Search

BackgroundThe relative cardiovascular safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared with GnRH agonists in men with prostate cancer and known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains controversial.MethodsIn this international, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label trial, men with prostate cancer and concomitant atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive the GnRH antagonist degarelix or the GnRH agonist leuprolide for 12 months. The primary outcome was the time to first adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) through 12 months.ResultsBecause of slower-than-projected enrollment and fewer-than-projected primary outcome events, enrollment was stopped before the 900 planned participants were accrued. From May 3, 2016, to April 16, 2020, a total of 545 patients from 113 sites across 12 countries were randomly selected. Baseline characteristics were balanced between study groups. The median age was 73 years, 49.8% had localized prostate cancer; 26.3% had locally advanced disease, and 20.4% had metastatic disease. A major adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 15 (5.5%) patients assigned to degarelix and 11 (4.1%) patients assigned to leuprolide (hazard ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.59-2.79]; P=0.53).ConclusionsPRONOUNCE (A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease) is the first, international, randomized clinical trial to prospectively compare the cardiovascular safety of a GnRH antagonist and a GnRH agonist in patients with prostate cancer. The study was terminated prematurely because of the smaller than planned number of participants and events, and no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events at 1 year between patients assigned to degarelix or leuprolide was observed. The relative cardiovascular safety of GnRH antagonists and agonists remains unresolved. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02663908.

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments.

PurposeRadical prostatectomy (RP) alone is often inadequate in curing men with clinically localized, high-risk prostate cancer (PC). We hypothesized that chemohormonal therapy (CHT) with androgen-deprivation therapy plus docetaxel before RP would improve biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) over RP alone.Patients and methodsMen with clinically localized, high-risk PC were assigned to RP alone or neoadjuvant CHT with androgen deprivation plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2 body surface area every 3 weeks for 6 cycles) and RP. The primary end point was 3-year BPFS. Biochemical failure was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level > 0.2 ng/mL that increased on 2 consecutive occasions that were at least 3 months apart. Secondary end points included 5-year BPFS, overall BPFS, local recurrence, metastasis-free survival (MFS), PC-specific mortality, and overall survival (OS).ResultsIn total, 788 men were randomly assigned. Median follow-up time was 6.1 years. The overall rates of grade 3 and 4 adverse events during chemotherapy were 26% and 19%, respectively. No difference was seen in 3-year BPFS between neoadjuvant CHT plus RP and RP alone (0.89 v 0.84, respectively; 95% CI for the difference, -0.01 to 0.11; P = .11). Neoadjuvant CHT was associated with improved overall BPFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.99), improved MFS (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.95), and improved OS (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.94) compared with RP alone.ConclusionThe primary study end point, 3-year BPFS, was not met. Although some improvement was seen in secondary end points, any potential benefit must be weighed against toxicity. Our data do not support the routine use of neoadjuvant CHT and RP in patients with clinically localized, high-risk PC at this time.

BackgroundInnovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but there are still many aspects of management that lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 addressed some of these topics to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence.ObjectiveTo present the results from the APCCC 2019.Design, setting, and participantsSimilar to prior conferences, experts identified 10 important areas of controversy regarding the management of advanced prostate cancer: locally advanced disease, biochemical recurrence after local therapy, treating the primary tumour in the metastatic setting, metastatic hormone-sensitive/naïve prostate cancer, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, bone health and bone metastases, molecular characterisation of tissue and blood, inter- and intrapatient heterogeneity, and adverse effects of hormonal therapy and their management. A panel of 72 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe panel voted publicly but anonymously on 123 predefined questions, which were developed by both voting and nonvoting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process.Results and limitationsPanellists voted based on their opinions rather than a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions had varying degrees of support by the panel, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material.ConclusionsThese voting results from a panel of prostate cancer experts can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of advanced prostate management for which high-level evidence is sparse. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient-specific factors, such as disease extent and location, prior lines of therapy, comorbidities, and treatment preferences, together with current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Clinical trial enrolment for men with advanced prostate cancer should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2019 once again identified important questions that merit assessment in specifically designed trials.Patient summaryThe Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference, which has been held three times since 2015, aims to share the knowledge of world experts in prostate cancer management with health care providers worldwide. At the end of the conference, an expert panel discusses and votes on predefined consensus questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision making.

A number of important drugs used to treat cancer-many of which serve as the backbone of modern chemotherapy regimens-have outdated prescribing information in their drug labeling. The Food and Drug Administration is undertaking a pilot project to develop a process and criteria for updating prescribing information for longstanding oncology drugs, based on the breadth of knowledge the cancer community has accumulated with the use of these drugs over time. This article highlights a number of considerations for labeling updates, including selecting priorities for updating; data sources and evidentiary criteria; as well as the risks, challenges, and opportunities for iterative review to ensure prescribing information for oncology drugs remains relevant to current clinical practice.

A number of important drugs used to treat cancer-many of which serve as the backbone of modern chemotherapy regimens-have outdated prescribing information in their drug labeling. The Food and Drug Administration is undertaking a pilot project to develop a process and criteria for updating prescribing information for longstanding oncology drugs, based on the breadth of knowledge the cancer community has accumulated with the use of these drugs over time. This article highlights a number of considerations for labeling updates, including selecting priorities for updating; data sources and evidentiary criteria; as well as the risks, challenges, and opportunities for iterative review to ensure prescribing information for oncology drugs remains relevant to current clinical practice.

ImportanceBlack men are more likely to die of prostate cancer than white men. In men with similar stages of disease, the contribution of biological vs nonbiological differences to this observed disparity is unclear.ObjectiveTo quantify the association of black race with long-term survival outcomes after controlling for known prognostic variables and access to care among men with prostate cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis multiple-cohort study included updated individual patient-level data of men with clinical T1-4N0-1M0 prostate cancer from the following 3 cohorts: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER [n = 296 273]); 5 equal-access regional medical centers within the Veterans Affairs health system (VA [n = 3972]); and 4 pooled National Cancer Institute-sponsored Radiation Therapy Oncology Group phase 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs [n = 5854]). Data were collected in the 3 cohorts from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 2013, and analyzed from April 27, 2017, through April 13, 2019.ExposuresIn the VA and RCT cohorts, all patients received surgery and radiotherapy, respectively, with curative intent. In SEER, radical treatment, hormone therapy, or conservative management were received.Main outcomes and measuresProstate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Secondary measures included other-cause mortality (OCM). To adjust for demographic-, cancer-, and treatment-related baseline differences, inverse probability weighting (IPW) was performed.ResultsAmong the 306 100 participants included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 64.9 [8.9] years), black men constituted 52 840 patients (17.8%) in the SEER cohort, 1513 (38.1%) in the VA cohort, and 1129 (19.3%) in the RCT cohort. Black race was associated with an increased age-adjusted PCSM hazard (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.30; 95% CI, 1.23-1.37; P

Purpose: Bevacizumab is a VEGF-specific angiogenesis inhibitor indicated as an adjunct to chemotherapy for the treatment of multiple cancers. Hypertension is commonly observed during bevacizumab treatment, and high-grade toxicity can limit therapy or lead to cardiovascular complications. The factors that contribute to interindividual variability in blood pressure rise during bevacizumab treatment are not well understood.Experimental Design: To identify genomic regions associated with bevacizumab-induced hypertension risk, sequencing of candidate genes and flanking regulatory regions was performed on 61 patients treated with bevacizumab (19 cases developed early-onset grade 3 hypertension and 42 controls had no reported hypertension in the first six cycles of treatment). SNP-based tests for common variant associations and gene-based tests for rare variant associations were performed in 174 candidate genes.Results: Four common variants in independent linkage disequilibrium blocks between SLC29A1 and HSP90AB1 were among the top associations. Validation in larger bevacizumab-treated cohorts supported association between rs9381299 with early grade 3+ hypertension (P = 0.01; OR, 2.4) and systolic blood pressure >180 mm Hg (P = 0.02; OR, 2.1). rs834576 was associated with early grade 3+ hypertension in CALGB 40502 (P = 0.03; OR, 2.9). These SNP regions are enriched for regulatory elements that may potentially increase gene expression. In vitro overexpression of SLC29A1 in human endothelial cells disrupted adenosine signaling and reduced nitric oxide levels that were further lowered upon bevacizumab exposure.Conclusions: The genomic region between SLC29A1 and HSP90AB1 and its role in regulating adenosine signaling are key targets for further investigation into the pathogenesis of bevacizumab-induced hypertension. Clin Cancer Res; 24(19); 4734-44. ©2018 AACR.

BackgroundIn advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics.ObjectiveTo present the report of APCCC 2017.Design, setting, and participantsTen important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process.Results and limitationsVoting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data.ConclusionsThe presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them.Patient summaryThe second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process.

Purpose Adjuvant therapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localized prostate cancer decreases the number of deaths from this disease. Surrogates for overall survival (OS) could expedite the evaluation of new adjuvant therapies. Methods By June 2013, 102 completed or ongoing randomized trials were identified and individual patient data were collected from 28 trials with 28,905 patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) were determined for 21,140 patients from 24 trials and 12,712 patients from 19 trials, respectively. We evaluated the surrogacy of DFS and MFS for OS by using a two-stage meta-analytic validation model by determining the correlation of an intermediate clinical end point with OS and the correlation of treatment effects on both the intermediate clinical end point and OS. Results Trials enrolled patients from 1987 to 2011. After a median follow-up of 10 years, 45% of 21,140 men and 45% of 12,712 men experienced a DFS and MFS event, respectively. For DFS and MFS, 61% and 90% of the patients, respectively, were from radiation trials, and 63% and 66%, respectively, had high-risk disease. At the patient level, Kendall's τ correlation with OS was 0.85 and 0.91 for DFS and MFS, respectively. At the trial level, R2 was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.88) from weighted linear regression of 8-year OS rates versus 5-year DFS and MFS rates, respectively. Treatment effects-measured by log hazard ratios-for the surrogates and OS were well correlated ( R2, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.82] for DFS and 0.92 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.95] for MFS). Conclusion MFS is a strong surrogate for OS for localized prostate cancer that is associated with a significant risk of death from prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND. Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is an aggressive subtype, the presence of which changes the prognosis and management of metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS. We performed analytical validation of a Circulating Tumor Cell (CTC) multiplex RNA qPCR assay to identify the limit of quantification (LOQ) in cell lines, synthetic cDNA, and patient samples. We next profiled 116 longitudinal samples from a prospectively collected institutional cohort of 17 patients with metastatic prostate cancer (7 NEPC, 10 adenocarcinoma) as well as 265 samples from 139 patients enrolled in 3 adenocarcinoma phase II trials of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs). We assessed a NEPC liquid biomarker via the presence of neuroendocrine markers and the absence of androgen receptor (AR) target genes. RESULTS. Using the analytical validation LOQ, liquid biomarker NEPC detection in the longitudinal cohort had a per- sample sensitivity of 51.35% and a specificity of 91.14%. However, when we incorporated the serial information from multiple liquid biopsies per patient, a unique aspect of this study, the per-patient predictions were 100% accurate, with a receiver- operatingcurve (ROC) AUC of 1. In the adenocarcinoma ARSI trials, the presence of neuroendocrine markers, even while AR target gene expression was retained, was a strong negative prognostic factor. CONCLUSION. Our analytically validated CTC biomarker can detect NEPC with high diagnostic accuracy when leveraging serial samples that are only feasible using liquid biopsies. Patients with expression of NE genes while retaining AR- target gene expression may indicate the transition to neuroendocrine differentiation, with clinical characteristics consistent with this phenotype. FUNDING. NIH (DP2 OD030734, 1UH2CA260389, R01CA247479, and P30 CA014520), Department of Defense (PC190039 and PC200334), and Prostate Cancer Foundation (Movember Foundation--PCF Challenge Award)., Introduction The majority of prostate cancers are histologically classified as adenocarcinomas. Prostate adenocarcinoma is driven by androgens, expresses prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and other androgen receptor (AR) target genes, and responds [...]

PURPOSE: Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) is a phase II basket trial evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancer and genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results of a cohort of patients with soft tissue sarcoma with cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) amplification treated with palbociclib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. The primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) of at least 16+ weeks duration (SD16+) according to RECIST v1.1. The DC rate was estimated with a 90% CI. Secondary end points included OR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response, duration of SD, and safety. RESULTS: Forty-two patients with CDK4 amplification were enrolled. One patient was not evaluable for efficacy. One patient with partial response and 18 with SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 46% (90% CI, 36 to 100) and 2% (95% CI, <1 to 13), respectively. Median PFS was 16 weeks (95% CI, 9 to 28) and median OS was 69 weeks (95% CI, 31 to 111) for evaluable patients. Twenty patients had at least one grade 3 to 4 adverse event (AE) at least possibly related to palbociclib, including alanine aminotransferase increase, anemia, fatigue, hypophosphatemia, leukopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. No serious AEs were reported. CONCLUSION: Palbociclib met prespecified criteria to declare a signal of antitumor activity in patients with sarcoma and CDK4 amplification. Palbociclib met @ASCO #TAPUR criteria to declare antitumor activity in patients with CDK4-amplified liposarcoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study is a phase II basket trial evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancer and genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results of a cohort of patients with various solid tumors with germline or somatic BRCA1/2 mutations treated with talazoparib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced solid tumors, measurable disease (RECIST), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. Patients with germline BRCA -mutated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer were not eligible for this study. Primary end point was disease control (DC) determined by investigator assessment of objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) of at least 16 weeks duration (SD16+). The results were evaluated on the basis of a one-sided exact binomial test with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power = 0.82; α =.10). Secondary end points were OR, progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of SD, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients (20 cancer types) with BRCA1/2 mutations were enrolled from December 2019 to September 2021 and collapsed into a single histology pooled cohort for analysis. All patients were evaluable for efficacy. One complete response, nine partial response, and six SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 57% (one-sided 90% CI, 43 to 100) and 36% (95% CI, 19 to 56), respectively. The null hypothesis of a 15% DC rate was rejected (P <.001). Patients with OR had the following tumor types: breast (2), nonmelanoma skin, mesothelioma, stomach, uterus, non–small cell lung cancer, ovary, hepatocellular carcinoma, and pancreas. Thirteen patients had at least one grade 3-5 adverse event (AE) or serious AE at least possibly related to talazoparib. All were consistent with the drug label except bilirubin increase and hyponatremia (both grade 3 AEs). CONCLUSION: Talazoparib demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors and BRCA1/2 mutations, including cancer types for which poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors are not yet US Food and Drug Administration–approved. Talazoparib showed activity in patients with BRCA-mutated tumors for which PARP inhibitors are not yet FDA-approved. @ASCO #TAPUR [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the advent of targeted agents and immunological therapies, the medical research community has become increasingly aware that conventional methods for determining the best dose or schedule of a new agent are inadequate. It has been well established that conventional phase I designs cannot reliably identify safe and effective doses. This problem applies, generally, for cytotoxic agents, radiation therapy, targeted agents, and immunotherapies. To address this, the US Food and Drug Administration's Oncology Center of Excellence initiated Project Optimus, with the goal "to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development." As a response to Project Optimus, the articles in this special issue of Clinical Trials review recent advances in methods for choosing the dose or schedule of a new agent with an overall objective of informing clinical trialists of these innovative designs. This introductory article briefly reviews problems with conventional methods, the regulatory changes that encourage better dose optimization designs, and provides brief summaries of the articles that follow in this special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PurposeDiscovery of SNPs that predict a patient's risk of docetaxel-induced neuropathy would enable treatment individualization to maximize efficacy and avoid unnecessary toxicity. The objectives of this analysis were to discover SNPs associated with docetaxel-induced neuropathy and mechanistically validate these associations in preclinical models of drug-induced neuropathy.Experimental designA genome-wide association study was conducted in metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with docetaxel, prednisone and randomized to bevacizumab or placebo on CALGB 90401. SNPs were genotyped on the Illumina HumanHap610-Quad platform followed by rigorous quality control. The inference was conducted on the cumulative dose at occurrence of grade 3+ sensory neuropathy using a cause-specific hazard model that accounted for early treatment discontinuation. Genes with SNPs significantly associated with neuropathy were knocked down in cellular and mouse models of drug-induced neuropathy.ResultsA total of 498,081 SNPs were analyzed in 623 Caucasian patients, 50 (8%) of whom experienced grade 3+ neuropathy. The 1,000 SNPs most associated with neuropathy clustered in relevant pathways including neuropathic pain and axonal guidance. An SNP in VAC14 (rs875858) surpassed genome-wide significance (P = 2.12 × 10-8, adjusted P = 5.88 × 10-7). siRNA knockdown of VAC14 in stem cell-derived peripheral neuronal cells increased docetaxel sensitivity as measured by decreased neurite processes (P = 0.0015) and branches (P < 0.0001). Prior to docetaxel treatment, VAC14 heterozygous mice had greater nociceptive sensitivity than wild-type litter mate controls (P = 0.001).ConclusionsVAC14 should be prioritized for further validation of its potential role as a predictor of docetaxel-induced neuropathy and biomarker for treatment individualization. Clin Cancer Res; 22(19); 4890-900. ©2016 AACR.

BackgroundPrognosis associated with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) can vary widely.MethodsThis study used pretreatment nephrectomy specimens from a randomized phase III trial. Expression levels of candidate genes were determined from archival tumors using the OpenArray® platform for TaqMan® RT-qPCR. The dataset was randomly divided at 2:1 ratio into training (n = 221) and testing (n = 103) sets to develop a multigene prognostic signature.FindingsGene expressions were measured in 324 patients. In the training set, multiple models testing 424 candidate genes identified a prognostic signature containing 8 genes plus MSKCC clinical risk factors. In the testing set, the time dependent (td) AUC for a prognostic model containing the 8 genes with and without MSKCC risk factors were 0.72 and 0.69, respectively. The tdAUC for the clinical risk factors alone was 0.61. Additional primary mRCCs from patients with mRCC (n = 12) were sampled in multiple sites and standard deviations of gene expressions within a tumor were used as a measure of heterogeneity. All 8 genes in the final prognostic model met our criteria for minimal heterogeneity.ConclusionsA molecular prognostic signature based on 8 genes was developed and is ready for external validation in this patient population and other related settings such as nonmetastatic RCC.

PurposeZoledronic acid decreases the risk for skeletal-related events (SREs) in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases but its role earlier in the natural history of the disease is unknown. This phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of earlier treatment with zoledronic acid in men with castration-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer.Patients and methodsMen with castration-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases whose androgen-deprivation therapy was initiated within 6 months of study entry were randomly assigned in a blinded 1:1 ratio to receive zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 4 weeks) or a placebo. After their disease progressed to castration-resistant status, all patients received open-label treatment with zoledronic acid. The primary end point was time to first SRE, defined as radiation to bone, clinical fracture, spinal cord compression, surgery to bone, or death as a result of prostate cancer. Target accrual was 680 patients. Primary analysis was planned after 470 SREs. The study was discontinued prematurely (645 patients; 299 SREs) after the corporate supporter withdrew study drug supply.ResultsEarly zoledronic acid was not associated with increased time to first SRE. The median time to first SRE was 31.9 months in the zoledronic acid group (95% CI, 24.2 to 40.3) and 29.8 months in the placebo group (95% CI, 25.3 to 37.2; hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0 to 1.17; one-sided stratified log-rank P = .39). Overall survival was similar between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.12; P = .29). Rates of adverse events were similar between the groups.ConclusionIn men with castration-sensitive prostate cancer and bone metastases, early treatment with zoledronic acid was not associated with lower risk for SREs.

PurposePrognostic models for overall survival (OS) for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are dated and do not reflect significant advances in treatment options available for these patients. This work developed and validated an updated prognostic model to predict OS in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy.MethodsData from a phase III trial of 1,050 patients with mCRPC were used (Cancer and Leukemia Group B CALGB-90401 [Alliance]). The data were randomly split into training and testing sets. A separate phase III trial served as an independent validation set. Adaptive least absolute shrinkage and selection operator selected eight factors prognostic for OS. A predictive score was computed from the regression coefficients and used to classify patients into low- and high-risk groups. The model was assessed for its predictive accuracy using the time-dependent area under the curve (tAUC).ResultsThe model included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, disease site, lactate dehydrogenase, opioid analgesic use, albumin, hemoglobin, prostate-specific antigen, and alkaline phosphatase. Median OS values in the high- and low-risk groups, respectively, in the testing set were 17 and 30 months (hazard ratio [HR], 2.2; P < .001); in the validation set they were 14 and 26 months (HR, 2.9; P < .001). The tAUCs were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.73) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.76) in the testing and validation sets, respectively.ConclusionAn updated prognostic model for OS in patients with mCRPC receiving first-line chemotherapy was developed and validated on an external set. This model can be used to predict OS, as well as to better select patients to participate in trials on the basis of their prognosis.

BackgroundThe current study was conducted to investigate the dependence between progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and to explore whether PFS can be used as an intermediate endpoint of OS in this patient population.MethodsA total of 1381 patients from 2 prospective phase 3 trials (Cancer and Leukemia Group B [CALGB] 90206 and AVOREN) of interferon-alpha with or without bevacizumab were analyzed. Both trials recruited previously untreated patients with clear cell mRCC with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2; adequate bone marrow, hepatic, cardiac, and renal function; and controlled blood pressure. The CALGB study served as the training data set, and the AVOREN study served as the testing data set. The dependence between PFS and OS was investigated using the Kendall tau for bivariate time-to-event endpoints.ResultsIn the training data set, the median OS times among patients who experienced progressive disease at 3 months or 6 months were 6 months and 8 months, respectively, compared with 25 months and 30 months, respectively, (P < .001) in patients who did not develop disease progress. The adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were 2.6 (P < .0001) and 2.8 (P < .0001), respectively, for patients who did and did not progress at 3 months or 6 months. The dependence between PFS and OS was 0.53. These associations were confirmed in the testing data set.ConclusionsIn patients with mRCC who were treated with interferon-alpha with or without bevacizumab, the PFS at 3 months and 6 months was found to be predictive of OS. A high dependence between PFS and OS was observed, suggesting that PFS may be used as a surrogate endpoint for OS. Although this is a novel observation for RCC, these findings require validation in patients with mRCC who are treated with other targeted agents.

Clinical genomic testing of patient germline, tumor tissue, or plasma cell-free DNA can enable a personalized approach to cancer management and treatment. In prostate cancer (PCa), broad genotyping tests are now widely used to identify germline and/or somatic alterations in BRCA2 and other DNA damage repair genes. Alterations in these genes can confer cancer sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, are linked with poor prognosis, and can have potential hereditary cancer implications for family members. However, there is huge variability in genomic tests and reporting standards, meaning that for successful implementation of testing in clinical practice, end users must carefully select the most appropriate test for a given patient and critically interpret the results. In this white paper, we outline key pre- and post-test considerations for choosing a genomic test and evaluating reported variants, specifically for patients with advanced PCa. Test choice must be based on clinical context and disease state, availability and suitability of tumor tissue, and the genes and regions that are covered by the test. We describe strategies to recognize false positives or negatives in test results, including frameworks to assess low tumor fraction, subclonal alterations, clonal hematopoiesis, and pathogenic versus nonpathogenic variants. We assume that improved understanding among health care professionals and researchers of the nuances associated with genomic testing will ultimately lead to optimal patient care and clinical decision making. This article provides a helpful framework for choosing and interpreting a genomic test in prostate cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundSeveral prognostic models for overall survival (OS) have been developed and validated in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who receive first-line chemotherapy. We sought to develop and validate a prognostic model to predict OS in men who had progressed after first-line chemotherapy and were selected to receive second-line chemotherapy.MethodsData from a phase III trial in men with mCRPC who had developed progressive disease after first-line chemotherapy (TROPIC trial) were used. The TROPIC was randomly split into training (n = 507) and testing (n = 248) sets. Another dataset consisting of 488 men previously treated with docetaxel (SPARC trial) was used for external validation. Adaptive least absolute shrinkage and selection operator selected nine prognostic factors of OS. A prognostic score was computed from the regression coefficients. The model was assessed on the testing and validation sets for its predictive accuracy using the time-dependent area under the curve (tAUC).ResultsThe nine prognostic variables in the final model were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, time since last docetaxel use, measurable disease, presence of visceral disease, pain, duration of hormonal use, hemoglobin, prostate specific antigen, and alkaline phosphatase. The tAUCs for this model were 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.72 to 0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI = 0.68 to 0.72) for the testing and validation sets, respectively.ConclusionsA prognostic model of OS in the postdocetaxel, second-line chemotherapy, mCRPC setting was developed and externally validated. This model incorporates novel prognostic factors and can be used to provide predicted probabilities for individual patients and to select patients to participate in clinical trials on the basis of their prognosis. Prospective validation is needed.

PurposeProstate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, and more specifically a ≥ 30% decline in PSA within 3 months after initiation of first-line chemotherapy with docetaxel, are associated with improvement in overall survival (OS) in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The objective of this analysis was to evaluate post-treatment PSA kinetics as surrogates for OS in patients receiving second-line chemotherapy.Patients and methodsData from a phase III trial of patients with mCRPC randomly assigned to cabazitaxel plus prednisone (C + P) or mitoxantrone plus prednisone were used. PSA decline (≥ 30% and ≥ 50%), velocity, and rise within the first 3 months of treatment were evaluated as surrogates for OS. The Prentice criteria, proportion of treatment explained (PTE), and meta-analytic approaches were used as measures of surrogacy.ResultsThe observed hazard ratio (HR) for death for patients treated with C + P was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.79; P < .001). Furthermore, a ≥ 30% decline in PSA was a statistically significant predictor of OS (HR for death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.64; P < .001). Adjusting for treatment effect, the HR for a ≥ 30% PSA decline was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.40 to 0.62; P < .001), but treatment remained statistically significant, thus failing the third Prentice criterion. The PTE for a ≥ 30% decline in PSA was 0.34 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.56), indicating a lack of surrogacy for OS. The values of R(2) were < 1, suggesting that PSA decline was not surrogate for OS.ConclusionSurrogacy for any PSA-based end point could not be demonstrated in this analysis. Thus, the benefits of cabazitaxel in mediating a survival benefit are not fully captured by early PSA changes.

BackgroundPreliminary data suggest a potential decreased benefit of docetaxel in patients with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who previously received abiraterone acetate, a novel androgen synthesis inhibitor (ASI). Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) trial 90401 (Alliance), a phase 3 trial in patients with mCRPC who received docetaxel-based chemotherapy, offered the opportunity to evaluate effect of prior ketoconazole, an earlier generation ASI, on clinical outcomes after docetaxel.MethodsIn CALGB trial 90401, 1050 men with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC were randomized to receive treatment with docetaxel and prednisone that included either bevacizumab or placebo. In total, 1005 men (96%) had data available regarding prior ketoconazole therapy. The observed effects of prior ketoconazole on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline, and the objective response rate (ORR) were assessed using proportional hazards and Poisson regression methods adjusted for validated prognostic factors and treatment arm.ResultsBaseline characteristics between patients who did (N=277) and did not (N=728) receive prior ketoconazole therapy were similar. There were no statistically significant differences between patients who did and those who did not receive prior ketoconazole therapy with respect to OS (median OS, 21.1 months vs 22.3 months, respectively; stratified log-rank P=.635), PFS (median PFS, 8.1 months vs 8.6 months, respectively; stratified log-rank P=.342), the proportion achieving a decline ≥ 50% in PSA (61% vs 66%, respectively; relative risk, 1.09; adjusted P=.129), or ORR (39% vs 43%, respectively; relative risk, 1.11; adjusted P=.366).ConclusionsAs measured by OS, PFS, PSA, and the ORR, there was no evidence that prior treatment with ketoconazole had an impact on the clinical outcomes of patients with mCRPC who received subsequent docetaxel-based therapy. The current results highlight the need for prospective studies to assess for potential cross-resistance with novel ASIs and to define the optimal sequence of therapy in mCRPC.

A prognostic model that predicts overall survival (OS) for metastatic urothelial cancer (MetUC) patients treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy was developed, validated, and compared with a commonly used Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk-score model. Data from 7 protocols that enrolled 308 patients with MetUC were pooled. An external multi-institutional dataset was used to validate the model. The primary measurement of predictive discrimination was Harrell's c-index, computed with 95% confidence interval (CI). The final model included four pretreatment variables to predict OS: visceral metastases, albumin, performance status, and hemoglobin. The Harrell's c-index was 0.67 for the four-variable model and 0.64 for the MSKCC risk-score model, with a prediction improvement for OS (the U statistic and its standard deviation were used to calculate the two-sided P = .002). In the validation cohort, the c-indices for the four-variable and the MSKCC risk-score models were 0.63 (95% CI = 0.56 to 0.69) and 0.58 (95% CI = 0.52 to 0.65), respectively, with superiority of the four-variable model compared with the MSKCC risk-score model for OS (the U statistic and its standard deviation were used to calculate the two-sided P = .02).