Search

PURPOSE We have previously developed and externally validated a prognostic model of overall survival (OS) in men with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with docetaxel. We sought to externally validate this model in a broader group of men with docetaxel-naïve mCRPC and in specific subgroups (White, Black, Asian patients, different age groups, and specific treatments) and to classify patients into validated two and three prognostic risk groupings on the basis of the model. METHODS Data from 8,083 docetaxel-naïve mCRPC men randomly assigned on seven phase III trials were used to validate the prognostic model of OS. We assessed the predictive performance of the model by computing the time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (tAUC) and validated the two-risk (low and high) and three-risk prognostic groups (low, intermediate, and high). RESULTS The tAUC was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.75), and when adjusting for the first-line androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor trial status, the tAUC was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.76). Similar results were observed by the different racial, age, and treatment subgroups. In patients enrolled on first-line AR inhibitor trials, the median OS (months) in the low-, intermediate-, and high-prognostic risk groups were 43.3 (95% CI, 40.7 to 45.8), 27.7 (95% CI, 25.8 to 31.3), and 15.4 (95% CI, 14.0 to 17.9), respectively. Compared with the low-risk prognostic group, the hazard ratios for the high- and intermediate-risk groups were 4.3 (95% CI, 3.6 to 5.1; P < .0001) and 1.9 (95% CI, 1.7 to 2.1; P < .0001). CONCLUSION This prognostic model for OS in docetaxel-naïve men with mCRPC has been validated using data from seven trials and yields similar results overall and across race, age, and different treatment classes. The prognostic risk groups are robust and can be used to identify groups of patients for enrichment designs and for stratification in randomized clinical trials.

PURPOSE Rogaratinib, an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR1-4) inhibitor, showed promising phase I efficacy and safety in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) with FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression. We assessed rogaratinib efficacy and safety versus chemotherapy in patients with FGFR mRNA-positive advanced/metastatic UC previously treated with platinum chemotherapy. METHODS FORT-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03410693 ) was a phase II/III, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with FGFR1/ 3 mRNA-positive locally advanced or metastatic UC with ≥ 1 prior platinum-containing regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) to rogaratinib (800 mg orally twice daily, 3-week cycles; n = 87) or chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, or vinflunine 320 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks; n = 88). The primary end point was overall survival, with objective response rate (ORR) analysis planned following phase II accrual. Because of comparable efficacy between treatments, enrollment was stopped before progression to phase III; a full interim analysis of phase II was completed. RESULTS ORRs were 20.7% (rogaratinib, 18/87; 95% CI, 12.7 to 30.7) and 19.3% (chemotherapy, 17/88; 95% CI, 11.7 to 29.1). Median overall survival was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not estimable) and 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.8 to not estimable; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.72; P = .67). Grade 3/4 events occurred in 37 (43.0%)/4 (4.7%) patients and 32 (39.0%)/15 (18.3%), respectively. No rogaratinib-related deaths occurred. Exploratory analysis of patients with FGFR3 DNA alterations showed ORRs of 52.4% (11/21; 95% CI, 29.8 to 74.3) for rogaratinib and 26.7% (4/15; 95% CI, 7.8 to 55.1) for chemotherapy. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, these are the first data to compare FGFR-directed therapy with chemotherapy in patients with FGFR-altered UC, showing comparable efficacy and manageable safety. Exploratory testing suggested FGFR3 DNA alterations in association with FGFR1/ 3 mRNA overexpression may be better predictors of rogaratinib response.

The addition of either docetaxel or an androgen receptor signalling pathway inhibitor (ARSi) to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the standard of care for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients. Recent phase III data support even greater survival impact of a triplet regimen with ADT plus docetaxel plus an ARSi (abiraterone or darolutamide) compared to ADT plus docetaxel.To evaluate whether the addition of an ARSi to ADT improves outcomes of mCSPC patients treated with docetaxel.We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ASCO Meeting abstracts for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of ARSi + ADT in mCSPC men who received docetaxel. Data extraction was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Summary hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using random- or fixed-effects models. The statistical analyses were performed with RevMan software (v.5.2.3).Five RCTs were selected. Triplet therapy improved overall survival (OS) compared to ADT + docetaxel in mCSPC patients (HR = 0.73; p lt; 0.00001). This intensified strategy maintained the OS benefit when the ARSi was administered concomitant to chemotherapy (HR = 0.72; p lt; 0.00001), but no statistical effect was detected if the ARSi was sequential to docetaxel (p = 0.44). Moreover, in the subgroup of men with de novo mCSPC, triplets significantly improved OS (HR = 0.72, p lt; 0.0001). The lack of access to raw data was the main limit of our analysis.Our results support a clear survival advantage of adding an ARSi to ADT in mCSPC patients treated with docetaxel, mainly when the ARSi was administered concomitantly to chemotherapy and in the subgroup of de novo mCSPC.

Advanced urothelial cancer is a frequently lethal disease characterized by marked genetic heterogeneity. In this study, we investigate the evolution of the genomic signatures caused by endogenous and external mutagenic stimuli and their interplay with complex structural variants. We superimposed mutational signatures and phylogenetic analyses of matched serial tumors from patients with urothelial cancer to define the evolutionary patterns of these processes. We show that APOBEC3-induced mutations are clonal and early, whereas mutational bursts comprising hundreds of late subclonal mutations are induced by chemotherapy. Using a novel genome graph computational paradigm, we observed frequent circular high copy-number amplicons characteristic of extrachromosomal DNA (ecDNA) involving double-minutes, breakage-fusion-bridge, and tyfonas events. We characterized the distinct temporal patterns of APOBEC3 mutations and chemotherapy-induced mutations within ecDNA, gaining new insights into the timing of these events relative to ecDNA biogenesis. Finally, we discovered that mostCCND1amplifications in urothelial cancer arise within circular ecDNA amplicons. TheseCCND1ecDNA amplification events persisted and increased in complexity incorporating additional DNA segments potentially contributing selective fitness advantage to the evolution of treatment resistance. Our findings define fundamental mechanisms driving urothelial cancer evolution and have therapeutic implications for treating this disease.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Initial results from the phase III JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02603432 ) showed that avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance plus best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who were progression-free after 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy. Avelumab 1L maintenance treatment is now a standard of care for aUC. Here, we report updated data with ≥ 2 years of follow-up in all patients, including OS (primary end point), PFS, safety, and additional novel analyses. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive avelumab plus BSC (n = 350) or BSC alone (n = 350). At data cutoff (June 4, 2021), median follow-up was 38.0 months and 39.6 months, respectively; 67 patients (19.5%) had received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment. OS remained longer with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone in all patients (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.91]; 2-sided P = .0036). Investigator-assessed PFS analyses also favored avelumab. Longer-term safety was consistent with previous analyses; no new safety signals were identified with longer treatment duration. In conclusion, longer-term follow-up continues to show clinically meaningful efficacy benefits with avelumab 1L maintenance plus BSC versus BSC alone in patients with aUC. An interactive visualization of data reported in this article is available.

Baseline patient characteristics and variables used in population PK analysis

Purpose:The clinical impact of concurrent corticosteroid use (CCU) on enzalutamide-treated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unknown. We investigated the association of CCU with overall survival (OS), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), and time to prostate-specific antigen progression (TTPP) in post-chemotherapy, enzalutamide-treated patients with mCRPC.Patients and Methods:Post hoc analysis of AFFIRM (NCT00974311) with patients (n = 1,199) randomized 2:1 to enzalutamide 160 mg/day or placebo. Treatment group, CCU, and known prognostic factors were evaluated for impact on OS, rPFS, and TTPP using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. CCU was defined as “baseline” (use started at baseline) or “on-study” (baseline plus use that was started during the trial).Results:Enzalutamide significantly improved OS, rPFS, and TTPP independent of baseline CCU but was associated with inferior clinical outcomes when compared with no baseline CCU, including a shorter OS [10.8 months vs. not reached (NR); HR for use vs. no use, 2.13; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.79–2.54], rPFS (5.2 months vs. 8.0 months; HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.29–1.72], and TTPP (4.6 months vs. 5.7 months; HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.25–1.81). These findings held in a multivariate analysis adjusting for baseline prognostic factors wherein baseline CCU was independently associated with decreased OS (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.43–2.04; P < 0.0001) and rPFS (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11–1.48; P = 0.0007).Conclusions:Patients with mCRPC benefited from enzalutamide treatment independent of CCU, but CCU was associated with worse baseline prognostic factors and outcomes.

Supplementary Table from The Effect of Corticosteroids on Prostate Cancer Outcome Following Treatment with Enzalutamide: A Multivariate Analysis of the Phase III AFFIRM Trial

Supplementary Figure from The Effect of Corticosteroids on Prostate Cancer Outcome Following Treatment with Enzalutamide: A Multivariate Analysis of the Phase III AFFIRM Trial

Purpose:In an exploratory analysis, we investigated the association between programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), tumor mutational burden (TMB), T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP), and stromal signature with outcomes of pembrolizumab in urothelial carcinoma (UC).Patients and Methods:Patients with advanced UC received first-line pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks in the single-arm phase II KEYNOTE-052 trial (NCT02335424) and salvage pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks or chemotherapy (paclitaxel/docetaxel/vinflunine) in the randomized phase III KEYNOTE-045 trial (NCT02256436). The association of each biomarker (continuous variable) with objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) was evaluated using logistic regression (ORR) and Cox PH (PFS, OS), adjusted for ECOG PS; nominal P values were calculated without multiplicity adjustment (one-sided, pembrolizumab; two-sided, chemotherapy). Significance was prespecified at α = 0.05.Results:In KEYNOTE-052, PD-L1, TMB, and TcellinfGEP were significantly associated with improved outcomes; stromal signature was significantly associated with worse outcomes. In KEYNOTE-045, although findings for TMB and TcellinfGEP with pembrolizumab were consistent with those of KEYNOTE-052, PD-L1 was not significantly associated with improved outcomes, nor was stromal signature associated with worse outcomes with pembrolizumab; chemotherapy was not associated with outcomes in a consistent manner for any of the biomarkers. Hazard ratio (HR) estimates at prespecified cutoffs showed an advantage for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy regardless of PD-L1 or TMB, with a trend toward lower HRs in the combined positive score ≥10 and the TMB ≥175 mutation/exome subgroup. For TcellinfGEP, PFS and OS HRs were lower in the TcellinfGEP-nonlow subgroup regardless of treatment.Conclusions:Multiple biomarkers characterizing the tumor microenvironment may help predict response to pembrolizumab monotherapy in UC, and potential clinical utility of these biomarkers may be context-dependent.

Prediction-corrected visual predictive checks of early (A) and late (B) Ctrough in study PROTECT

Supplementary Figure 1 and 2

Purpose: PROTECT, a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled study, evaluated pazopanib efficacy and safety in the adjuvant renal cell carcinoma setting. The relationship between pazopanib exposure (Ctrough) and efficacy and safety was evaluated.Patients and Methods: Evaluable steady-state blood trough concentrations were collected from 311 patients at week 3 or 5 (early Ctrough) and 250 patients at week 16 or 20 (late Ctrough). Pazopanib pharmacokinetic (PK) data were analyzed via a population model approach. Relationship between Ctrough or dose intensity and disease-free survival (DFS) was explored via Kaplan–Meier and multivariate analysis. Adverse events (AE) and AE-related treatment discontinuation proportions were summarized by Ctrough quartiles.Results: Most (>90%) patients with early or late Ctrough data started on 600 mg. Mean early and late Ctrough overlapped across dose levels. Patients with higher early Ctrough quartiles achieved longer DFS (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.42–0.82; P = 0.002). Patients achieving early or late Ctrough >20.5 μg/mL had significantly longer DFS: not estimable (NE) versus 29.5 months, P = 0.006, and NE versus 29.9 months, P = 0.008, respectively. Dose intensity up to week 8 did not correlate with DFS, consistent with population PK model–based simulations showing overlapping pazopanib exposure with 600 and 800 mg doses. The proportion of AE-related treatment discontinuation and grade 3/4 AEs, with the exception of hypertension, was not correlated to Ctrough.Conclusions: In the adjuvant setting, higher pazopanib Ctrough was associated with improved DFS and did not increase treatment discontinuations or grade 3/4 AEs, with the exception of hypertension. Clin Cancer Res; 24(13); 3005–13. ©2018 AACR.See related commentary by Rini, p. 2979

Supplementary Data from Putative Biomarkers of Clinical Benefit With Pembrolizumab in Advanced Urothelial Cancer: Results from the KEYNOTE-045 and KEYNOTE-052 Landmark Trials

List of PROTECT Study investigators

Purpose:The PARP inhibitor rucaparib is approved in the United States for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and a deleterious germline and/or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alteration. While sequencing of tumor tissue is considered the standard for identifying patients with BRCA alterations (BRCA+), plasma profiling may provide a minimally invasive option to select patients for rucaparib treatment. Here, we report clinical efficacy in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC identified through central plasma, central tissue, or local genomic testing and enrolled in TRITON2.Patients and Methods:Patients had progressed after next-generation androgen receptor–directed and taxane-based therapies for mCRPC and had BRCA alterations identified by central sequencing of plasma and/or tissue samples or local genomic testing. Concordance of plasma/tissue BRCA status and objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates were summarized.Results:TRITON2 enrolled 115 patients with BRCA+ identified by central plasma (n = 34), central tissue (n = 37), or local (n = 44) testing. Plasma/tissue concordance was determined in 38 patients with paired samples and was 47% in 19 patients with a somatic BRCA alteration. No statistically significant differences were observed between objective and PSA response rates to rucaparib across the 3 assay groups. Patients unable to provide tissue samples and tested solely by plasma assay responded at rates no different from patients identified as BRCA+ by tissue testing.Conclusions:Plasma, tissue, and local testing of mCRPC patients can be used to identify men with BRCA+ mCRPC who can benefit from treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib.

Background The real-world EPIX study was conducted to gather information about the characteristics of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who survived ≥2 years after treatment with the alpha-emitter radium-223. Methods This retrospective study of electronic health records in the US Flatiron database (NCT04516161) included patients with mCRPC treated with radium-223 between January 2013 and June 2019. Median overall survival (OS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥50% reduction) from start of radium-223 treatment were the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. Patient characteristics were compared between those who survived ≥2 years versus Results In the 1180 patients identified, median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI: 12.1–13.7), and 13% of patients with data at 6 months had a PSA response. The survival groups included 775 patients (65.7%) who survived 75 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 2–4, visceral metastases, prior symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs), and prior chemotherapy were independently prognostic of reduced OS. For patients with survival ≥2 years versus Conclusions In this study of men with mCRPC treated in real-world clinical practice, median OS was consistent with that seen in the phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial. Patients who survived ≥2 years after the start of radium-223 were younger and had better ECOG PS, lower disease burden, and less use of prior chemotherapy than those who survived

Objective To describe the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical literature and trial data extraction, and its applications in uro-oncology. This bridging review, which consolidates information from the diverse applications of AI, highlights how AI users can investigate more sophisticated queries than with traditional methods, leading to synthesis of raw data and complex outputs into more actionable and personalized results, particularly in the field of uro-oncology. Methods Literature and clinical trial searches were performed in PubMed, Dimensions, Embase and Google (1999-2020). The searches focused on the use of AI and its various forms to facilitate literature searches, clinical guidelines development, and clinical trial data extraction in uro-oncology. To illustrate how AI can be applied toaddress questions about optimizing therapeutic decision making and individualizing treatment regimens, the Dimensions-linked information platform was searched for "prostate cancer" keywords (76 publications were identified; 48 were included). Results AI offers the promise of transforming raw data and complex outputs into actionable insights. Literature and clinical trial searches can be automated, enabling clinicians to develop and analyze publications expeditiously on complex issues such as therapeutic sequencing and to obtain updates on documents that evolve at the pace and scope of the landscape. An AI-based platform inclusive of 12 trial databases and >100 scientific literature sources enabled the creation of an interactive visualization. Conclusion As the literature and clinical trial landscape continues to grow in complexity and with increasing speed, the ability to pull the right information at the right time from different search engines and resources while excluding social media bias becomes more challenging. This review demonstrates that by applying natural language processing and machine learning algorithms, validated and optimized AI leads to a speedier, more personalized, efficient and focused search compared with traditional methods.

Take Home Message This systematic review and meta-analysis, based on updated individual participant data, demonstrates that cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is a valid option for improving outcomes for muscle-invasive bladder cancer., Context Our prior systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) suggesting a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer was limited by the number and size of included randomised trials. We have updated results to include additional trials, providing the most up-to-date and reliable evidence of the effects of this treatment. Objective To investigate the role of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Evidence acquisition Published and unpublished trials were sought via searches of bibliographic databases, trials registers, conference proceedings, and hand searching. Updated IPD were centrally collected, checked, and analysed. Results from individual randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were combined using a two-stage fixed-effect model. Prespecified analyses explored any variation in effect by trial and participant characteristics. Evidence synthesis Analyses of ten RCTs (1183 participants) demonstrated a benefit of cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70–0.96, p = 0.02). This represents an absolute improvement in survival of 6% at 5 yr, from 50% to 56%, and a 9% absolute benefit when adjusted for age, sex, pT stage, and pN category (HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.65–0.92, p = 0.004). There was no clear evidence that the effect varied by trial or participant characteristics. Adjuvant chemotherapy was also shown to improve recurrence-free survival (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.60–0.83, p

Lay abstract Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer are often first treated with novel hormonal therapy (NHT) using abiraterone or enzalutamide. To aid decisions about what treatment to use next, we reviewed information about patients who were treated with an alternative NHT (226 patients) or the nuclear medicine radium-223 (120 patients) after the first NHT. Most patients given radium-223 had cancer that had spread to their bones only, whereas many patients given an alternative NHT had cancer in their bones and other parts of their body. Around one in four patients given radium-223 and one in five given an alternative NHT had symptoms related to their bone metastases after starting treatment. Five in every ten patients given radium-223 received further therapy, including chemotherapy in 50% of these patients, while four in every ten patients given an alternative NHT received further therapy, including chemotherapy in 75%. On average, patients lived for almost a year after starting radium-223 or an alternative NHT.

Chromosomal instability; Lethal prostate cancer; Therapy resistance Inestabilidad cromosómica; Cáncer de próstata letal; Resistencia a la terapia Inestabilitat cromosòmica; Càncer de pròstata letal; Resistència a la teràpia Metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) inevitably acquires resistance to standard therapy preceding lethality. Here, we unveil a chromosomal instability (CIN) tolerance mechanism as a therapeutic vulnerability of therapy-refractory lethal PCa. Through genomic and transcriptomic analysis of patient datasets, we find that castration and chemotherapy-resistant tumors display the highest CIN and mitotic kinase levels. Functional genomics screening coupled with quantitative phosphoproteomics identify MASTL kinase as a survival vulnerability specific of chemotherapy-resistant PCa cells. Mechanistically, MASTL upregulation is driven by transcriptional rewiring mechanisms involving the non-canonical transcription factors androgen receptor splice variant 7 and E2F7 in a circuitry that restrains deleterious CIN and prevents cell death selectively in metastatic therapy-resistant PCa cells. Notably, MASTL pharmacological inhibition re-sensitizes tumors to standard therapy and improves survival of pre-clinical models. These results uncover a targetable mechanism promoting high CIN adaptation and survival of lethal PCa. Research was supported by NIH/NCI grants P30CA08748 (to R.C.H.); R01CA207311 and R01CA261925 (to J.D.-D.); K22CA207458 and R01CA237398 (to V.R.-B.); and funding to V.R.-B. from the Mayo Clinic Foundation, The Margaret Q. Landenberger Research Foundation, The W.W. Smith Charitable Trust, The AACR, and The Prostate Cancer Foundation (PCF).

PURPOSE For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, metastatic burden affects outcome. We examined efficacy and safety from the ARASENS trial for subgroups by disease volume and risk. METHODS Patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were randomly assigned to darolutamide or placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel. High-volume disease was defined as visceral metastases and/or ≥ 4 bone metastases with ≥ 1 beyond the vertebral column/pelvis. High-risk disease was defined as ≥ 2 risk factors: Gleason score ≥ 8, ≥ 3 bone lesions, and presence of measurable visceral metastases. RESULTS Of 1,305 patients, 1,005 (77%) had high-volume disease and 912 (70%) had high-risk disease. Darolutamide increased overall survival (OS) versus placebo in patients with high-volume (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.82), high-risk (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86), and low-risk disease (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.90), and in the smaller low-volume subgroup, the results were also suggestive of survival benefit (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.13). Darolutamide improved clinically relevant secondary end points of time to castration-resistant prostate cancer and subsequent systemic antineoplastic therapy versus placebo in all disease volume and risk subgroups. Adverse events (AEs) were similar between treatment groups across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 64.9% of darolutamide patients versus 64.2% of placebo patients in the high-volume subgroup and 70.1% versus 61.1% in the low-volume subgroup. Among the most common AEs, many were known toxicities related to docetaxel. CONCLUSION In patients with high-volume and high-risk/low-risk metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, treatment intensification with darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel increased OS with a similar AE profile in the subgroups, consistent with the overall population. [Media: see text]

Few prognostic factors have been identified in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) was associated with clinical outcomes for ICIs in several tumor types. We aim to assess the value of the LIPI in patients with mUC treated with ICIs. A retrospective ICI cohort and a validation cohort (SAUL cohort) included, respectively, patients with mUC treated with ICI in 8 European centers (any line) and patients treated with atezolizumab in a second or further line. A chemotherapy-only cohort was also analyzed. The LIPI score was based on 2 factors, derived neutrophils/(leukocytes minus neutrophils) ratio (dNLR) > 3 and lactate dehydrogenase > upper limit of normal, and defined 3 prognostic groups. The association of LIPI with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed. In the ICI and SAUL cohorts, 137 and 541 patients were respectively analyzed. In the ICI cohort, mPFS and mOS were 3.6 mo (95% CI; 2.6–6.0) and 13.8 mo (95% CI; 11.5–23.2) whereas in the SAUL cohort the mPFS and mOS were 2.2 mo (95% CI; 2.1–2.3) and 8.7 mo (95% CI; 7.8–9.9) respectively. The LIPI classified the population of these cohorts in good (56%; 52%), intermediate (35%; 36%) and poor (9%; 12%) prognostic groups (values for the ICI and SAUL cohorts respectively). Poor LIPI was associated with a poorer OS in both cohorts: hazard ratio (HR) for the ICI cohort = 2.69 (95% CI; 1.24–5.84, p = 0.035); HR = 2. 89 for the SAUL cohort (CI 95%: 1.93–4.32, p < 0.0001). Similar results were found in the chemo cohort. The LIPI score allows to identify different subgroups in patients with good prognostis according to the Bellmunt score criteria, with a subset of patients with poorer outcomes having an mOS of 3.7 mo compared to the good and intermediate LIPI subgroups with mOS of 17.9 and 7.4 mo, respectively. The LIPI score was associated with survival in mUC patients treated by ICIs. Future prospective studies will be required to test the combination of Bellmunt score and the LIPI score as a more accurate prognosis tool.

Contains fulltext : 291600.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.

Purpose: The clinical impact of concurrent corticosteroid use (CCU) on enzalutamide-treated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unknown. We investigated the association of CCU with overall survival (OS), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), and time to prostate-specific antigen progression (TTPP) in post-chemotherapy, enzalutamide-treated patients with mCRPC. Patients and Methods: Post hoc analysis of AFFIRM (NCT00974311) with patients (n = 1,199) randomized 2:1 to enzalutamide 160 mg/day or placebo. Treatment group, CCU, and known prognostic factors were evaluated for impact on OS, rPFS, and TTPP using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. CCU was defined as “baseline” (use started at baseline) or “on-study” (baseline plus use that was started during the trial). Results: Enzalutamide significantly improved OS, rPFS, and TTPP independent of baseline CCU but was associated with inferior clinical outcomes when compared with no baseline CCU, including a shorter OS [10.8 months vs. not reached (NR); HR for use vs. no use, 2.13; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.79–2.54], rPFS (5.2 months vs. 8.0 months; HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.29–1.72], and TTPP (4.6 months vs. 5.7 months; HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.25–1.81). These findings held in a multivariate analysis adjusting for baseline prognostic factors wherein baseline CCU was independently associated with decreased OS (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.43–2.04; P < 0.0001) and rPFS (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11–1.48; P = 0.0007). Conclusions: Patients with mCRPC benefited from enzalutamide treatment independent of CCU, but CCU was associated with worse baseline prognostic factors and outcomes.

Purpose: The PARP inhibitor rucaparib is approved in the United States for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and a deleterious germline and/or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alteration. While sequencing of tumor tissue is considered the standard for identifying patients with BRCA alterations (BRCA+), plasma profiling may provide a minimally invasive option to select patients for rucaparib treatment. Here, we report clinical efficacy in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC identified through central plasma, central tissue, or local genomic testing and enrolled in TRITON2. Patients and Methods: Patients had progressed after next-generation androgen receptor–directed and taxane-based therapies for mCRPC and had BRCA alterations identified by central sequencing of plasma and/or tissue samples or local genomic testing. Concordance of plasma/tissue BRCA status and objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates were summarized. Results: TRITON2 enrolled 115 patients with BRCA+ identified by central plasma (n = 34), central tissue (n = 37), or local (n = 44) testing. Plasma/tissue concordance was determined in 38 patients with paired samples and was 47% in 19 patients with a somatic BRCA alteration. No statistically significant differences were observed between objective and PSA response rates to rucaparib across the 3 assay groups. Patients unable to provide tissue samples and tested solely by plasma assay responded at rates no different from patients identified as BRCA+ by tissue testing. Conclusions: Plasma, tissue, and local testing of mCRPC patients can be used to identify men with BRCA+ mCRPC who can benefit from treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly prolonged metastasis-free survival and overall survival (OS) versus ADT alone in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) with rapidly rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The objective of this post hoc analysis of the PROSPER trial is to evaluate OS benefit and safety of enzalutamide in patients across age and regional subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible men with nmCRPC, PSA doubling time ≤10 months and PSA ≥2 ng/mL with continued ADT use were randomised 2:1 to enzalutamide 160 mg or placebo. OS and safety were examined by age (

The current prognostic models for patients with advanced urinary tract cancers were developed and validated in the chemotherapy setting. As immunotherapy has become the backbone of novel treatments, updated prognostic scores are needed.A comprehensive analysis of inflammatory indexes from peripheral blood and clinical factors was planned on the entire real-world cohort of pretreated patients with advanced urinary tract carcinoma receiving atezolizumab in the prospective, single-arm, phase IIIb SAUL study. Univariable and multivariable analyses with overall survival as the primary endpoint, bootstrap internal validation, Schneeweiss scoring system and calibration test were performed to develop a novel immunotherapy prognostic score.Thirteen clinical variables from 1001 patients were analyzed. The following eight prognostic factors were included in a model: ECOG PS, liver and bone metastases, histology, pre-treatment steroids, systemic immune-inflammatory index (i.e., neutrophils-to-lymphocytes ratio times platelets count), hemoglobin and lactate dehydrogenase. The prognostic model was able to stratify patients into five risk groups with significantly different (P0.001) median overall survival of NR, 18.0, 8.7, 4.6 and 2.4 months, respectively. The c-index for OS was higher than the Bellmunt Score one (0.702 vs. 0.672).A novel 5-class prognostic model contemporary to immunotherapy provides robust prognostic discrimination of patients with advanced urinary tract carcinoma homogeneously treated with immunotherapy through baseline affordable and reproducible clinical and laboratory factors. It could be quickly adopted in clinical practice to inform patients about prognosis with immunotherapy and assess the benefit of novel immunotherapy combinations in clinical trials.

PURPOSE Two poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (olaparib and rucaparib) are US Food and Drug Administration–approved for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring BRCA1/ 2 mutations, but the relative efficacy of PARP inhibition in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered mCRPC is understudied. METHODS We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis involving 12 sites. We collected genomic and clinical data from 123 patients with BRCA1/ 2-altered mCRPC who were treated with PARP inhibitors. The primary efficacy end point was the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥ 50% PSA decline) rate. Secondary end points were PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), clinical or radiographic PFS, and overall survival. We compared clinical outcomes, and other genomic characteristics, among BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered mCRPC. RESULTS A total of 123 patients (13 BRCA1 and 110 BRCA2) were included. PARP inhibitors used were olaparib (n = 116), rucaparib (n = 3), talazoparib (n = 2), and veliparib (n = 2). At diagnosis, 72% of patients had Gleason 8-10 disease. BRCA1 patients were more likely to have metastatic disease at presentation (69% v 37%; P = .04). Age, baseline PSA, metastatic distribution, and types of previous systemic therapies were similar between groups. There were equal proportions of germline mutations (51% v 46%; P = .78) in both groups. BRCA1 patients had more monoallelic (56% v 41%; P = .49) and concurrent TP53 (55% v 36%; P = .32) mutations. PSA50 responses in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered patients were 23% versus 63%, respectively ( P = .01). BRCA2 patients achieved longer PSA-PFS (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.92 to 4.09; P = .08), PFS (HR, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.99 to 4.40; P = .05), and overall survival (HR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.32 to 6.83; P = .008). Biallelic (compared with monoallelic) mutations, truncating (compared with missense) mutations, and absence of a concurrent TP53 mutation were associated with PARP inhibitor sensitivity. CONCLUSION PARP inhibitor efficacy is diminished in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered mCRPC. This is not due to an imbalance in germline mutations but might be related to more monoallelic mutations and/or concurrent TP53 alterations in the BRCA1 group.

Background: In the CARD study (NCT02485691), cabazitaxel significantly improved median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) versus abiraterone/enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had previously received docetaxel and progressed ≤12 mo on the alternative agent (abiraterone/enzalutamide). Objective: To assess cabazitaxel versus abiraterone/enzalutamide in older (≥70 yr) and younger (2 plus prednisone and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus abiraterone (1000 mg plus prednisone) or enzalutamide (160 mg). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Analyses of rPFS (primary endpoint) and safety by age were prespecified; others were post hoc. Treatment groups were compared using stratified log-rank or Cochran–Mantel-Haenszel tests. Results and limitations: Of the 255 patients randomized, 135 were aged ≥70 yr (median 76 yr). Cabazitaxel, compared with abiraterone/enzalutamide, significantly improved median rPFS in older (8.2 vs 4.5 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38–0.89; p = 0.012) and younger (7.4 vs 3.2 mo; HR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.30–0.74; p < 0.001) patients. The median OS of cabazitaxel versus abiraterone/enzalutamide was 13.9 versus 9.4 mo in older patients (HR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.41–1.06; p = 0.084), and it was 13.6 versus 11.8 mo in younger patients (HR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.41–1.08; p = 0.093). Progression-free survival, prostate-specific antigen, and tumor and pain responses favored cabazitaxel, regardless of age. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 58% versus 49% of older patients receiving cabazitaxel versus abiraterone/enzalutamide and 48% versus 42% of younger patients. In older patients, cardiac adverse events were more frequent with abiraterone/enzalutamide; asthenia and diarrhea were more frequent with cabazitaxel. Conclusions: Cabazitaxel improved efficacy outcomes versus abiraterone/enzalutamide in patients with mCRPC after prior docetaxel and abiraterone/enzalutamide, regardless of age. TEAEs were more frequent among older patients. The cabazitaxel safety profile was manageable across age groups. Patient summary: Clinical trial data showed that cabazitaxel improved survival versus abiraterone/enzalutamide with manageable side effects in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had previously received docetaxel and the alternative agent (abiraterone/enzalutamide), irrespective of age.

Background The value of a complete response to immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment for urothelial cancer is well recognised, but less is known about long-term outcomes in patients with a partial response or the benefit of achieving disease stabilisation. Objective To determine clinical outcomes in patients with a partial response or stable disease on atezolizumab therapy for advanced urinary tract carcinoma (UTC). Design, setting, and participants Data were extracted from three prospective trials (IMvigor210 cohort 2, SAUL, and IMvigor211) evaluating single-agent atezolizumab therapy for platinum-pretreated advanced UTC. The analysis population included 604 atezolizumab-treated and 208 chemotherapy-treated patients (229 achieving a partial response and 583 achieving stable disease). Intervention Atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 wk until progression or unacceptable toxicity or single-agent chemotherapy for patients in the control arm of IMvigor211. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Baseline characteristics, treatment exposure, overall survival, duration of disease control. Partial response and stable disease populations were analysed separately. Results and limitations The population of patients with a partial response included more patients with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on ≥5% of tumour-infiltrating immune cells than the stable disease population. The median time to best response was 2.1 mo across trials and treatments, regardless of the type of response. Atezolizumab-treated patients with a partial response had sustained disease control (median overall survival not reached); durations of disease control and overall survival were longer with atezolizumab than with chemotherapy. In patients with stable disease, median overall survival was numerically longer with atezolizumab (exceeding 1 yr) than with chemotherapy. Irrespective of treatment, durations of disease control and survival were shorter in patients with stable disease than in those achieving a partial response. These analyses are limited by their post hoc exploratory nature and relatively short follow-up. Conclusions Stable disease and partial response are meaningful clinical outcomes in atezolizumab-treated patients with advanced UTC. Patient summary In this report, we looked at the outcomes in patients whose tumours responded to treatment to some extent, but the tumour did not disappear completely. We aimed to understand whether a modest response to treatment was associated with meaningful long-term outcomes for patients. We found that on average, life expectancy was >1 yr in patients whose disease was stabilised and even longer in those whose tumours showed some shrinkage in response to treatment.

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used as second-line treatments for urothelial cancer (UC), only a small proportion of patients respond. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms of response to ICIs is critical to improve clinical outcomes for UC patients. The tumor microenvironment (TME) is recognized as a key player in tumor progression and the response to certain anti-cancer treatments. This study aims to investigate the mechanism of response using integrated genomic and transcriptomic profiling of a UC patient who was part of the KEYNOTE-045 trial and showed an exceptional response to pembrolizumab. Diagnosed in 2014 and receiving first-line chemotherapy without success, the patient took part in the KEYNOTE-045 trial for 2 years. She showed dramatic improvement and has now been free of disease for over 6 years. Recently described by Bagaev et al., the Molecular Functional (MF) Portrait was utilized to dissect genomic and transcriptomic features of the patient’s tumor and TME. The patient’s tumor was characterized as Immune Desert, which is suggestive of a non-inflamed microenvironment. Integrated whole-exome sequencing (WES) and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) analysis identified an ATM mutation and high TMB level (33.9 mut/mb), which are both positive biomarkers for ICI response. Analysis further revealed the presence of the APOBEC complex, indicating the potential for use of APOBEC signatures as predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy response. Overall, comprehensive characterization of the patient’s tumor and TME with the MF Portrait revealed important insights that could potentially be hypothesis generating to identify clinically useful biomarkers and improve treatment for UC patients.

Rogaratinib, an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR1-4) inhibitor, showed promising phase I efficacy and safety in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) withFORT-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03410693) was a phase II/III, randomized, open-label trial. Patients withORRs were 20.7% (rogaratinib, 18/87; 95% CI, 12.7 to 30.7) and 19.3% (chemotherapy, 17/88; 95% CI, 11.7 to 29.1). Median overall survival was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not estimable) and 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.8 to not estimable; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.72;To our knowledge, these are the first data to compare FGFR-directed therapy with chemotherapy in patients with

Background Characterization of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been integrated into clinical practice. Although labs have standardized validation procedures to develop single locus tests, the efficacy of on‐site plasma‐based next‐generation sequencing (NGS) assays still needs to be proved. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, we profiled DNA from matched tissue and plasma samples from 75 patients with cancer. We applied an NGS test that detects clinically relevant alterations in 33 genes and microsatellite instability (MSI) to analyze plasma cell‐free DNA (cfDNA). Results The concordance between alterations detected in both tissue and plasma samples was higher in patients with metastatic disease. The NGS test detected 77% of sequence alterations, amplifications, and fusions that were found in metastatic samples compared with 45% of those alterations found in the primary tumor samples (p = .00005). There was 87% agreement on MSI status between the NGS test and tumor tissue results. In three patients, MSI‐high ctDNA correlated with response to immunotherapy. In addition, the NGS test revealed an FGFR2 amplification that was not detected in tumor tissue from a patient with metastatic gastric cancer, emphasizing the importance of profiling plasma samples in patients with advanced cancer. Conclusion Our validation experience of a plasma‐based NGS assay advances current knowledge about translating cfDNA testing into clinical practice and supports the application of plasma assays in the management of oncology patients with metastatic disease. With an in‐house method that minimizes the need for invasive procedures, on‐site cfDNA testing supplements tissue biopsy to guide precision therapy and is entitled to become a routine practice. Implications for Practice This study proposes a solution for decentralized liquid biopsy testing based on validation of a next‐generation sequencing (NGS) test that detects four classes of genomic alterations in blood: sequence mutations (single nucleotide substitutions or insertions and deletions), fusions, amplifications, and microsatellite instability (MSI). Although there are reference labs that perform single‐site comprehensive liquid biopsy testing, the targeted assay this study validated can be established locally in any lab with capacity to offer clinical molecular pathology assays. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first report that validates evaluating an on‐site plasma‐based NGS test that detects the MSI status along with common sequence alterations encountered in solid tumors., This report describes the concordance between circulating tumor DNA and matched tumor tissue molecular profiles, discusses interpretation of observed discordant data, and illustrates applications through clinical cases. It is the first known report to evaluate the performance of an on‐site plasma‐based next‐generation sequencing test to detect microsatellite instability status along with common sequence alterations in the context of its clinical utility and therapeutic applications in precision oncology.

BACKGROUND: Plasma tumor DNA fraction is prognostic in metastatic cancers. This could improve risk stratification before commencing a new treatment. We hypothesized that a second sample collected after one cycle of treatment could refine outcome prediction of patients identified as poor prognosis based on plasma DNA collected pre-treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma DNA [128 pre-treatment, 134 cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), and 49 progression] from 151 chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients in a phase II study of abiraterone acetate (NCT01867710) were subjected to custom targeted next-generation sequencing covering exons of these genes: TP53, AR, RB1, PTEN, PIK3CA, BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, CDK12, CHEK2, FANCA HDAC2 and PALB2. We also captured 1500 pan-genome regions enriched for single nucleotide polymorphisms to allow detection of tumor DNA using the rolling B-allele method. We tested associations with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Plasma tumor DNA detection was associated with shorter OS [hazard ratio (HR): 2.89, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.77-4.73, P ≤ 0.0001] and PFS (HR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.36-3.11, P < 0.001). Using a multivariable model including plasma tumor DNA, patients who had a TP53, RB1 or PTEN gene alteration pre-treatment and at C2D1 had a significantly shorter OS than patients with no alteration at either time point (TP53: HR 7.13, 95% CI 2.37-21.47, P < 0.001; RB1: HR 6.24, 95% CI 1.97-19.73, P = 0.002; PTEN: HR 11.9, 95% CI 3.6-39.34, P < 0.001). Patients who were positive pre-treatment and converted to undetectable had no evidence of a difference in survival compared with those who were undetectable pre-treatment (P = 0.48, P = 0.43, P = 0.5, respectively). Progression samples harbored AR gain in all patients who had gain pre-treatment (9/49) and de novo AR somatic point mutations were detected in 8/49 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma gene testing after one cycle treatment refines prognostication and could provide an early indication of treatment benefit.

Abiraterone acetate; Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; Metformin Acetato de abiraterona; Cáncer de próstata metastásico resistente a la castración; Metformina Acetat d'abiraterona; Càncer de pròstata resistent a la castració metastàtic; Metformina Background The associations of metformin and statins with overall survival (OS) and prostate specific antigen response rate (PSA-RR) in trials in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer remain unclear. Objective To determine whether metformin or statins ± abiraterone acetate plus prednisone/prednisolone (AAP) influence OS and PSA-RR. Design, setting and participant COU-AA-301 and COU-AA-302 patients were stratified by metformin and statin use. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazards ratio (HR) stratified by concomitant medications, and a random effects model was used to pool HR. We compared PSA-RR using Chi χ2 test. Results In COU-AA-301-AAP, metformin was associated with improved PSA-RR (41.1% versus 28.6%) but not prolonged OS. In COU-AA-301-placebo-P, there was no association between metformin and prolonged OS or PSA-RR. In COU-AA-302-AAP, metformin was associated with prolonged OS (adjHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48–0.98) and improved PSA-RR (72.7% versus 60.0%). In COU-AA-302-P, metformin was associated with prolonged OS (adjHR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47–0.93). In pooled analysis, OS was prolonged among those treated with metformin (pooled HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62–0.95).In COU-AA-301-AAP, statins were associated with an improved OS (adjHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62–0.93), while there was no difference in COU-AA-301-P. There was no association with statins and OS in either COU-AA-302 groups. When pooling HR, OS was prolonged among those treated with statins (pooled HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68–0.88). Conclusion Within the limitations of post-hoc sub-analyses, metformin and statins are associated with a prolonged OS and increased PSA-RR, particularly in combination with AAP.