Abiraterone acetate in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer - the unanticipated real-world clinical experience.

BACKGROUND: There is much interest in confirming whether the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) demonstrated within the trial setting is reproducible in routine clinical practice. We report the clinical outcome of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with AA in real-life clinical practice. METHODS: The clinical records of mCRPC patients treated with AA from all 6 public oncology centers in Hong Kong between August 2011 and December 2014 were reviewed. The treatment efficacy and its determinants, and toxicities were determined. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients with mCRPC were treated with AA in the review period, of whom 58 were chemo-naive and 52 had received prior chemotherapy (post-chemo). The median follow-up time was 7.5/11.4 months for chemo-naive/post-chemo patients. 6.9/15.4 % of chemo-naive/post-chemo patients had visceral metastases. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 18.1/15.5 months and 6.7/6.4 months for chemo-naive/post-chemo patients, respectively. Among chemo-naive patients, those with visceral diseases had significantly inferior OS (2.8 vs 18.0 p = 0.0007) and PFS (2.8 vs 6.8 months, p = 0.0088) than those without. Pain control was comparable in both groups of patients. The most common grade 3 or above toxicities were hypertension (6.9/5.8 %) and hypokalemia (3.4/3.8 %) in chemo-naive/post-chemo patients. In multivariate analysis, the presence of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥50 % drop of PSA from baseline) within the first 3 months of therapy was associated with favorable OS and PFS in both chemo-naive and post-chemo group. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice outside the trial setting, OS after AA in our chemo-naive patient cohort (18.1 months) was considerably shorter than that reported in the COU-AA-302 trial (34.7 months), and the OS was particularly short in those with visceral metastases (2.8 months). Conversely, AA was efficacious in post-chemo patients. AA resulted in comparable pain control in both groups of patients. The presence of PSA response within the first 3 months of treatment was a significant determinant of survival.

A Territory-wide, Multicenter, Age- and Prostate-specific Antigen-matched Study Comparing Chemohormonal Therapy and Hormonal Therapy Alone in Chinese Men With Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of real-world data regarding the treatment outcomes of chemohormonal therapy versus hormonal therapy alone in Chinese men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a territory-wide, multicenter, age- and prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-matched cohort study comparing chemohormonal therapy and hormonal therapy alone in Chinese men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Patient and disease characteristics were reviewed. The primary outcome was PSA progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes included clinical progression-free survival and castration resistance-free survival. Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: From January 2015 to July 2016, 32 Chinese men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were treated with chemohormonal therapy, and they were matched to 32 Chinese men who were treated with hormonal therapy alone. Patient and disease characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The chemohormonal therapy group had a significantly better PSA progression-free survival (P = .001) and castration resistance-free survival (P = .002) than the hormonal therapy group. There was no significant difference in the clinical progression-free survival between the 2 groups. Upon multivariate Cox regression analyses, the use of chemohormonal therapy was significantly associated with a longer time to PSA progression (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.73; P = .008) and a longer time to castration resistance (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.83; P = .015), but was not associated with clinical progression. CONCLUSIONS: The use of chemohormonal therapy could prevent PSA progression and the development of castration resistance when compared with hormonal therapy alone in Chinese men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostatic cancer.

Differences in clinical outcome between docetaxel and abiraterone acetate as the first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with or without the ineligible clinical factors of the COU-AA-302 study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) versus docetaxel (T) as first-line treatment in chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with or without the ineligible factors of the COU-AA-302 study (presence of visceral metastases, symptomatic disease, and/or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinical records of chemo-naïve mCRPC patients who received AA in six public oncology centers or T in two of these centers between 2003 and 2014 were reviewed. The survival time was compared among four subgroups of patients: those with ineligible factors administered AA (Group Ineligible-AA) or T (Group Ineligible-T), and those without ineligible factors and administered AA (Group Eligible-AA) or T (Group Eligible-T). RESULTS: During the study period, we identified 115 mCRPC patients who received AA or T, among whom 29, 36, 29, and 21 patients were classified as Groups Ineligible-AA, Ineligible-T, Eligible-AA, and Eligible-T, respectively. Both Group Ineligible-AA and Group Eligible-AA had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and similar overall survival (OS) as Group Ineligible-T and Group Eligible-T (Ineligible, PFS: 6.3 vs. 5.9 months, P = 0.0234, OS: 7.8 vs. 15.7 months, P = 0.1601; Eligible, PFS: 9.8 vs. 5.6 months, P = 0.0437, OS: 20.5 vs. 18.2 months, P = 0.7820). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to T, AA treatment resulted in longer PFS and similar OS in chemo-naïve mCRPC patients, irrespective of the presence of ineligible factors, suggesting that the initial treatment by AA may still be beneficial to those with the aforementioned ineligible factors.