Search

Contains fulltext : 297160.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: PROpel met its primary endpoint showing statistically significant improvement in radiographic progression-free survival with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone in patients with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) unselected by homologous recombination repair mutation (HRRm) status, with benefit observed in all prespecified subgroups. Here we report the final prespecified overall survival analysis. METHODS: This was a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial done at 126 centres in 17 countries worldwide. Patients with mCRPC aged at least 18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, a life expectancy of at least 6 months, with no previous systemic treatment for mCRPC and unselected by HRRm status were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by means of an interactive voice response system-interactive web response system to abiraterone acetate (orally, 1000 mg once daily) plus prednisone or prednisolone with either olaparib (orally, 300 mg twice daily) or placebo. The patients, the investigator, and study centre staff were masked to drug allocation. Stratification factors were site of metastases and previous docetaxel at metastatic hormone-sensitive cancer stage. Radiographic progression-free survival was the primary endpoint and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint with alpha-control (alpha-threshold at prespecified final analysis: 0·0377 [two-sided]), evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of a study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03732820, and is completed and no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Oct 31, 2018 and March 11, 2020, 1103 patients were screened, of whom 399 were randomly assigned to olaparib plus abiraterone and 397 to placebo plus abiraterone. Median follow-up for overall survival in patients with censored data was 36·6 months (IQR 34·1-40·3) for olaparib p

PURPOSE: We previously reported that enzalutamide improved overall survival when added to standard of care in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Here, we report its effects on aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHOD(S): HRQL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality-of-life questionnaire and QLM-PR25 at weeks 0, 4, 12, and then every 12 weeks until progression. Scores from week 4 to 156 were analyzed with repeated measures modeling to calculate group means and differences. Deterioration-free survival was from random assignment until the earliest of death, clinical progression, discontinuation of study treatment, or a worsening of 10 points or more from baseline in fatigue, physical function, cognitive function, or overall health and quality of life (OHQL). HRQL scores range from 0 (lowest possible) to 100 (highest possible). RESULT(S): HRQL was assessed in 1,042 of 1,125 participants (93%). Differences in means favored control over enzalutamide for fatigue (5.2, 95% CI, 3.6 to 6.9; P < .001), cognitive function (4.0, 95% CI, 2.5 to 5.5; P < .001), and physical function (2.6, 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.9; P < .001), but not OHQL (1.2, 95% CI, -0.2 to 2.7; P = .1). Deterioration-free survival rates at 3 years, and log-rank P values comparing the whole distributions, favored enzalutamide over control for OHQL (31% v 17%; P < .0001), cognitive function (31% v 20%; P = .001), and physical function (31% v 22%; P < .001), but not fatigue (24% v 18%; P = .16). The effects of enzalutamide on HRQL were independent of baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION(S): Enzalutamide was associated with worsening of self-reported fatigue, cognitive function, and physical function, but not OHQL. Enzalutamide was associated with improved deterioration-free survival for OHQL, physical function, and cognitive function because delays in disease progression outweighed early deteriorations in these aspects of HRQL.

Background: Immune checkpoint immunotherapy (ICI) is active against many cancers. Many people are failed by PD1 inhibition alone, but not all patients benefit, nor require combination ICI treatment. UNISoN (NCT03177239) previously reported outcomes in people with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) receiving nivolumab (N) monotherapy, and N plus ipilimumab (I) in those whose cancers progressed after N alone. We present the final planned report. Method(s): Population, Intervention, Analysis: Participants (pts) with advanced nccRCC with good performance status (ECOG 0/1) received N 240mg q2w alone (Part 1). Those with cancers refractory to N at 3 months were offered combination I (1mg/kg) + N (3mg/kg) q3w for up to 4 doses, followed by N 240mg q2w for a maximum total of 12 months of N (Part 2). UNISoN was powered to identify a clinically-relevant objective tumor response rate (OTRR) of 30% (assuming 15% was not relevant) among people receiving I+N in Part 2. Result(s): 85 pts with a representative spectrum of nccRCC histologies were enrolled and received N. Amongst the total population enrolled to UNISoN Part 1/2, mOS was 24 (16-28) months and 12m OS was 65% (54%-74%); of those proceeding to Part 2, the mOS was 10 (6-17) months only. Overall, 17% (10%-27%; 14/83) and 10% (3%-23%; 4/41) of pts experienced a response from N alone or I+N, respectively. 41 pts refractory to N received I+N. Overall in Part 2, the median time on treatment was 2.1 (95% CI 1.8, 2.8) months, the median number of cycles was 3; median follow-up at final analysis was 22 (16-30) months. In this population, the median PFS was 2.6 (2.2-3.8) months and 12m PFS was 11% (4%-23%). 13% (7%-22%) of patients were free of progression or death at 24 months. The primary endpoint was not met; only 80% of pts failed by N were assessable for response in Part 2. Overall tumor responses from N alone or I+N were more common in pts with papillary histology; pts with chromophobe histology had poor outcomes.

Background: The first planned interim analysis of ENZAMET, with 243 deaths after a median follow-up of 34 months, revealed a clinically meaningful overall survival benefit in mHSPC with the addition of enzalutamide to standard of care (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86, p=0.002, Davis et al, NEJM 2019). We now present updated overall survival (OS) findings from the prespecified analysis triggered to occur after 470 deaths. Method(s): We randomly assigned participants (pts) with mHSPC to treatment with testosterone suppression (TS) plus either a conventional non-steroidal anti-androgen (NSAA) or enzalutamide. Stratification factors included age, volume of disease (high vs low according to the CHAARTED definition), and planned use of concurrent docetaxel assigned by the treating physician (docetaxel yes vs no). Result(s): We randomized 1125 pts with a median age of 69 years, including 503 in the docetaxel stratum, and 602 with high volume metastatic disease. OS results in the table below are based on 476 deaths, a median follow-up of 68 months, and a cut-off date of 19JAN2022. The hazard rate for death was 30% lower among all those assigned enzalutamide versus control (p<0.0001). Outcomes by volume status are shown (Table) as well as the subgroups of interest with M1 high or low volume disease at diagnosis selected for concurrent docetaxel. Conclusion(s): Enzalutamide added to TS, compared with an active comparator of NSAA, provided clinically meaningful improvements in OS for the combined overall cohort, which persisted with an additional 3 years of followup. The benefits were more pronounced in pts with low volume disease, and were also seen in the subgroup with M1 high volume mHSPC despite the relatively high survival with TS+docetaxel+NSAA. ENZAMET was led by ANZUP Cancer Trials Group and the University of Sydney NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, with funding support from Astellas.

INTRODUCTION: Several systemic therapies have demonstrated a survival advantage in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Access to these medications varies significantly worldwide. In Australia until recently, patients must have received docetaxel first, unless unsuitable for chemotherapy, despite no evidence suggesting superiority over androgen receptor signalling inhibitors (ARSIs). Our study investigated real-world systemic treatment patterns in Australian patients with mCRPC. METHODS: The electronic CRPC Australian Database (ePAD) was interrogated to identify mCRPC patients. Clinicopathological features, treatment and outcome data, stratified by first-line systemic therapies, were extracted. Comparisons between groups utilised Kruskal-Wallis tests and Chi-Square analyses. Time-to-event data were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods and groups compared using log-rank tests. Factors influencing overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were analysed through Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: We identified 578 patients who received first-line systemic therapy for mCRPC. Enzalutamide (ENZ) was most commonly prescribed (n = 240, 41%), followed by docetaxel (DOC, n = 164, 28%) and abiraterone (AA, n = 100, 17%). Patients receiving ENZ or AA were older (79, 78.5 years respectively) compared with DOC (71 years, p = 0.001) and less likely to have ECOG performance status 0 (45%, 44%, 59% in ENZ, AA and DOC groups respectively p < 0.0001). Median TTF was significantly higher in those receiving ENZ (12.4 months) and AA (11.9 months) compared to DOC (8.3 months, p < 0.001). PSA50 response rates and OS were not statistically different. Time to developing CRPC > 12 months was independently associated with longer TTF (HR 0.67, p < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.49, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: In our real-world population, ENZ and AA were common first-line systemic therapy choices, particularly among older patients and those with poorer per

PURPOSE: We previously reported that enzalutamide improved overall survival when added to standard of care in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Here, we report its effects on aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHODS: HRQL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality-of-life questionnaire and QLM-PR25 at weeks 0, 4, 12, and then every 12 weeks until progression. Scores from week 4 to 156 were analyzed with repeated measures modeling to calculate group means and differences. Deterioration-free survival was from random assignment until the earliest of death, clinical progression, discontinuation of study treatment, or a worsening of 10 points or more from baseline in fatigue, physical function, cognitive function, or overall health and quality of life (OHQL). HRQL scores range from 0 (lowest possible) to 100 (highest possible). RESULTS: HRQL was assessed in 1,042 of 1,125 participants (93%). Differences in means favored control over enzalutamide for fatigue (5.2, 95% CI, 3.6 to 6.9; P < .001), cognitive function (4.0, 95% CI, 2.5 to 5.5; P < .001), and physical function (2.6, 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.9; P < .001), but not OHQL (1.2, 95% CI, -0.2 to 2.7; P = .1). Deterioration-free survival rates at 3 years, and log-rank P values comparing the whole distributions, favored enzalutamide over control for OHQL (31% v 17%; P < .0001), cognitive function (31% v 20%; P = .001), and physical function (31% v 22%; P < .001), but not fatigue (24% v 18%; P = .16). The effects of enzalutamide on HRQL were independent of baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION: Enzalutamide was associated with worsening of self-reported fatigue, cognitive function, and physical function, but not OHQL. Enzalutamide was associated with improved deterioration-free survival for OHQL, physical function, and cognitive function because delays in disease progression outweighed early deteriorations in these aspects of HRQL.

Elevated circulating sphingolipids are associated with shorter overall survival and therapeutic resistance in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), suggesting that perturbations in sphingolipid metabolism promotes prostate cancer growth. This study assessed whether addition of simvastatin to standard treatment for mCRPC can modify a poor prognostic circulating lipidomic profile represented by a validated 3-lipid signature (3LS). Men with mCRPC (n = 27) who were not on a lipid-lowering agent, were given simvastatin for 12 weeks (40 mg orally, once daily) with commencement of standard treatment. Lipidomic profiling was performed on their plasma sampled at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment. Only 11 men had the poor prognostic 3LS at baseline, of whom five (45%) did not retain the 3LS after simvastatin treatment (expected conversion rate with standard treatment = 19%). At baseline, the plasma profiles of men with the 3LS displayed higher levels (p < 0.05) of sphingolipids (ceramides, hexosylceramides and sphingomyelins) than those of men without the 3LS. These plasma sphingolipids were reduced after statin treatment in men who lost the 3LS (mean decrease: 23−52%, p < 0.05), but not in men with persistent 3LS, and were independent of changes to plasma cholesterol, LDL-C or triacylglycerol. In conclusion, simvastatin in addition to standard treatment can modify the poor prognostic circulating lipidomic profile in mCRPC into a more favourable profile at twice the expected conversion rate.

Men who initially present with localized prostate cancer and later develop metachronous metastases have a better prognosis than men with de novo metastatic disease and often have a low burden of disease on conventional imaging. Some have disease amenable to metastasis-directed therapy for lymph node or bone metastases, a strategy used by some because no documented overall survival (OS) benefit of combination systemic therapy in this setting. We report data for patients prospectively classified as "M0" at initial diagnosis from the interim analysis of the ENZAMET trial, with 34 mo of median follow-up for survivors. A total of 312 (28%) of the 1125 enrolled patients were classified as M0 at diagnosis, and 205 (66%) of the 312 patients had low-volume disease at study entry as per the CHAARTED criteria. The hazard ratio for OS, that is, HR(OS), was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-1.06) with the addition of enzalutamide for all patients with metachronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, and for the low-volume subset the HR(OS) was 0.40 (95% CI: 0.16-0.97). The 3-yr OS was 83% without and 89% with enzalutamide for all patients with metachronous metastases, and 83% and 92%, respectively, for the low-volume subset. Intensification of hormonal therapy should strongly be considered for these men. Patient Summary: Many men present with prostate cancer that has spread to distant sites beyond the prostate gland years after their initial diagnosis and treatment, while others have distant spread at the time the cancer is diagnosed. On average, men whose cancer comes back years after the initial diagnosis often survive much longer than men whose cancer has been found to spread to distant sites when it is first diagnosed. In this report, we demonstrate strong evidence for the first time that the survival of men whose cancer comes back years later is improved when drugs such as enzalutamide or apalutamide are added to testosterone suppression in this setting.Cop

Aim: Optimal treatment for newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has evolved, with many patients deriving benefit from the addition of docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy (D-ADT). This study sought to define the therapy used and associated activity following D-ADT. Method(s): Retrospective analysis of patients with mHSPC treated with one or more cycles of D-ADT who were identified from a prospectively maintained multisite prostate cancer database of patients treated in a community or academic center setting in Australia. The primary endpoint of this study was first-line time to treatment failure (1L TTF) for subsequent treatment of metastatic Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC), with secondary endpoints of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction >50% and time from 1L to second-line (2L) treatment initiation. Result(s): A total of 93 patients received D-ADT for mHSPC, 85 (91%) had subsequent treatment for mCRPC. Median time to mCRPC (biochemical, clinical or radiographic) had been 14.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-16.5). 1L treatment was enzalutamide 47 patients (55%), abiraterone 23 (27%), cabazitaxel 7 (8%), docetaxel 4 (5%) and other therapies 4 (5%). Median 1L TTF was 6.3 months (95% CI, 4.9-7.6), PSA > 50% reduction was achieved in 32 of 89 patients (36%), median time from 1L to second-line treatment was 7.3 months (1.3-27.4), which did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Conclusion(s): Abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel and docetaxel all demonstrate activity following progression on D-ADT. No difference in efficacy was detected between treatment options for mCRPC. Prospective trials investigating the optimal treatment sequence for prostate cancer following progression on D-ADT needed.Copyright © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd

Purpose: Multiple life-prolonging systemic therapies are now approved for patients with metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, the optimal treatment strategy following progression through standard treatment lines, including docetaxel, novel anti-androgens abiraterone or enzalutamide and cabazitaxel, remains unclear.We aimed to describe treatment patterns in men with mCRPC following progression on cabazitaxel. Patients andMethods: Patients with mCRPC, who had received treatment with cabazitaxel were identified from the ePAD database (a multicentre mCRPC registry). Clinicopathologic information, treatment and outcome data were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to report prior and subsequent systemic therapies. T-tests and chi square analyses compared characteristics between those who did and did not receive further therapies. Result(s): Search of the ePAD database identified 106 eligible patients. The median age at commencement of cabazitaxel was 70.8 years. Cabazitaxel was most frequently given as third line treatment (n = 56, 53%). Seventy-nine patients (75%) had previously received both docetaxel and a novel anti-androgen. The median duration of cabazitaxel treatment was 4.1 months, with most patients stopping due to disease progression (n = 61, 58%) or toxicity (n = 14, 13%). Following cabazitaxel, 47 patients (44%) received further systemic therapy. Eighteen patients received a novel anti-androgen, 11 entered a clinical trial and 10 received carboplatin. Other agents included docetaxel (n = 8), cyclophosphamide (n = 6) and mitoxantone (n = 5). Patients who received further systemic therapy were more likely to have better ECOG performance status (P = .0013) but had no difference in median age or comorbidities compared to those who received no further systemic therapy. There was no significant difference in the duration on subsequent systemic therapy. Conclusion(s): This retrospective analysis demonstrates the wide variety of pres

Objectives: To investigate the recent real-world use of first-generation antiandrogens (FGAs) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) using a retrospective multicentre cohort study. Patients and Methods: The electronic CRPC Australian Database (ePAD) was interrogated to identify patients with mCRPC. Clinicopathological features, treatment and outcome data, stratified by FGA use, were retrieved and reported through descriptive statistics. Survival analyses were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and groups compared using log-rank tests. Factors influencing overall survival (OS) were analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression model. Result(s): We identified 634 patients with mCRPC, enrolled in ePAD between January 2016 and March 2019, including 322 (51%) who received FGAs. The median follow-up was 21.9 months. Patients treated with FGAs were more likely to have lower International Society of Urological Pathologists (ISUP) grade group (P = 0.04), longer median time to CRPC (25.6 vs 16.0 months, P < 0.001), and were less likely to have visceral metastases (5.0% vs 11.2%, P = 0.005) or to have received upfront docetaxel (P < 0.001). A >=50% reduction from pre-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (PSA50 response) during FGA treatment occurred in 119 (37%) patients and was independently associated with improved OS (hazard ratio 0.233, P < 0.001). Prior FGA treatment did not significantly influence the selection of subsequent life-prolonging treatments for mCRPC or their PSA50 response rates. Conclusion(s): In our present cohort, FGAs were commonly used in lower-risk mCRPC and their use did not significantly influence the choice or duration of subsequent systemic therapy. A PSA50 response to FGA therapy was an independent favourable prognostic marker associated with improved OS.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. BJU International © 2021 BJU International

Introduction: Novel antiandrogens abiraterone and enzalutamide are commonly prescribed in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Current data suggest similar efficacy between treatments, with selection often based on toxicity profiles and patient comorbidities. We aimed to describe real-world prescribing patterns in Australian patients receiving novel antiandrogens. Method(s): Patients receiving novel antiandrogens for mCRPC were identified from the multi-centre electronic CRPC Australian Database (ePAD). Descriptive statistics were used to report baseline characteristics, treatment choice and adverse events. Groups were compared using Chi-square, Fisher's exact or Mann-Whitney tests. Time-to-event analyses utilised Kaplan-Meier curves and were compared through log-rank tests. Result(s): Of 812 patients receiving first-line mCRPC therapy, 503 received abiraterone (n=180) or enzalutamide (n=323). Overall, 140 (28%) had prior ischemic heart disease (IHD), 509 (81%) had >=1 cardiovascular risk factor and 20 (4%) had documented cognitive impairment. Compared to enzalutamide, those receiving abiraterone were older (79 vs 76 years; p=0.007), more commonly had ECOG performance status 2 (22% vs 12%; p=0.003) and were more likely to have prior stroke history (13% vs 6%; p=0.007). IHD was a prospectively documented reason for preferentially selecting enzalutamide in 10%, while older age and cognitive impairment influenced abiraterone choice in 38% and 6% respectively. PSA50 response rate was lower in the abiraterone group (47% vs 58%; p=0.03) but there were no significant differences in time to treatment failure or overall survival. Overall, 92 (18%) experienced adverse events leading to dose modification (n=47) or cessation (n=45), with clinically significant cardiac failure more frequent with abiraterone (4% vs 1%, p=0.04) and fatigue with enzalutamide (9% vs 4%; p=0.005). Conclusion(s): Our data reflect real-world prescribing practices for n

Introduction: Bone metastases occur frequently in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and may lead to skeletal-related events (SREs), including symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs). Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) delay SREs and SSEs. However, the real-world use of BMAs is debated given the absence of demonstrated survival advantage and potential adverse events (AEs). Our retrospective study examined BMA use and SSE rates in Australian patients with CRPC. Method(s): Patients with CRPC and bone metastases were identified from the electronic CRPC Australian Database. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns and AEs were analysed. Descriptive statistics reported baseline characteristics, SSE rates and BMA use. Comparisons between groups used t-tests and Chi-square analyses. Overall survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Result(s): A total of 532 eligible patients were identified with a median age of 73 years (range: 44-97 years). BMAs were prescribed in 232 men (46%), 183 of whom received denosumab. Patients receiving first-line docetaxel for CRPC were more likely to commence BMAs than those receiving abiraterone or enzalutamide (51% vs 31% vs 38%; p = 0.004). SSEs occurred in 148 men (28%), most commonly symptomatic lesions requiring intervention (75%). At the time of initial SSEs, only 28% were receiving BMAs. Patients treated at sites with lower BMA use (

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the recent real-world use of first-generation antiandrogens (FGAs) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) using a retrospective multicentre cohort study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The electronic CRPC Australian Database (ePAD) was interrogated to identify patients with mCRPC. Clinicopathological features, treatment and outcome data, stratified by FGA use, were retrieved and reported through descriptive statistics. Survival analyses were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and groups compared using log-rank tests. Factors influencing overall survival (OS) were analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: We identified 634 patients with mCRPC, enrolled in ePAD between January 2016 and March 2019, including 322 (51%) who received FGAs. The median follow-up was 21.9 months. Patients treated with FGAs were more likely to have lower International Society of Urological Pathologists (ISUP) grade group (P = 0.04), longer median time to CRPC (25.6 vs 16.0 months, P < 0.001), and were less likely to have visceral metastases (5.0% vs 11.2%, P = 0.005) or to have received upfront docetaxel (P < 0.001). A ≥50% reduction from pre-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (PSA50 response) during FGA treatment occurred in 119 (37%) patients and was independently associated with improved OS (hazard ratio 0.233, P < 0.001). Prior FGA treatment did not significantly influence the selection of subsequent life-prolonging treatments for mCRPC or their PSA50 response rates. CONCLUSION: In our present cohort, FGAs were commonly used in lower-risk mCRPC and their use did not significantly influence the choice or duration of subsequent systemic therapy. A PSA50 response to FGA therapy was an independent favourable prognostic marker associated with improved OS.

Background: We previously reported that treatment with enzalutamide (ENZA) rather than an older non-steroidal anti-androgen (NSAA: bicalutamide, nilutamide, or flutamide), resulted in longer overall survival when added to standard first-line treatment, with or without concurrent early docetaxel, in mHSPC (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86, p = 0.002, NEJM 2019). Here we report effects on HRQL. Method(s): HRQL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PR25 at weeks 0, 4, 12, and then 12-weekly until clinical progression. We used mixed models for repeated measures to calculate the least squares mean difference (LSMD), 95% CI, and p-value for comparisons of the randomly assigned groups for all assessments from week 4 to 156. For each analysis of deterioration-free survival, the endpoint was defined a-priori as the earliest of death, clinical progression, cessation of study treatment, or a 10-point worsening from baseline (minimum clinically important difference on scales scored from 0 to 100) in the pertinent HRQL sub-scale: physical functioning (PF), global health and quality of life (GHQL), cognitive functioning (CF), and fatigue; p-values were based on the log-rank test. Result(s): Completion of HRQL forms in 1016 men with a baseline assessment of HRQL (1125 randomised) ranged from 94% at week 12 to 78% at week 156. Random assignment to ENZA v NSAA was associated with modest impairments (LSMD, 95% CI) from week 4 to 156 in fatigue (5.0, 3.3 to 6.7, p < 0.0001), CF (3.9, 2.4 to 5.4, p < 0.0001), and PF (2.5, 1.2 to 3.8, p = 0.0002), but not GHQL (1.1, -0.4 to 2.6, p = 0.16). Deterioration-free survival rates at 3 years favoured ENZA over NSAA for GHQL (32% v 18%, p < 0.0001), CF (33% v 21%, p = 0.0003), and PF (31% v 22%, p = 0.001), but not fatigue (26% v 18%, p = 0.1). The effects of ENZA on HRQL were relatively stable over time and unaffected by treatment with concurrent early docetaxel. Conclusion(s): The addition of ENZA maintained GHQL and improved deteriora

Background: We previously reported that treatment with enzalutamide (ENZA) rather than an older non-steroidal anti-androgen (NSAA: bicalutamide, nilutamide, or flutamide), resulted in longer overall survival when added to standard first-line treatment, with or without concurrent early docetaxel, in mHSPC (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86, p=0.002, NEJM 2019). Here we report effects on HRQL. Method(s): HRQL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PR25 at weeks 0, 4, 12, and then 12-weekly until clinical progression. We used mixed models for repeated measures to calculate the least squares mean difference (LSMD), 95% CI, and p-value for comparisons of the randomly assigned groups for all assessments from week 4 to 156. For each analysis of deterioration-free survival, the endpoint was defined a-priori as the earliest of death, clinical progression, cessation of study treatment, or a 10-point worsening from baseline (minimum clinically important difference on scales scored from 0 to 100) in the pertinent HRQL sub-scale: physical functioning (PF), global health and quality of life (GHQL), cognitive functioning (CF), and fatigue; p-values were based on the log-rank test. Result(s): Completion of HRQL forms in 1016 men with a baseline assessment of HRQL (1125 randomised) ranged from 94% at week 12 to 78% at week 156. Random assignment to ENZA v NSAA was associated with modest impairments (LSMD, 95% CI) from week 4 to 156 in fatigue (5.0, 3.3 to 6.7, p<0.0001), CF (3.9, 2.4 to 5.4, p<0.0001), and PF (2.5, 1.2 to 3.8, p=0.0002), but not GHQL (1.1,-0.4 to 2.6, p=0.16). Deterioration-free survival rates at 3 years favoured ENZA over NSAA for GHQL (32% v 18%, p<0.0001), CF (33% v 21%, p=0.0003), and PF (31% v 22%, p=0.001), but not fatigue (26% v 18%, p=0.1). The effects of ENZA on HRQL were relatively stable over time and unaffected by treatment with concurrent early docetaxel. Conclusion(s): The addition of ENZA maintained GHQL and improved deteriorationfree survival b

Background: There is no prospective data to guide optimal selection of treatment for first line (1L) mCRPC after D and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is given in the hormone sensitive setting. We explored efficacy of 1L treatment in this group. Method(s): Pts with mCRPC treated with D for hormone sensitive disease were identified from a prospectively maintained multi-site mCRPC database (ePAD) of patients treated in a community and academic setting in Australia. 1L treatment, clinicopathologic and outcome data were extracted. Result(s): We identified 93 pts, median age 65y (range 43-85), who received median 6 cycles of D-ADT and developed mCRPC between May 2013 and Jun 2019. 58% had Gleason > 8, median PSA at diagnosis was 53 ng/mL (range 0.67-7086), 65% had de-novo metastatic disease. Median time to mCRPC was 14.8mo (range 1.3 to 56.9) with median time to 1L 16.3mo (range 2.1-57.2). Eighty-five patients (91%) received at least one further active treatment for mCRPC with outcomes below. Conclusion(s): Abiraterone, enzalutamide, and cabazitaxel all demonstrate activity for 1L mCRPC following progression on D-ADT. Compared to historical controls, PSA responses appear less than pre-docetaxel, but greater than the post-docetaxel setting.

Background: Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are predominantly the clear cell (cc) subtype, with a unique biology, characterized by sensitivity to angiogenesis inhibition. However vascular endothelial growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors elicit modest responses in people with rare variant non-clear cell (ncc) RCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are active against many cancers, but people with rare variant nccRCC have been excluded from frontline trials despite experiencing a more aggressive disease course and poorer prognosis compared to those with ccRCC. UNISON (NCT03177239) aims to test 2 ideas; the activity of ICI in nccRCC, and the novel sequencing strategy of anti-programmed cell death protein (PD)1 immunotherapy, followed by the combination of anti-PD1 and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein (CTLA)4 blockade, in people failed by single agent treatment. Method(s): This single-arm, two-part trial recruits people of good performance status suffering metastatic or locally advanced unresectable rare variant nccRCC, including but not limited to papillary (type 1/2), chromophobe, sarcomatoid, Xp11 translocation, collecting duct, and unclassified histological subtypes. Participants are offered fixed dose nivolumab at 240mg every two weeks in Part 1 of the trial. If they experience progressive disease, eligible participants may proceed to Part 2 consisting of nivolumab (3mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for up to 4 doses. People experiencing disease control after single-agent or combined ICI are eligible to continue treatment for up to 1 year. UNISON is powered to distinguish a clinically nonrelevant objective tumor response rate (OTRR) of 15% in people taking combination ICI whose cancers are refractory to single-agent PD1, versus a clinically-relevant OTRR of 30% at 5% level of significance with 80% power. 85 participants were recruited in Part 1, on the assumption that 55% of those entering Part 1 will be eligible for inclusion in Part 2.

AIM: Optimal treatment for newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has evolved, with many patients deriving benefit from the addition of docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy (D-ADT). This study sought to define the therapy used and associated activity following D-ADT. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with mHSPC treated with one or more cycles of D-ADT who were identified from a prospectively maintained multisite prostate cancer database of patients treated in a community or academic center setting in Australia. The primary endpoint of this study was first-line time to treatment failure (1L TTF) for subsequent treatment of metastatic Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC), with secondary endpoints of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction >50% and time from 1L to second-line (2L) treatment initiation. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients received D-ADT for mHSPC, 85 (91%) had subsequent treatment for mCRPC. Median time to mCRPC (biochemical, clinical or radiographic) had been 14.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-16.5). 1L treatment was enzalutamide 47 patients (55%), abiraterone 23 (27%), cabazitaxel 7 (8%), docetaxel 4 (5%) and other therapies 4 (5%). Median 1L TTF was 6.3 months (95% CI, 4.9-7.6), PSA > 50% reduction was achieved in 32 of 89 patients (36%), median time from 1L to second-line treatment was 7.3 months (1.3-27.4), which did not differ significantly between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel and docetaxel all demonstrate activity following progression on D-ADT. No difference in efficacy was detected between treatment options for mCRPC. Prospective trials investigating the optimal treatment sequence for prostate cancer following progression on D-ADT needed.

BACKGROUND Enzalutamide, an androgen-receptor inhibitor, has been associated with improved overall survival in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer. It is not known whether adding enzalutamide to testosterone suppression, with or without early docetaxel, will improve survival in men with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. METHODS In this open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial, we assigned patients to receive testosterone suppression plus either open-label enzalutamide or a standard nonsteroidal antiandrogen therapy (standard-care group). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included progression-free survival as determined by the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, clinical progression-free survival, and adverse events. RESULTS A total of 1125 men underwent randomization; the median follow-up was 34 months. There were 102 deaths in the enzalutamide group and 143 deaths in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.86; P=0.002). Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 3 years were 80% (based on 94 events) in the enzalutamide group and 72% (based on 130 events) in the standard-care group. Better results with enzalutamide were also seen in PSA progression-free survival (174 and 333 events, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.39; P<0.001) and in clinical progression-free survival (167 and 320 events, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.40; P<0.001). Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was more frequent in the enzalutamide group than in the standard-care group (33 events and 14 events, respectively). Fatigue was more common in the enzalutamide group; seizures occurred in 7 patients in the enzalutamide group (1%) and in no patients in the standard-care group. CONCLUSIONS Enzalutamide was associated with significantly longer progression-free and overall survival than standard care in men with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer receiving testosterone suppression. The

Background: Historically, first generation anti-androgens (FGA) such as bicalutamide result in PSA50 response rates (>=50% reduction in PSA) of 20% in early castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Following the emergence of novel antiandrogens, enzalutamide and abiraterone, their role has become unclear. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the real-world use of FGAs in the treatment of metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). Method(s): The electronic CRPC Australian Database (ePAD) was interrogated to identify patients with CRPC. Use of FGAs was determined and clinicopathological features and survival data were retrieved. Differences between patient groups were compared using T-tests and Chi-Square analyses. Survival analyses utilised the Kaplan Meier method and differences compared using log-rank tests. Result(s): We identified 634 mCRPC patients with median follow-up time 21.9 months. 322 (51%) were treated with FGAs. These patients were more likely to have lower Gleason grade group at diagnosis (p = 0.04), increased time to CRPC (median 25.6mo versus 16.0mo, p < 0.0001) and less likely to have visceral metastases (5.0% v 11.2%, p = 0.005)). 119 (37%) patients achieved a PSA50 response; these patients had a significantly greater overall survival (HR = 0.63, p = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in subsequent systemic therapy choice, PSA response rates or duration of therapy between patients who received FGAs and those who did not.However, patients who received FGAs were less likely to have had prior upfront docetaxel chemotherapy (p < 0.0001). Conclusion(s): In this ePAD study, FGAs were commonly used in lowerrisk mCRPC, and did not significantly influence choice or duration of subsequent systemic therapy. A PSA50 response to FGA therapy is an important prognostic marker in mCRPC, as demonstrated by significant improvement in overall survival. Longer follow-up is required to evaluate the long-term effects on efficacy of subsequent therapies and po

Background: Testosterone suppression (TS) is the backbone of treatment for mHSPC. OS is improved by the addition of early docetaxel (DOC) or abiraterone to TS. ENZAMET assessed the effects of enzalutamide (ENZA), a potent androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor, versus a nonsteroidal anti-androgen (NSAA: bicalutamide, nilutamide, or flutamide) in addition to SOC (TS with or without DOC) in mHSPC. Method(s): Men with mHSPC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive TS plus either ENZA or NSAA. Randomization was stratified by: volume of disease (high vs low, according to CHAARTED); planned early DOC; planned anti-resorptive therapy, comorbidity score (ACE-27), and study site. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Accrual of 1100 men provided 80% power to detect a 25% reduction in the hazard of death (HR 0.75) with up to 4 interim analyses (IA), the first planned to occur after 235 deaths (50% of total information with a critical p-value threshold <0.0031 by the Lan-DeMets alpha-spending approach with O'Brien-Fleming type shape). Subgroup analyses to assess possible modulation of the treatment effect were specified a priori and included planned early docetaxel (yes vs no) and volume of disease (high vs low). Result(s): We randomly assigned 1125 patients from 31MAR14 to 24MAR17. The treatment groups were well balanced for all important baseline factors. Criteria for early reporting were met at the first IA (28FEB2019) after a median follow-up of 33 months. Overall survival was prolonged by ENZA (see below). At 3 years, 36% NSAA vs 64% ENZA were still on their assigned study treatment. Serious adverse events (regardless of attribution) within 30 days of study treatment occurred in 42% ENZA vs 34% NSAA, commensurate with the different durations of study treatment. Conclusion(s): ENZA significantly improved OS when added to SOC in mHSPC. The benefits appeared lower in those planned to receive early DOC. Results of analyses with updated follow-up triggered by this IA will be prese

Introduction: Bone metastases occur in more than 90% of men with advanced prostate cancer, causing significant morbidity and mortality. Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) denosumab and zoledronic acid have been shown to reduce skeletal-related events and are approved in Australia for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and bone metastases. However, pivotal studies with BMA were conducted prior to the introduction of highly active hormonal therapies. Consequently, BMA use varies across centres, with divergent opinions amongst clinicians and in current treatment guidelines. Objective(s): We aimed to examine current prescribing of BMA in men with CRPC undergoing systemic therapy. Method(s): The Electronic CRPC AustralianDatabase (ePAD)was interrogated retrospectively. Information extracted included patient and disease characteristics, BMA choice and treatment schedule. Data were stratified by the presence of bone metastases and line of systemic therapy. Result(s): Men undergoing systemic therapy for CRPC were included in the analysis. Bone metastases were present in 190 (70%) of 270 men receiving first-line therapy and 90 (84%) of 107 receiving secondline therapy. Of those with bone metastases, 65 (34%) and 44 (49%) men received BMA during first-line and second-line therapy, respectively. The most common treatment agent was denosumab (69% in first-line patients, 82% in second-line patients), with a 6-weekly treatment schedule used most frequently (44%). After a median follow-up of 16 months, 48 (74%) first-line and 31 (70%) second-line patients were continuing on BMA treatment. A greater proportion of patients on docetaxel as first-line therapy received BMA (54%), compared to those treated with enzalutamide (31%) and abiraterone (21%). Conclusion(s): Our results demonstrate a low rate of BMA use in Australian men with CRPC and bone metastases. The dominant 6-weekly treatment schedule is likely based on convenience, given the absence of efficacy data. Overall

Prognosis from differentiated thyroid cancer is worse when the disease becomes refractory to radioiodine. Until recently, treatment options have been limited to local therapies such as surgery and radiotherapy, but the recent availability of systemic therapies now provides some potential for disease control. Multitargeted kinase inhibitors (TKIs) including lenvatinib and sorafenib have been shown to improve progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials, but are also associated with a spectrum of adverse effects. Other TKIs have been utilized as "redifferentiation" agents, increasing sodium iodide symporter expression in metastases and thus restoring radioiodine avidity. Some patients whose disease progresses on initial TKI therapy will still respond to a different TKI and clinical trials currently in progress will clarify the best options for such patients. As these drugs are not inexpensive, care needs to be taken to minimize not only biological but also financial toxicity. In this review, we examine the basic biology of radioiodine refractory disease and discuss optimal treatment approaches, with specific focus on choice and timing of TKI treatment. This clinical field remains fluid, and directions for future research include exploring biomarkers and considering adjuvant TKI use in certain patient groups.