Search

The diagnosis of metastatic prostatic cancer (MPC) by fine needle aspiration (FNA) can usually be rendered by typical cytomorphologic and immunohistochemical (IHC) features. However, MPC diagnosis may be complicated by transformation to atypical phenotypes such as small cell carcinoma, typically under pressure from androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Predictive and prognostic biomarkers can also be assessed by IHC. This study illustrates how careful assessment of cytologic and biomarker features may provide therapeutic and prognostic information in MPC.We reviewed our anatomic pathology archives for MPC diagnosed by FNA from January 2014 to June 2021. Clinical histories, cytology slides, and cell blocks were reviewed. Extensive IHC biomarker workup was performed, including markers of prostate lineage, cell-cycle dysfunction, Ki-67, neuroendocrine markers, PDL1, and androgen receptor splice variant 7. Cases were reclassified into three categories: conventional type, intermediary type, and high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma (HGNC).Eighteen patients were identified. Twelve had conventional MPC, including six of six ADT-naive patients. Six of twelve (50%) with prior ADT were reclassified as intermediary or HGNC. Four intermediary cases included two with squamous differentiation and two with pro-proliferative features. Two HGNC cases had typical small cell carcinoma cytomorphology. Expression of PDL1 was identified in two cases and ARv7 in three cases. Five of five intermediary and HGNC patients died of disease versus six of eleven with with conventional type.Aggressive cytomorphologic variants were commonly identified in patients with prior ADT. Identification of nonconventional cytomorphology and increased proliferation can provide important prognostic information. Recognition of these changes is important for an accurate diagnosis, and the identification of high-grade variants can affect therapeutic decision-making. Clinically actionable biomarkers such as PDL1 and ARv7 can be assessed by IHC.

Supplementary Table 2. Clinical Characteristics of the Evaluable Paired Biopsy Cohort

Supplementary Data from Modeling Androgen Deprivation Therapy–Induced Prostate Cancer Dormancy and Its Clinical Implications

Supplementary Table 1. Clinical Characteristics of the Whole Genome Sequencing Cohort

Therapeutic resistance in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can be accompanied by treatment-emergent small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (t-SCNC), a morphologically distinct subtype. We performed integrative whole-genome and -transcriptome analysis of mCRPC tumor biopsies including paired biopsies after progression, and multiple samples from the same individual. t-SCNC was significantly less likely to have amplification of AR or an intergenic AR-enhancer locus, and demonstrated lower expression of AR and its downstream transcriptional targets. Genomic and transcriptional hallmarks of t-SCNC included biallelic loss of RB1, elevated expression levels of CDKN2A and E2F1, and loss of expression of the AR and AR-responsive genes including TMPRSS2 and NKX3-1. We identified three tumors that converted from adenocarcinoma to t-SCNC and demonstrate spatial and temporal intrapatient heterogeneity of metastatic tumors harboring adenocarcinoma, t-SCNC, or mixed expression phenotypes, with implications for treatment strategies in which dual targeting of adenocarcinoma and t-SCNC phenotypes may be necessary.Implications:The t-SCNC phenotype is characterized by lack of AR enhancer gain and loss of RB1 function, and demonstrates both interindividual and intraindividual heterogeneity.Visual Overview: http://mcr.aacrjournals.org/content/molcanres/17/6/1235/F1.large.jpg.

Supplementary Table S1: Patient 1 reversion alleles. Supplementary Table 2: DNA read identifiers supporting reversion alleles. Supplementary Table S3: Gene targets of the SeqCap library used for cfDNA sequencing. Supplementary Figure S1: Frequent loss of heterozygosity in Patient 1's tumor DNA. Supplementary Figure S2: A single copy of chromosome 13 at the BRCA2 locus is present in Patient 1's tumor DNA. Supplementary Figure S3: Mutation signature three is present in patient 1's solid tumor. Supplementary Figure S4: A single copy of chromosome 13 at the BRCA2 locus is present in Patient 2's tumor DNA. Supplementary Figure S5: Patient 2's DNA coverage depth at residue 259. Supplementary Figure S6: Nucleotide and inferred protein sequences for patient 2's reversion alleles. Supplementary Figure S7: Reversion indels were significantly longer than the background distribution of indels. Supplementary Methods.

Purpose:Autoantibody responses in cancer are of great interest, as they may be concordant with T-cell responses to cancer antigens or predictive of response to cancer immunotherapies. Thus, we sought to characterize the antibody landscape of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).Experimental Design:Serum antibody epitope repertoire analysis (SERA) was performed on patient serum to identify tumor-specific neoepitopes. Somatic mutation–specific neoepitopes were investigated by associating serum epitope enrichment scores with whole-genome sequencing results from paired solid tumor metastasis biopsies and germline blood samples. A protein-based immunome-wide association study (PIWAS) was performed to identify significantly enriched epitopes, and candidate serum antibodies enriched in select patients were validated by ELISA profiling. A distinct cohort of patients with melanoma was evaluated to validate the top cancer-specific epitopes.Results:SERA was performed on 1,229 serum samples obtained from 72 men with mCRPC and 1,157 healthy control patients. Twenty-nine of 6,636 somatic mutations (0.44%) were associated with an antibody response specific to the mutated peptide. PIWAS analyses identified motifs in 11 proteins, including NY-ESO-1 and HERVK-113, as immunogenic in mCRPC, and ELISA confirmed serum antibody enrichment in candidate patients. Confirmatory PIWAS, Identifying Motifs Using Next-generation sequencing Experiments (IMUNE), and ELISA analyses performed on serum samples from 106 patients with melanoma similarly revealed enriched cancer-specific antibody responses to NY-ESO-1.Conclusions:We present the first large-scale profiling of autoantibodies in advanced prostate cancer, utilizing a new antibody profiling approach to reveal novel cancer-specific antigens and epitopes. Our study recovers antigens of known importance and identifies novel tumor-specific epitopes of translational interest.

Supplementary Figure S3 from BET Bromodomain Inhibition Blocks an AR-Repressed, E2F1-Activated Treatment-Emergent Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer Lineage Plasticity Program

Neuroendocrine (NE) differentiation in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is an increasingly common clinical feature arising from cellular plasticity. We recently characterized two mCRPC phenotypes with NE features: androgen receptor (AR)-positive NE-positive amphicrine prostate cancer (AMPC) and AR-negative small cell or neuroendocrine prostate cancer (SCNPC). Here, we interrogated the regulation of RE1-silencing transcription factor (REST), a transcriptional repressor of neuronal genes, and elucidated molecular programs driving AMPC and SCNPC biology. Analysis of prostate cancer cell lines, mCRPC specimens, and LuCaP patient-derived xenograft models detected alternative splicing of REST to REST4 and attenuated REST repressor activity in AMPC and SCNPC. The REST locus was also hypermethylated and REST expression was reduced in SCNPC. While serine/arginine repetitive matrix protein 4 (SRRM4) was previously implicated in alternative splicing of REST in mCRPC, we detected SRRM3 expression in REST4-positive, SRRM4-negative AMPC, and SCNPC. In CRPC cell lines, SRRM3 induced alternative splicing of REST to REST4 and exacerbated the expression of REST-repressed genes. Furthermore, SRRM3 and SRRM4 expression defined molecular subsets of AMPC and SCNPC across species and tumor types. Two AMPC phenotypes and three SCNPC phenotypes were characterized, denoted either by REST attenuation and ASCL1 activity or by progressive activation of neuronal transcription factor programs, respectively. These results nominate SRRM3 as the principal REST splicing factor expressed in early NE differentiation and provide a framework to molecularly classify diverse NE phenotypes in mCRPC.Significance:This study identifies SRRM3 as a key inducer of cellular plasticity in prostate cancer with neuroendocrine features and delineates distinct neuroendocrine phenotypes to inform therapeutic development and precision medicine applications.

All supplementary tables. Tables S1-S12

Supplementary Figures S1-S9

Supplementary Dataset S1 shows the list of copy number gain genes.

Supplementary Data from BET Bromodomain Inhibition Blocks an AR-Repressed, E2F1-Activated Treatment-Emergent Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer Lineage Plasticity Program

Supplementary Materials and Methods

Supplementary Table S2 S4 S6 S7 from BET Bromodomain Inhibition Blocks an AR-Repressed, E2F1-Activated Treatment-Emergent Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer Lineage Plasticity Program

Study design (A) and patient disposition (B); data cutoff December 31, 2014.

Supplementary Table 1

Supplementary Table S3 from BET Bromodomain Inhibition Blocks an AR-Repressed, E2F1-Activated Treatment-Emergent Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer Lineage Plasticity Program

Purpose:ZEN-3694 is a bromodomain extraterminal inhibitor (BETi) with activity in androgen-signaling inhibitor (ASI)-resistant models. The safety and efficacy of ZEN-3694 plus enzalutamide was evaluated in a phase Ib/IIa study in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).Patients and Methods:Patients had progressive mCRPC with prior resistance to abiraterone and/or enzalutamide. 3+3 dose escalation was followed by dose expansion in parallel cohorts (ZEN-3694 at 48 and 96 mg orally once daily, respectively).Results:Seventy-five patients were enrolled (N = 26 and 14 in dose expansion at low- and high-dose ZEN-3694, respectively). Thirty (40.0%) patients were resistant to abiraterone, 34 (45.3%) to enzalutamide, and 11 (14.7%) to both. ZEN-3694 dosing ranged from 36 to 144 mg daily without reaching an MTD. Fourteen patients (18.7%) experienced grade ≥3 toxicities, including three patients with grade 3 thrombocytopenia (4%). An exposure-dependent decrease in whole-blood RNA expression of BETi targets was observed (up to fourfold mean difference at 4 hours post–ZEN-3694 dose; P ≤ 0.0001). The median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) was 9.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.6–12.9] and composite median radiographic or clinical progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.0–7.8). Median duration of treatment was 3.5 months (range, 0–34.7+). Lower androgen receptor (AR) transcriptional activity in baseline tumor biopsies was associated with longer rPFS (median rPFS 10.4 vs. 4.3 months).Conclusions:ZEN-3694 plus enzalutamide demonstrated acceptable tolerability and potential efficacy in patients with ASI-resistant mCRPC. Further prospective study is warranted including in mCRPC harboring low AR transcriptional activity.

Supplementary methods and Figure S1

Purpose:The purpose of this study was to measure genomic changes that emerge with enzalutamide treatment using analyses of whole-genome sequencing and RNA sequencing.Experimental Design:One hundred and one tumors from men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had not been treated with enzalutamide (n = 64) or who had enzalutamide-resistant mCRPC (n = 37) underwent whole genome sequencing. Ninety-nine of these tumors also underwent RNA sequencing. We analyzed the genomes and transcriptomes of these mCRPC tumors.Results:Copy number loss was more common than gain in enzalutamide-resistant tumors. Specially, we identified 124 protein-coding genes that were more commonly lost in enzalutamide-resistant samples. These 124 genes included eight putative tumor suppressors located at nine distinct genomic regions. We demonstrated that focal deletion of the 17q22 locus that includes RNF43 and SRSF1 was not present in any patient with enzalutamide-naïve mCRPC but was present in 16% (6/37) of patients with enzalutamide-resistant mCRPC. 17q22 loss was associated with lower RNF43 and SRSF1 expression and poor overall survival from time of biopsy [median overall survival of 19.3 months in 17q22 intact vs. 8.9 months in 17q22 loss, HR, 3.44 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.338–8.867, log-rank P = 0.006]. Finally, 17q22 loss was linked with activation of several targetable factors, including CDK1/2, Akt, and PLK1, demonstrating the potential therapeutic relevance of 17q22 loss in mCRPC.Conclusions:Copy number loss is common in enzalutamide-resistant tumors. Focal deletion of chromosome 17q22 defines a previously unappreciated molecular subset of enzalutamide-resistant mCRPC associated with poor clinical outcome.

Figure S3 shows the prognostic significance of copy number loss of 17q24, 2q24, and 4q35 containing putative tumor suppressor genes.

Purpose:This study assesses the action of panobinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACI), in restoring sensitivity to bicalutamide in a castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) model and the efficacy and safety of the panobinostat/bicalutamide combination in CRPC patients resistant to second-line antiandrogen therapy (2ndLAARx).Patients and Methods:The CWR22PC xenograft and isogenic cell line were tested for drug interactions on tumor cell growth and on the androgen receptor (AR), AR-splice variant7, and AR targets. A phase I trial had a 3 × 3 panobinostat dose-escalation design. The phase II study randomized 55 patients to panobinostat 40 mg (A arm) or 20 mg (B arm) triweekly ×2 weeks with bicalutamide 50 mg/day in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint was to determine the percentage of radiographic progression-free (rPF) patients at 36 weeks versus historic high-dose bicalutamide.Results:In the model, panobinostat/bicalutamide demonstrated synergistic antitumor effect while reducing AR activity. The dose-limiting toxicity was not reached. The probabilities of remaining rPF were 47.5% in the A arm and 38.5% in the B arm, exceeding the protocol-specified threshold of 35%. The A arm but not the B arm exceeded expectations for times (medians) to rP (33.9 and 10 weeks), and from PSA progression to rP (24 and 5.9 weeks). A arm/B arm events included: adverse events (AE), 62%/19%; treatment stopped for AEs, 27.5%/11.5%; dose reduction required, 41%/4%. The principal A-arm grade ≥ 3 AEs were thrombocytopenia (31%) and fatigue (14%).Conclusions:The 40 mg panobinostat/bicalutamide regimen increased rPF survival in CRPC patients resistant to 2ndLAARx. Panobinostat toxicity was tolerable with dose reductions. Epigenetic HDACI therapy reduces AR-mediated resistance to bicalutamide in CRPC models with clinical benefit in patients. The combination merits validation using a second-generation antiandrogen.

Purpose:Lineage plasticity in prostate cancer—most commonly exemplified by loss of androgen receptor (AR) signaling and a switch from a luminal to alternate differentiation program—is now recognized as a treatment resistance mechanism. Lineage plasticity is a spectrum, but neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is the most virulent example. Currently, there are limited treatments for NEPC. Moreover, the incidence of treatment-emergent NEPC (t-NEPC) is increasing in the era of novel AR inhibitors. In contradistinction to de novo NEPC, t-NEPC tumors often express the AR, but AR's functional role in t-NEPC is unknown. Furthermore, targetable factors that promote t-NEPC lineage plasticity are also unclear.Experimental Design:Using an integrative systems biology approach, we investigated enzalutamide-resistant t-NEPC cell lines and their parental, enzalutamide-sensitive adenocarcinoma cell lines. The AR is still expressed in these t-NEPC cells, enabling us to determine the role of the AR and other key factors in regulating t-NEPC lineage plasticity.Results:AR inhibition accentuates lineage plasticity in t-NEPC cells—an effect not observed in parental, enzalutamide-sensitive adenocarcinoma cells. Induction of an AR-repressed, lineage plasticity program is dependent on activation of the transcription factor E2F1 in concert with the BET bromodomain chromatin reader BRD4. BET inhibition (BETi) blocks this E2F1/BRD4-regulated program and decreases growth of t-NEPC tumor models and a subset of t-NEPC patient tumors with high activity of this program in a BETi clinical trial.Conclusions:E2F1 and BRD4 are critical for activating an AR-repressed, t-NEPC lineage plasticity program. BETi is a promising approach to block this program.

Supplementary Figure 1

Supplementary Table S1- Number of patients with 1-4 and {greater than or equal to}5 CTCs per 7.5mL of whole blood at baseline, and at 3, 6 and 12 months. Supplementary Table S2- Biochemical markers of bone turnover and bone mineral density (BMD).

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of apalutamide before or after treatment with abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) in patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).Experimental Design: Two cohorts were studied: AAP-naïve and post-AAP patients who had received ≥6 months of AAP. Patients had progressive mCRPC per rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or imaging, without prior chemotherapy exposure. All received apalutamide 240 mg/day. Primary endpoint was ≥50% decline in 12-week PSA according to Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria. Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression and time on treatment.Results: Forty-six patients enrolled in the AAP-naïve (n = 25) and post-AAP (n = 21) cohorts. The 12-week PSA response rate was 88% (22/25) and 22% (4/18), median time to PSA progression was 18.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.3 months–not reached) and 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.8–5.6 months), and median time on treatment 21 months (range, 2.6–37.5) and 4.9 months (range, 1.3–23.2), for the AAP-naïve and post-AAP cohorts, respectively. Eighty percent (95% CI, 59–93) and 64% (95% CI, 43–82) of AAP-naïve and 43% (95% CI, 22–66) and 10% (95% CI, 1–30) of post-AAP patients remained on treatment for 6+ and 12+ months, respectively. Common treatment-emergent adverse events in both cohorts were grade 1 or 2 fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, and abdominal pain.Conclusions: Apalutamide was safe, well tolerated, and demonstrated clinical activity in mCRPC, with 80% of AAP-naïve and 43% of post-AAP patients, remaining on treatment for 6 months or longer. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3544–51. ©2017 AACR.

Supplementary Table 2

Supplementary Table S8-S12 from BET Bromodomain Inhibition Blocks an AR-Repressed, E2F1-Activated Treatment-Emergent Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer Lineage Plasticity Program

All Supplementary Figures. Figures S1-S13

Supplementary Figure Legend contains the description of supplementary Figure S1-S4 and supplementary Datasets S1-S2.

Supplementary Tables S1-S4

Supplementary Table S1 shows the univariable survival analysis.

Supplementary Figure 2

Treatment-induced tumor dormancy is a state in cancer progression where residual disease is present but remains asymptomatic. Dormant cancer cells are treatment-resistant and responsible for cancer recurrence and metastasis. Prostate cancer treated with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) often enters a dormant state. ADT-induced prostate cancer dormancy remains poorly understood due to the challenge in acquiring clinical dormant prostate cancer cells and the lack of representative models. In this study, we aimed to develop clinically relevant models for studying ADT-induced prostate cancer dormancy. Dormant prostate cancer models were established by castrating mice bearing patient-derived xenografts (PDX) of hormonal naïve or sensitive prostate cancer. Dormancy status and tumor relapse were monitored and evaluated. Paired pre- and postcastration (dormant) PDX tissues were subjected to morphologic and transcriptome profiling analyses. As a result, we established eleven ADT-induced dormant prostate cancer models that closely mimicked the clinical courses of ADT-treated prostate cancer. We identified two ADT-induced dormancy subtypes that differed in morphology, gene expression, and relapse rates. We discovered transcriptomic differences in precastration PDXs that predisposed the dormancy response to ADT. We further developed a dormancy subtype-based, predisposed gene signature that was significantly associated with ADT response in hormonal naïve prostate cancer and clinical outcome in castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with ADT or androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors. Implications: We have established highly clinically relevant PDXs of ADT-induced dormant prostate cancer and identified two dormancy subtypes, leading to the development of a novel predicative gene signature that allows robust risk stratification of patients with prostate cancer to ADT or androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors.

Analysis of DNA methylation is a valuable tool to understand disease progression and is increasingly being used to create diagnostic and prognostic clinical biomarkers. While conversion of cytosine to 5-methylcytosine (5mC) commonly results in transcriptional repression, further conversion to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) is associated with transcriptional activation. Here we perform the first study integrating whole-genome 5hmC with DNA, 5mC, and transcriptome sequencing in clinical samples of benign, localized, and advanced prostate cancer. 5hmC is shown to mark activation of cancer drivers and downstream targets. Furthermore, 5hmC sequencing revealed profoundly altered cell states throughout the disease course, characterized by increased proliferation, oncogenic signaling, dedifferentiation, and lineage plasticity to neuroendocrine and gastrointestinal lineages. Finally, 5hmC sequencing of cell-free DNA from patients with metastatic disease proved useful as a prognostic biomarker able to identify an aggressive subtype of prostate cancer using the genes TOP2A and EZH2, previously only detectable by transcriptomic analysis of solid tumor biopsies. Overall, these findings reveal that 5hmC marks epigenomic activation in prostate cancer and identify hallmarks of prostate cancer progression with potential as biomarkers of aggressive disease. Significance: In prostate cancer, 5-hydroxymethylcytosine delineates oncogene activation and stage-specific cell states and can be analyzed in liquid biopsies to detect cancer phenotypes. See related article by Wu and Attard, p. 3880

The use of androgen deprivation therapy and second-line anti-androgens in prostate cancer has led to the emergence of tumors employing multiple androgen receptor (AR)-dependent and AR-independent mechanisms to resist AR-targeted therapies in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). While the AR signaling axis remains the cornerstone for therapeutic development in CRPC, a clearer understanding of the heterogeneous biology of CRPC tumors is needed for innovative treatment strategies. In this review, we discuss the characteristics of CRPC tumors that lack AR activity and the temporal and spatial considerations for the conversion of an AR-dependent to an AR-independent tumor type. We describe the more prevalent treatment-emergent phenotypes arising in the CRPC disease continuum, including amphicrine, AR-low, double-negative, neuroendocrine and small cell phenotypes. We discuss the association between the loss of AR activity and tumor plasticity with a focus on the roles of transcription factors like SOX2, DNA methylation, alternative splicing, and the activity of epigenetic modifiers like EZH2, BRD4, LSD1, and the nBAF complex in conversion to a neuroendocrine or small cell phenotype in CRPC. We hypothesize that only a subset of CRPC tumors have the propensity for tumor plasticity and conversion to the neuroendocrine phenotype and outline how we might target these plastic and emergent phenotypes in CRPC. In conclusion, we assess the current and future avenues for treatment and determine that the heterogeneity of CRPCs lacking AR activity will require diverse treatment approaches.

Neuroendocrine (NE) differentiation in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is an increasingly common clinical feature arising from cellular plasticity. We recently characterized two mCRPC phenotypes with NE features: androgen receptor (AR)-positive NE-positive amphicrine prostate cancer (AMPC) and AR-negative small cell or neuroendocrine prostate cancer (SCNPC). Here, we interrogated the regulation of RE1-silencing transcription factor (REST), a transcriptional repressor of neuronal genes, and elucidated molecular programs driving AMPC and SCNPC biology. Analysis of prostate cancer cell lines, mCRPC specimens, and LuCaP patient-derived xenograft models detected alternative splicing of REST to REST4 and attenuated REST repressor activity in AMPC and SCNPC. The REST locus was also hypermethylated and REST expression was reduced in SCNPC. While serine/arginine repetitive matrix protein 4 (SRRM4) was previously implicated in alternative splicing of REST in mCRPC, we detected SRRM3 expression in REST4-positive, SRRM4-negative AMPC, and SCNPC. In CRPC cell lines, SRRM3 induced alternative splicing of REST to REST4 and exacerbated the expression of REST-repressed genes. Furthermore, SRRM3 and SRRM4 expression defined molecular subsets of AMPC and SCNPC across species and tumor types. Two AMPC phenotypes and three SCNPC phenotypes were characterized, denoted either by REST attenuation and ASCL1 activity or by progressive activation of neuronal transcription factor programs, respectively. These results nominate SRRM3 as the principal REST splicing factor expressed in early NE differentiation and provide a framework to molecularly classify diverse NE phenotypes in mCRPC. Significance: This study identifies SRRM3 as a key inducer of cellular plasticity in prostate cancer with neuroendocrine features and delineates distinct neuroendocrine phenotypes to inform therapeutic development and precision medicine applications.

Context In addition to genetic alterations, epigenetic alterations play a crucial role during prostate cancer progression. A better understanding of the epigenetic factors that promote prostate cancer progression may lead to the design of rational therapeutic strategies to target prostate cancer more effectively. Objective To systematically review recent literature on the role of epigenetic factors in prostate cancer and highlight key preclinical and translational data with epigenetic therapies. Evidence acquisition We performed a systemic literature search in PubMed. At the request of the editors, we limited our search to articles published between January 2015 and August 2020 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Clinical trials targeting epigenetic factors were retrieved from clinicaltrials.gov. Evidence synthesis We retrieved 1451 articles, and 62 were finally selected for review. Twelve additional foundational studies outside this time frame were also included. Findings from both preclinical and clinical studies were reviewed and summarized. We also discuss 12 ongoing clinical studies with epigenetic targeted therapies. Conclusions Epigenetic mechanisms impact prostate cancer progression. Understanding the role of specific epigenetic factors is critical to determine how we may improve prostate cancer treatment and modulate resistance to standard therapies. Recent preclinical studies and ongoing or completed clinical studies with epigenetic therapies provide a useful roadmap for how to best deploy epigenetic therapies clinically to target prostate cancer. Patient summary Epigenetics is a process by which gene expression is regulated without changes in the DNA sequence itself. Oftentimes, epigenetic changes influence cellular behavior and contribute to cancer development or progression. Understanding how epigenetic changes occur in prostate cancer is the first step toward therapeutic targeting in patients. Importantly, laboratory-based studies and recently completed and ongoing clinical trials suggest that drugs targeting epigenetic factors are promising. More work is necessary to determine whether this class of drugs will add to our existing treatment arsenal in prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer cells that survive clinical androgen receptor (AR) blockade mediate disease progression and lethality. Reprogrammed metabolic signaling is one mechanism by which tumor cells can survive treatment. However, how AR inhibition reprograms metabolism, and whether altered metabolism can be exploited to eradicate cells that survive AR blockade, remains unclear. Here, we comprehensively characterized the effect of AR blockade on prostate cancer metabolism using transcriptomics, metabolomics, and bioenergetics approaches. AR inhibition maintains oxidative mitochondrial metabolism and reduces glycolytic signaling, through hexokinase II downregulation and decreased MYC activity. Robust elongation of mitochondria via reduced DRP1 activity supports cell fitness after AR blockade. In addition, AR inhibition enhances sensitivity to complex I inhibitors in several models, suggesting that AR blockade increases reliance on oxidative mitochondrial metabolism. Our study provides an enhanced understanding of how AR inhibition alters metabolic signaling and highlights the potential of therapies that target metabolic vulnerabilities in AR-inhibited cells.

Summary Background The international Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate working group has established metastasis-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in localised prostate cancer based on the findings of 19 predominantly radiotherapy-based trials. We sought to comprehensively assess aggregate trial-level performance of commonly reported intermediate clinical endpoints across all randomised trials in localised prostate cancer. Methods For this meta-analysis, we searched PubMed for all trials in localised or biochemically recurrent prostate cancer published between Jan 1, 1970, and Jan 15, 2020. Eligible trials had to be randomised, therapeutic, reporting overall survival and at least one intermediate clinical endpoint, and with a sample size of at least 70 participants. Trials of metastatic disease were excluded. Intermediate clinical endpoints included biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastases, biochemical failure-free survival, progression-free survival, and metastasis-free survival. Candidacy for surrogacy was assessed using the second condition of the meta-analytical approach (ie, correlation of the treatment effect of the intermediate clinical endpoint and overall survival), using R2 weighted by the inverse variance of the log intermediate clinical endpoint hazard ratio. The intermediate clinical endpoint was deemed to be a surrogate for overall survival if R2 was 0·7 or greater. Findings 75 trials (53 631 patients) were included in our analysis. Median follow-up was 9·1 years (IQR 5·7–10·6). Biochemical failure (R2 0·38 [95% CI 0·11–0·64]), biochemical failure-free survival (R2 0·12 [0·0030–0·33]), biochemical failure and clinical failure (R2 0·28 [0·0045–0·65]), and local failure (R2 0·085 [0·00–0·37]) correlated poorly with overall survival. Progression-free survival (R2 0·46 [95% CI 0·22–0·67]) showed moderate correlation with overall survival, and metastasis-free survival (R2 0·78 [0·59–0·89]) correlated strongly. Interpretation Intermediate clinical endpoints based on biochemical and local failure did not meet the second condition of the meta-analytical approach and are not surrogate endpoints for overall survival in localised prostate cancer. Our findings validate metastasis-free survival as the only identified surrogate endpoint for overall survival to date. Funding Prostate Cancer Foundation and National Institutes of Health.