulated radiation therapy. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and Society-approved tools for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS: Based on high-quality evidence, strong consensus was reached for offering moderate hypofractionation across risk groups to patients choosing external beam radiation therapy. The task force conditionally recommends ultrahypofractionated radiation may be offered for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer but strongly encourages treatment of intermediate-risk patients on a clinical trial or multi-institutional registry. For high-risk patients, the task force conditionally recommends against routine use of ultrahypofractionated external beam radiation therapy. With any hypofractionated approach, the task force strongly recommends image guided radiation therapy and avoidance of nonmodulated 3-dimensional conformal techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Hypofractionated radiation therapy provides important potential advantages in cost and convenience for patients, and these recommendations are intended to provide guidance on moderate hypofractionation and ultrahypofractionation for localized prostate cancer. The limits in the current evidentiary base-especially for ultrahypofractionation-highlight the imperative to support large-scale randomized clinical trials and underscore the importance of shared decision making between clinicians and patients.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: When and for Whom?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize recent evidence concerning the use of moderately hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy, defined as 2.4-3.4 Gy per fraction, and ultrahypofractionated external beam radiotherapy (also known as stereotactic body radiotherapy [SBRT]), defined as at least 5 Gy per fraction, in men with localized prostate cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Taken together, a number of recently completed randomized trials show that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy confers similar biochemical control compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy without increasing late toxicity. These effects appear to extend across all baseline clinical risk groups. Several single-arm phase II studies, as well as a recently published large-scale randomized trial comparing SBRT with conventional fractionation, show very promising biochemical control and favorable acute and late treatment-related morbidity with the use of SBRT in predominantly low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. As it is associated with similar prostate cancer control and toxicity while improving patient convenience and reducing cost, moderate hypofractionation is a preferred alternative to conventional fractionation in a majority of men with localized prostate cancer choosing radiotherapy as their primary treatment modality. To date, studies conducted largely in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer report encouraging oncologic outcomes and acceptable toxicity with SBRT. Mature results of phase III trials evaluating five-fraction SBRT regimens are eagerly awaited.

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for tumour staging of bladder cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for local staging of bladder cancer for four clinical scenarios (T-stage thresholds) considered against current standards for clinical staging and secondarily to identify sources for variability in accuracy. Systematic review of patients with bladder cancer undergoing T-staging MRI to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Sub-group analysis was done to explore variability; risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. The search identified 30 studies (5156 patients). Pooled accuracy at multiple T-stage thresholds: ≤T1 vs ≥T2 = sensitivity 87% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82-91), specificity 79% (95% CI 72-85); T-any vs T0 = sensitivity 65% (95% CI 23-92), specificity 90% (95% CI 83-94); ≤T2 vs ≥T3 = sensitivity 83% (95% CI 75-88), specificity 87% (95% CI 78-93); and

Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Bone health is a significant concern in men with prostate cancer. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of drug, supplement, and lifestyle interventions aimed at preventing fracture, improving bone mineral density (BMD), or preventing or delaying osteoporosis in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 19 January 2017), EMBASE (1980 to 18 January 2017), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (19 January 2017). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials and systematic reviews of trials that were published in English; involved men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer; and compared bone-targeted therapies with placebo, usual care, or other active treatments. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and assessed study risk of bias for each outcome. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two systematic reviews and 28 reports of 27 trials met inclusion criteria. All trials focused on men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who were initiating or continuing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Bisphosphonates were effective in increasing BMD, but no trial was sufficiently powered to detect reduction in fractures. Denosumab improved BMD and reduced the incidence of new radiographic vertebral fractures in 1 high-quality trial. No trials compared calcium or vitamin D versus placebo. Three lifestyle intervention trials did not show a statistically significant difference in change in BMD between exercise and usual care. LIMITATIONS: Most trials were of moderate quality. Only 2 randomized controlled trials were designed to examine fracture outcomes. Potential harms of treatments were not evaluated. CONCLUSION: Both bisphosphonates and denosumab improve BMD in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who are receiving ADT. Denosumab also reduces risk for radiographic vertebral fractures, based on 1 trial. More trials studying fracture outcomes are needed in this population. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Program in Evidence-Based Care.

Radiation Therapy Summary of the AUA/ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to develop a summary of recommendations regarding the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer based on the American Urologic Association/ ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. METHODS: The American Urologic Association and ASTRO convened a multidisciplinary, expert panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic literature review using an a priori defined consensus-building methodology. The topics covered were risk assessment, staging, risk-based management, principles of management including active surveillance, surgery, radiation, and follow-up after treatment. Presented are recommendations from the guideline most pertinent to radiation oncologists with an additional statement on health equity, diversity, and inclusion related to guideline panel composition and the topic of clinically localized prostate cancer. SUMMARY: Staging, risk assessment, and management options in prostate cancer have advanced over the last decade and significantly affect shared decision-making for treatment management. Current advancements and controversies discussed to guide staging, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations include the use of advanced imaging and tumor genomic profiling. An essential active surveillance strategy includes prostate-specific antigen monitoring and periodic digital rectal examination with changes triggering magnetic resonance imaging and possible biopsy thereafter and histologic progression or greater tumor volume prompting consideration of definitive local treatment. The panel recommends against routine use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for patients with prostate cancer after prostatectomy with negative nodes and an undetectable prostate-specific antigen, while acknowledging that patients at highest risk of recurrence were relatively poorly represented in the 3 largest randomized trials comparing adjuvant RT to early salvage and that a role may exist for adjuvant RT in selected patients at highest risk. RT for clinically localized prostate cancer has evolved rapidly, with new trial results, therapeutic combinations, and technological advances. The recommendation of moderately hypofractionated RT has not changed, and the updated guideline incorporates a conditional recommendation for the use of ultrahypofractionated treatment. Health disparities and inequities exist in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer across the continuum of care that can influence guideline concordance.

Prediction of prostate cancer recurrence after radiotherapy using a fused machine learning approach: Utilizing radiomics from pretreatment T2W MRI images with clinical and pathological information.

BACKGROUND: The risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer (PCa) varies widely within standard risk groups. There is a need for low-cost tools to more robustly predict recurrence and personalize therapy. Radiomic features from pretreatment MRI show potential as noninvasive biomarkers for BCR prediction. However, previous research has not fully combined radiomics with clinical and pathological data to predict BCR in PCa patients following radiotherapy. Purpose: This study aims to predict 5-year BCR using radiomics from pretreatment T2W MRI and clinical-pathological data in PCa patients treated with radiation therapy, and to develop a unified model compatible with both 1.5T and 3T MRI scanners. Methods: A total of 150 T2W scans and clinical parameters were preprocessed. Of these, 120 cases were used for training and validation, and 30 for testing. Four distinct machine learning models were developed: Model 1 used radiomics, Model 2 used clinical and pathological data, and Model 3 combined these using late fusion. Model 4 integrated radiomic and clinical-pathological data using early fusion. Results: Model 1 achieved an AUC of 0.73, while Model 2 had an AUC of 0.64 for predicting outcomes in 30 new test cases. Model 3, using late fusion, had an AUC of 0.69. Early fusion models showed strong potential, with Model 4 reaching an AUC of 0.84, highlighting the effectiveness of the early fusion model. Conclusions: This study is the first to use a fusion technique for predicting BCR in PCa patients following radiotherapy, utilizing pre-treatment T2W MRI images and clinical-pathological data. The methodology improves predictive accuracy by fusing radiomics with clinical-pathological information, even with a relatively small dataset, and introduces the first unified model for both 1.5T and 3T MRI images.

Helical Tomotherapy Versus 3-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: We present long-term outcomes from a phase 3 randomized controlled trial that compared helical tomotherapy with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Newly diagnosed patients with high-risk prostate cancer were randomly allocated to receive radical radiation therapy (RT) using 3D-CRT or helical tomotherapy. In both arms, patients received an initial dose of 46 Gy in 23 fractions to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes, followed by an additional boost to the prostate of 32 Gy in 16 fractions. RT was combined with 3 years of adjuvant androgen deprivation. The primary endpoint was late (>90 days since RT initiation) rectal toxicity. RESULTS: Overall,123 patients were randomly assigned to either the 3D-CRT (n = 60) or tomotherapy (n = 63) arms. The median follow-up was 161 months. Overall, the proportion of patients with grade ≥ 2 late rectal toxicity was 8.3% (95% CI, 3.1-19.1; n = 5) in the 3D-CRT arm and 11.1% (95% CI, 5.0-22.2; n = 7) in the tomotherapy arm with no significant between-arm difference (P = .83). There was no significant difference (P = .17) in the proportion of patients with late grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicity:10.0% (95% CI, 4.1-21.2) in the 3D-CRT arm and 20.6% (95% CI, 11.9-33.0) in the tomotherapy arm. There was no significant difference in the hazard of biochemical progression or death between the 2 groups (hazard ratio for the tomotherapy arm: 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.15; P = .17). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 3 trial, the overall incidence of grade ≥ 2 rectal toxicity was low and was not significantly different between the 2 arms. There was no significant evidence of improved biochemical progression-free survival in patients treated with tomotherapy. These findings should be interpreted considering the possibility of type II errors due to limited sample size and low event rates.

Effect of Concomitant Medications on Treatment Response and Survival in De Novo Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the LATITUDE Study.

PURPOSE: It is unclear whether exposure to commonly prescribed medications influences survival and treatment response in patients with de novo high-risk metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of the LATITUDE trial to determine whether receipt of concomitant medications influenced the effect of abiraterone acetate and prednisone, in addition to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), on overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in patients with de novo mPCa. We focused on 7 commonly prescribed classes of medications: metformin, statins, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors, aspirin, acetaminophen, and NSAIDs (nonselective COX inhibitors). To account for multiple testing, a two-sided p < 0.0024 was set as the threshold for statistical significance. RESULTS: Overall, 1135 patients were eligible. There was some evidence of a differential treatment effect from abiraterone among patients who received concomitant NSAIDs (hazard ratio [HR] for OS: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.42-0.70) versus those who did not (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.60-0.91), though this did not reach significance (interaction p = 0.05). A similar non-significant finding of heterogeneity of effect from abiraterone was noted among patients who received concomitant aspirin (HR for OS: 0.93 [0.63-1.36]) versus those who did not (HR: 0.61 [0.51-0.73]) (interaction p = 0.04). Receipt of NSAIDs was independently associated with a significantly inferior OS (HR: 1.37 [1.15-1.62]; p < 0.001) and higher relative incidence of PCSM (sHR: 1.47 [1.21-1.78]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis did not find statistically significant evidence of differences in treatment effects from ADT plus abiraterone in de novo high-risk mPCa based on the receipt of concurrent medications. The receipt of NSAIDs was independently associated with increased PCSM and inferior OS.

Effect of Pelvic External Beam Radiation Therapy on Bone Mineral Density: A Secondary Analysis of a Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Pelvic radiation therapy may lead to decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and increased risk of fracture that could be of particular concern in patients with prostate cancer who also receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We performed an exploratory analysis of a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether exposure to prior pelvic external beam radiation therapy (XRT) affects BMD and risk of fracture in patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer aged ≥70 years or <70 years with low BMD (T-score < -1) or osteoporotic fracture who had been receiving ADT for ≥12 months were randomly assigned to receive densoumab or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. BMD was measured at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36. We applied multivariable linear mixed-effects models with an interaction term between the treatment arm and exposure to prior pelvic XRT to evaluate differential XRT effect on percent BMD change between the 2 treatment arms. RESULTS: Among 1407 eligible patients, 31% (n = 447) received prior pelvic XRT. There was no significant difference in any clinical fractures among patients with (5.8%, 26 of 447) or without (5.2%, 50 of 960) prior pelvic XRT (P = .42). Prior pelvic XRT was associated with a significant (0.54%) improvement in BMD (95% CI, 0.05-1.02) in the placebo group and a nonsignificant (0.04%) decline in BMD (95% CI, -0.47 to -0.35) in the denosumab group (interaction P = .007). There was no significant difference in pelvic XRT effect on percent BMD change in the lumbar spine (P = .65) or total hip (P = .39) between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find sufficient evidence to suggest any detrimental effect of pelvic XRT on the treatment effect from denosumab on percent BMD change, with only an approximately 5% incidence of clinical fractures.

Effect of concomitant medications on treatment response and survival in non-metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer: Exploratory analysis of the SPARTAN trial.

BACKGROUND: We performed an exploratory analysis of the SPARTAN trial to determine whether concomitant exposure to several classes of commonly prescribed medications influenced the effect of apalutamide on overall survival (OS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: SPARTAN was a phase III randomized controlled trial in which nmCRPC patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive androgen deprivation therapy with or without apalutamide. We focused on 5 commonly prescribed classes of medications: metformin, statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) based on a plausible biological and clinical rationale. To determine the potential effect modification, we applied multivariable Cox regression models for OS and MFS separately with additional interaction terms. To determine the independent association of concomitant medications with OS and MFS, we used IPTW-based log-rank test. A 2-sided p < 0.01 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: We did not find statistically significant differences in effect from apalutamide on OS across subgroups stratified by concomitant exposure to any of the medication classes. While there was some difference in the treatment effect from apalutamide on MFS between patients with concomitant statins (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.20; 95 % CI: 0.15-0.28) versus without concomitant statins (aHR: 0.31 [0.24-0.39]), this did not reach the pre-specified threshold of statistical significance (p = 0.011). On IPTW-based analysis, patients treated concomitantly with metformin (median: not reached versus 31 months; p = 0.002), or ACEI (median: 37 versus 29 months, p = 0.006) had significantly improved MFS. CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc exploratory analysis of SPARTAN, effects of apalutamide on MFS and OS were consistent across subgroups stratified by exposure to concomitant medications. Exposure to concomitant metformin and ACEI was independently associated with a significant improvement in MFS.

Prostate Radiotherapy in Low-volume Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The utility of prostate radiotherapy (RT) is unclear in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) receiving intensified systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the role of prostate RT in low-volume mHSPC. METHODS: Bibliographic databases and conference proceedings were searched through July 2023 for RCTs evaluating the addition of ARPIs or prostate RT to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy, defined as ADT or ADT plus docetaxel, for the initial treatment of mHSPC. We focused exclusively on aggregate data from the low-volume mHSPC subpopulation in these trials. We pooled the treatment arms into four groups: SOC, SOC plus ARPI, SOC plus RT, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). To compare treatment strategies, a fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was undertaken, while a Bayesian network meta-regression was performed to account for across-trial differences in docetaxel use as part of SOC and in proportions of patients with de novo presentation. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Ten RCTs comprising 4423 patients were eligible. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve scores were 0.0006, 0.45, 0.62, and 0.94 for SOC, SOC plus RT, SOC plus ARPI, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT, respectively. On a meta-regression, in a population with de novo mHSPC and no docetaxel use, we did not find sufficient evidence of a difference in OS between SOC plus ARPI plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% credible interval: 0.51-1.16) and SOC plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (HR: 1.10; 95% credible interval: 0.92-1.42). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: There was some evidence that SOC plus ARPI plus RT reduced mortality compared with the next best strategy of SOC plus ARPI in patients with low-volume de novo mHSPC. A meta-analysis with individual patient data or an RCT is needed to confirm these findings.

Prior Local Therapy and First-Line Apalutamide in Patients With Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the SPARTAN Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Preclinical studies suggest that exposure to prostate-directed local therapy (LT) may influence the efficacy of subsequent systemic therapy including androgen receptor pathway inhibitors. However, there is insufficient clinical evidence to support this premise in patients with nonmetastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Objective: To determine whether exposure to prior prostate-directed LT (radical prostatectomy [RP], radiation therapy [RT], or both) played any effect-modifying role in the treatment effect of apalutamide on metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with nmCRPC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc secondary analysis used individual patient data from SPARTAN (Study of Apalutamide [ARN-509] in Men With Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer), a phase 3, double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial conducted at 332 sites in 26 countries. Between October 14, 2013, and December 15, 2016, patients with nmCRPC and a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 10 months or less were randomly assigned to apalutamide vs placebo; all patients received androgen deprivation therapy. The final data analysis was performed on December 31, 2023. Exposure: Prior prostate-directed LT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Separate Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed for OS and MFS, which included prior LT, treatment group, and an interaction term, in addition to a minimally sufficient set of confounders. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for MFS and OS were determined for the apalutamide groups with or without prior LT. Results: Among the 1179 evaluable patients included in this analysis, 795 received prior LT and 384 did not. The median age of patients with and without prior LT was 70 (IQR, 45-90) years and 75 (IQR, 50-95) years, respectively. The median follow-up was 52.0 (IQR, 51.5-52.8) months. A differential treatment effect of apalutamide on MFS was observed between patients with and without prior LT (P for interaction = .009), with greater benefits for those with prior LT (adjusted HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.17-0.27]) compared with those without prior LT (adjusted HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.25-0.51]). However, there was insufficient evidence of a differential treatment effect on OS among subgroups stratified by exposure to prior LT (P for interaction = .23), with improved OS in the subgroup with prior LT (adjusted HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.57-0.92]) but no significant difference in OS in the subgroup without prior LT (adjusted HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.64-1.31]). Conclusions and Relevance: This post hoc analysis of the SPARTAN trial provides evidence of an interaction between prior LT and apalutamide in patients with nmCRPC, with a clinically significant and more favorable treatment effect from apalutamide on MFS among patients with prior LT. Further studies are needed to validate these findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01946204.

Testosterone Recovery Following Androgen Suppression and Prostate Radiotherapy (TRANSPORT): A Pooled Analysis of Five Randomized Trials from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Time to testosterone recovery (TR) following androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists varies widely. We evaluate TR kinetics and the oncological impact of an effective castration period in patients receiving definitive radiotherapy and ADT for prostate cancer. METHODS: We obtained individual patient data from randomized controlled trials of radiotherapy with ADT and prospectively collected serial testosterone data from the MARCAP Consortium. We estimated the times to noncastrate TR (>1.7 nmol/l) and nonhypogonadal TR (>8.0 nmol/l) were estimated for each prescribed ADT duration, and developed corresponding nomograms. The association between effective castration period and metastasis-free survival (MFS) for any given ADT duration was evaluated via multivariable Cox regression. We conducted cubic spline analyses to assess nonlinear associations. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 1444 men from five trials in the analysis, of whom 115 received 4 mo, 880 received 6 mo, 353 received 18 mo, 36 received 28 mo, and 60 received 36 mo of ADT. Times to noncastrate TR and to nonhypogonadal TR varied considerably by ADT duration. Higher baseline testosterone and lower age were associated with a higher likelihood of TR (p < 0.001 for both). Effective castration period was not linearly associated with MFS for any ADT duration on Cox regression. Cubic spline analysis revealed that the optimal effective castration period for an MFS benefit was 10.6 mo for men who received 6 mo of ADT and 18 mo for men who received 18 mo of ADT. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Time to TR varies according to the ADT duration, baseline testosterone, and age. The relationship between effective castration period and MFS may be nonlinear, with a longer effective castration period being helpful for men receiving 6 mo of ADT.

Long-term Renal Function Outcomes After Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for Primary Renal Cell Carcinoma Including Patients with a Solitary Kidney: A Report from the International Radiosurgery Oncology Consortium of the Kidney.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Renal function preservation is particularly important following nonoperative treatment of localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) since patients are often older with medical comorbidities. Our objective was to report long-term renal function outcomes after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) including patients with a solitary kidney. METHODS: Patients with primary RCC treated with SABR with ≥2 yr of follow-up at 12 International Radiosurgery Consortium for Kidney institutions were included. Renal function was measured by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 190 patients (56 with a solitary kidney) underwent SABR and were followed for a median of 5.0 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.4-6.8). In patients with a solitary kidney versus bilateral kidneys, pre-SABR eGFR (mean [standard deviation]) was 61.1 (23.2) versus 58.0 (22.3) ml/min (p = 0.32) and the median tumor size was 3.65 cm (IQR: 2.59-4.50 cm) versus 4.00 cm (IQR: 3.00-5.00 cm; p = 0.026). At 5 yr after SABR, eGFR decreased by -14.5 (7.6) and -13.3 (15.9) ml/min (p = 0.67), respectively, and there were similar rates of post-SABR dialysis (3.6% [n = 2/56] vs 3.7% [n = 5/134]). A multivariable analysis demonstrated that increasing tumor size (odds ratio [OR] per 1 cm: 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-2.16, p = 0.0055) and baseline eGFR (OR per 10 ml/min: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.02-1.66, p = 0.034) were associated with an eGFR decline of ≥15 ml/min at 1 yr. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: With long-term follow-up after SABR, kidney function decline remains moderate, with no observed difference between patients with a solitary kidney and bilateral kidneys. Tumor size and baseline eGFR are dominant factors predictive of long-term renal function decline. PATIENT SUMMARY: With long-term follow-up, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) yields moderate long-term renal function decline and low dialysis rates even in patients with a solitary kidney. SABR thus represents a promising noninvasive, nephron-sparing option for patients with localized renal cell carcinoma.