Explore the vast range of titles available.

ProBio is the first outcome-adaptive platform trial in prostate cancer utilizing a Bayesian framework to evaluate efficacy within predefined biomarker signatures across systemic treatments. Prospective circulating tumor DNA and germline DNA analysis was performed in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer before randomization to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs), taxanes or a physician’s choice control arm. The primary endpoint was the time to no longer clinically benefitting (NLCB). Secondary endpoints included overall survival and (serious) adverse events. Upon reaching the time to NLCB, patients could be re-randomized. The primary endpoint was met after 218 randomizations. ARPIs demonstrated ~50% longer time to NLCB compared to taxanes (median, 11.1 versus 6.9 months) and the physician’s choice arm (median, 11.1 versus 7.4 months) in the biomarker-unselected or ‘all’ patient population. ARPIs demonstrated longer overall survival (median, 38.7 versus 21.7 and 21.8 months for taxanes and physician’s choice, respectively). Biomarker signature findings suggest that the largest increase in time to NLCB was observed in AR (single-nucleotide variant/genomic structural rearrangement)-negative and TP53 wild-type patients and TMPRSS2–ERG fusion-positive patients, whereas no difference between ARPIs and taxanes was observed in TP53 -altered patients. In summary, ARPIs outperform taxanes and physician’s choice treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with detectable circulating tumor DNA. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03903835 . In a biomarker-driven, outcome-adaptive platform trial for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, androgen receptor pathway inhibitors showed longer survival with respect to taxanes and physician’s choice treatment.

A randomized trial tested whether the addition of apalutamide, an androgen receptor blocker, to androgen-deprivation therapy might improve radiographic (including MRI-detected) progression–free survival and overall survival. Apalutamide was significantly more effective than placebo for both end points.

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (herein referred to as abiraterone) or enzalutamide added at the start of androgen deprivation therapy improves outcomes for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Here, we aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes and test whether combining enzalutamide with abiraterone and androgen deprivation therapy improves survival. We analysed two open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol, with no overlapping controls, conducted at 117 sites in the UK and Switzerland. Eligible patients (no age restriction) had metastatic, histologically-confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma; a WHO performance status of 0–2; and adequate haematological, renal, and liver function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computerised algorithm and a minimisation technique to either standard of care (androgen deprivation therapy; docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously for six cycles with prednisolone 10 mg orally once per day allowed from Dec 17, 2015) or standard of care plus abiraterone acetate 1000 mg and prednisolone 5 mg (in the abiraterone trial) orally or abiraterone acetate and prednisolone plus enzalutamide 160 mg orally once a day (in the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial). Patients were stratified by centre, age, WHO performance status, type of androgen deprivation therapy, use of aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, pelvic nodal status, planned radiotherapy, and planned docetaxel use. The primary outcome was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who started treatment. A fixed-effects meta-analysis of individual patient data was used to compare differences in survival between the two trials. STAMPEDE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN78818544). Between Nov 15, 2011, and Jan 17, 2014, 1003 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=502) or standard of care plus abiraterone (n=501) in the abiraterone trial. Between July 29, 2014, and March 31, 2016, 916 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=454) or standard of care plus abiraterone and enzalutamide (n=462) in the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial. Median follow-up was 96 months (IQR 86–107) in the abiraterone trial and 72 months (61–74) in the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial. In the abiraterone trial, median overall survival was 76·6 months (95% CI 67·8–86·9) in the abiraterone group versus 45·7 months (41·6–52·0) in the standard of care group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·62 [95% CI 0·53–0·73]; p<0·0001). In the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial, median overall survival was 73·1 months (61·9–81·3) in the abiraterone and enzalutamide group versus 51·8 months (45·3–59·0) in the standard of care group (HR 0·65 [0·55–0·77]; p<0·0001). We found no difference in the treatment effect between these two trials (interaction HR 1·05 [0·83–1·32]; pinteraction=0·71) or between-trial heterogeneity (I2 p=0·70). In the first 5 years of treatment, grade 3–5 toxic effects were higher when abiraterone was added to standard of care (271 [54%] of 498 vs 192 [38%] of 502 with standard of care) and the highest toxic effects were seen when abiraterone and enzalutamide were added to standard of care (302 [68%] of 445 vs 204 [45%] of 454 with standard of care). Cardiac causes were the most common cause of death due to adverse events (five [1%] with standard of care plus abiraterone and enzalutamide [two attributed to treatment] and one (<1%) with standard of care in the abiraterone trial). Enzalutamide and abiraterone should not be combined for patients with prostate cancer starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. Clinically important improvements in survival from addition of abiraterone to androgen deprivation therapy are maintained for longer than 7 years. Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Janssen, and Astellas.

Background In recent years, there is increasing evidence showing a beneficial outcome (e.g. progression free survival; PFS) after metastases-directed therapy (MDT) with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or targeted surgery for oligometastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (oHSPC). However, many patients do not qualify for these treatments due to prior interventions or tumor location. Such oligometastatic patients could benefit from radioligand therapy (RLT) with 177 Lu-PSMA; a novel tumor targeting therapy for end-stage metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Especially because RLT could be more effective in low volume disease, such as the oligometastatic status, due to high uptake of radioligands in smaller lesions. To test the hypothesis that 177 Lu-PSMA is an effective treatment in oHSPC to prolong PFS and postpone the need for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), we initiated a multicenter randomized clinical trial. This is globally, the first prospective study using 177 Lu-PSMA-I&T in a randomized multicenter setting. Methods & design This study compares 177 Lu-PSMA-I&T MDT to the current standard of care (SOC); deferred ADT. Fifty-eight patients with oHSPC (≤5 metastases on PSMA PET) and high PSMA uptake (SUVmax > 15, partial volume corrected) on 18 F-PSMA PET after prior surgery and/or EBRT and a PSA doubling time of < 6 months, will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio. The patients randomized to the interventional arm will be eligible for two cycles of 7.4GBq 177 Lu-PSMA-I&T at a 6-week interval. After both cycles, patients are monitored every 3 weeks (including adverse events, QoL- and xerostomia questionnaires and laboratory testing) at the outpatient clinic. Twenty-four weeks after cycle two an end of study evaluation is planned together with another 18 F-PSMA PET and (whole body) MRI. Patients in the SOC arm are eligible to receive 177 Lu-PSMA-I&T after meeting the primary study objective, which is the fraction of patients who show disease progression during the study follow up. A second primary objective is the time to disease progression. Disease progression is defined as a 100% increase in PSA from baseline or clinical progression. Discussion This is the first prospective randomized clinical study assessing the therapeutic efficacy and toxicity of 177 Lu-PSMA-I&T for patients with oHSPC. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04443062 .

Background A higher incidence of apalutamide-related skin rash has been observed in Japanese patients with prostate cancer (PC). Methods This integrated analysis of data of Japanese patients from 2 global Phase 3 studies, SPARTAN ( NCT01946204 ; patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant PC [nmCRPC]) and TITAN ( NCT02489318 ; patients with metastatic castration-sensitive PC [mCSPC]), and the Phase 1 study 56021927PCR1008 ( NCT02162836 ; patients with metastatic CRPC [mCRPC]), assessed clinical risk factors of apalutamide-related skin rash as well as the potential correlation with plasma exposure to apalutamide. Kaplan-Meier method was used for time-to-event analyses. Clinical risk factors for skin rash were assessed using odds ratio. Results Data from 68 patients (SPARTAN: n  = 34, TITAN: n  = 28, 56021927PCR1008: n  = 6) receiving apalutamide 240 mg orally once-daily were analyzed. Rash (13 [19.1%]) and maculo-papular rash (11 [16.2%]) were the most frequently reported skin rash. All Grade and Grade 3 skin rash occurred in 35 (51.5%) and 10 (14.7%) patients, respectively. Most (85.7%) skin rash occurred within 4 months of apalutamide initiation and resolved in a median time of 1 month following the use of antihistamines, topical or systemic corticosteroids, with/without apalutamide dose interruptions/reductions. Median time-to-remission of first incidence of rash and maximum grade incidence of rash were 1.0 month (IQR: 0.36–1.81) and 1.0 month (IQR: 0.30–2.43), respectively. No significant clinical risk factors for the incidence of skin rash were observed. Areas under the curve (0–24 h) (AUC 0–24, ss ) at steady-state of plasma apalutamide concentration were numerically slightly higher in patients with skin rash than those without. Conclusions No clinical risk factors for rash could be detected. There is a potential correlation between incidence of skin rash and plasma exposure to apalutamide. In general, apalutamide-related skin rash is easily managed, with appropriate treatment with or without dose adjustment. Trial registration Retrospective pooled analysis of NCT01946204 , NCT02489318 , and NCT02162836 .

The alpha-emitter radium-223 ( 223Ra) is a bone-seeking radionuclide studied as a new treatment for patients with bone metastases from hormone-refractory prostate cancer. We aimed to study mature outcomes from a randomised, multicentre, phase II study of 223Ra. Patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer and bone pain needing external-beam radiotherapy were assigned to four intravenous injections of 223Ra (50 kBq/kg, 33 patients) or placebo (31 patients), given every 4 weeks. Primary endpoints were change in bone-alkaline phosphatase (ALP) concentration and time to skeletal-related events (SREs). Secondary endpoints included toxic effects, time to prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) progression, and overall survival. All tests were done at a 5% significance level, based on intention to treat. Median relative change in bone-ALP during treatment was −65·6% (95% CI −69·5 to −57·7) and 9·3% (3·8–60·9) in the 223Ra group and placebo groups, respectively (p<0·0001, Wilcoxon ranked-sums test). Hazard ratio for time to first SRE, adjusted for baseline covariates, was 1·75 (0·96–3·19, p=0·065, Cox regression). Haematological toxic effects did not differ significantly between two groups. No patient discontinued 223Ra because of treatment toxicity. Median time to PSA progression was 26 weeks (16–39) versus 8 weeks (4–12; p=0·048) for 223Ra versus placebo, respectively. Median overall survival was 65·3 weeks (48·7–∞) for 223Ra and 46·4 weeks (32·1–77·4) for placebo (p=0·066, log rank). The hazard ratio for overall survival, adjusted for baseline covariates was 2·12 (1·13–3·98, p=0·020, Cox regression). 223Ra was well tolerated with minimum myelotoxicity, and had a significant effect on bone-ALP concentrations. Larger clinical trials are warranted to study 223Ra on the prevention of SREs and on overall survival in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Bone-targeting properties of 223Ra could also potentially be used for treating skeletal metastasis from other primary cancers.

A randomized trial showed noninferiority of stereotactic body radiotherapy to conventionally or moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy in preventing biochemical recurrence in selected men with localized prostate cancer.

At 23 years of follow-up in the SPCG-4 trial, mortality among men who underwent radical prostatectomy was 11.7 percentage points lower than that among men whose condition was managed by watchful waiting. Radical prostatectomy was associated with a mean of nearly 3 years of extra life.

Metastasis-directed therapy by stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes in the oligometastatic prostate cancer setting. We aimed to investigate whether short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and SBRT at all oligometastatic sites versus SBRT alone improves clinical progression-free survival in men with metachronous oligorecurrent hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. The RADIOSA study was a single-centre, randomised, open-label, controlled phase 2 trial done in the European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy. Key eligibility criteria were histologically proven initial diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the prostate, biochemical progression after radical local prostate treatment, nodal relapse in the pelvis, extra-regional nodal relapse, bone metastases at next-generation imaging with a maximum of three lesions, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0–1, and age 18 years or older. Participants were stratified according to prostate-specific membrane antigen doubling time (≤3 vs >3 months), metastases localisation (node vs bone), and diagnostic imaging (positron emission tomography vs MRI) and were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated random number to SBRT alone or SBRT in combination with 6 months of ADT. For SBRT treatment, a schedule of 30 Gy in three fractions every other day (with the equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions being 98·6 Gy, considering α/β ratio of 1·5 Gy and biologically effective dose of >100 Gy), or equivalent regimens depending on disease site location, was administered. Patients in the SBRT with ADT group received 6 months of ADT with a luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue within 1 week before the start of SBRT. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was clinical progression-free survival. All analyses followed a modified intention-to-treat principle, consisting of all patients assigned to a treatment group who had available data. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02680587, and is complete. Between Aug 1, 2019, and April 30, 2023, 218 patients were assessed for eligibility, 113 were excluded, and 105 were enrolled and randomly assigned to an intervention (52 to SBRT only and 53 to SBRT with ADT). Three patients were lost to follow-up and 51 patients in each group were assessed for the primary outcome. The median age at study enrolment was 70 years (IQR 65–75); data on race and ethnicity were not collected. With a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 16–36) for both groups, the median clinical progression-free survival was 15·1 months (95% CI 12·4–22·8) for the SBRT group versus 32·2 months (22·4–not reached) for the SBRT with ADT group (hazard ratio 0·43 [95% CI 0·26–0·72], p=0·0010]). One gastrointestinal grade 1 adverse event (SBRT group) and one genitourinary grade 3 adverse event (left ureter stenosis, SBRT with ADT group) were reported, with no late toxicities observed. 22 grade 1 ADT-related adverse events were reported, all of which had resolved at the last follow-up. No treatment-related deaths were recorded. To our knowledge, the RADIOSA trial represents the first randomised trial in the metachronous oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer setting to report improved clinical progression-free survival with the combination of SBRT and a short course of ADT, although carefully selected patients might still benefit from SBRT alone. By demonstrating improved clinical progression-free survival, the RADIOSA trial reinforces the role of metastasis-directed therapy in delaying systemic treatment escalation. Additionally, it underscores the need for further studies to determine the optimal duration of ADT and identify biomarkers predicting response to SBRT alone. Italian Association of Cancer Research.

Patients with prostate cancer who have high-risk biochemical recurrence have an increased risk of progression. The efficacy and safety of enzalutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy and enzalutamide monotherapy, as compared with androgen-deprivation therapy alone, are unknown. In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with prostate cancer who had high-risk biochemical recurrence with a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 9 months or less. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive enzalutamide (160 mg) daily plus leuprolide every 12 weeks (combination group), placebo plus leuprolide (leuprolide-alone group), or enzalutamide monotherapy (monotherapy group). The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, as assessed by blinded independent central review, in the combination group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. A key secondary end point was metastasis-free survival in the monotherapy group as compared with the leuprolide-alone group. Other secondary end points were patient-reported outcomes and safety. A total of 1068 patients underwent randomization: 355 were assigned to the combination group, 358 to the leuprolide-alone group, and 355 to the monotherapy group. The patients were followed for a median of 60.7 months. At 5 years, metastasis-free survival was 87.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.0 to 90.6) in the combination group, 71.4% (95% CI, 65.7 to 76.3) in the leuprolide-alone group, and 80.0% (95% CI, 75.0 to 84.1) in the monotherapy group. With respect to metastasis-free survival, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.61; P<0.001); enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87; P = 0.005). No new safety signals were observed, with no substantial between-group differences in quality-of-life measures. In patients with prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence, enzalutamide plus leuprolide was superior to leuprolide alone with respect to metastasis-free survival; enzalutamide monotherapy was also superior to leuprolide alone. The safety profile of enzalutamide was consistent with that shown in previous clinical studies, with no apparent detrimental effect on quality of life. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; EMBARK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02319837.).