Search

Introduction & Objectives: In the previously reported ARCHES trial (NCT02677896), ENZA + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) vs placebo (PBO) + ADT improved overall survival (OS) and clinical outcomes in men with mHSPC. This post hoc analysis assessed clinical endpoints in menwith mHSPC who reached undetectable PSA levels on ENZA+ADT or PBO+ADT and investigated predictors of such a PSA decline.Materials & Methods: Men with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to ENZA (160 mg/day) + ADT or PBO+ADT, stratified by disease volume and priordocetaxel. Post hoc analyses were based on reaching undetectable (<0.2 ng/mL) or detectable (>=0.2 ng/mL) PSA levels during study treatmentand included men with both detectable baseline PSA (>=0.2 ng/mL) and postbaseline PSA measurements (ENZA+ADT, n=507; PBO+ADT, n=504).Stepwise multivariate analysis was conducted on variables from a univariate logistic regression model to identify clinical factors that significantlycorrelated with PSA decline to undetectable levels. Result(s): PSA undetectable groups had fewer men with high-volume disease, Gleason scores >=8, and de novo mHSPC; both ENZA+ADT groupshad more men with these clinical factors. Men who reached undetectable PSA levels had improved clinical outcomes; e.g., delayed radiographicprogression and improved OS (Table). Men on ENZA+ADT (n=348 [68.6%]) were almost 4 times more likely to reach undetectable PSA than menon PBO+ADT (n=89 [17.7%]). Predictors of reaching undetectable PSA on ENZA+ADT were the absence of de novo disease (M0 vs M1: odds ratio[OR] 4.5; p=0.0003) and the presence of bone only (OR 2.0; p=0.0009) or soft tissue only (OR 2.4; p=0.0193) vs bone + soft tissue metastases. Menwho reached undetectable PSA on ENZA+ADT had more treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) but fewer serious and grade 3-4 TEAEs vsthose with detectable PSA levels. Safety across treatment arms was similar to prior findings. Conclusion(s): Men with mHSPC in ARCHES who reached undetectable PSA levels had im

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 co-primary 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.In primary analysis, enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC); however, overall survival data were immature. In the phase III, double-blind, global ARCHES trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02677896), 1,150 patients with mHSPC were randomly assigned 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg once daily) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT, stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel use. Here, we report the final prespecified analysis of overall survival (key secondary end point) and an update on rPFS, other secondary end points, and safety. After unblinding, 180 (31.3%) progression-free patients randomly assigned to placebo plus ADT crossed over to open-label enzalutamide plus ADT. As of May 28, 2021 (median follow-up, 44.6 months), 154 of 574 patients randomly assigned to enzalutamide plus ADT and 202 of 576 patients randomly assigned to placebo plus ADT had died. Enzalutamide plus ADT reduced risk of death by 34% versus placebo plus ADT (median not reached in either group; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.81; P < .001). Enzalutamide plus ADT continued to improve rPFS and other secondary end points. Adverse events were generally consistent with previous reports of long-term enzalutamide use. In conclusion, enzalutamide plus ADT significantly prolongs survival versus placebo plus ADT in patients with mHSPC.

Background: While enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly reduces the risk of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and improves overall survival in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the efficacy in clinically relevant subgroups of patients based on prior local and systemic therapy, disease volume, and risk has not been analyzed to date. These post hoc analyses of the phase 3 ARCHES trial (NCT02677896) evaluated the efficacy of enzalutamide plus ADT according to prior local and systemic treatment, disease volume, and risk, assessed at trial baseline. Method(s): In ARCHES, a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, 1150 patients with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to receive enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT, stratified by prior docetaxel therapy and disease volume. Primary endpoint was rPFS. Secondary endpoints included time to prostate-specific antigen progression, symptomatic skeletal events, and prostate-specific antigen and radiographic responses. Analyses of clinical endpoints were completed by prior local therapy, prior docetaxel exposure, CHAARTED (NCT00309985)-defined disease volume, and LATITUDE (NCT01715285)-defined risk groups. Result(s): Patients were randomized to enzalutamide plus ADT (n = 574) and placebo plus ADT (n = 576). Enzalutamide plus ADT significantly improved rPFS (hazard ratio: 0.39; p < 0.0001), with similar improvements reported in all subgroups based on prior local and docetaxel treatment, disease volume, and risk. Treatment benefits were observed with enzalutamide plus ADT in multiple secondary clinical endpoints in the overall population and all subgroups. Conclusion(s): Enzalutamide plus ADT demonstrated clinical benefit across all patients with mHSPC, irrespective of prior local and systemic treatment, disease volume, and risk.Copyright © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Background: Enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved radiographic progression-free survival versus ADT alone in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in ARCHES (NCT02677896). While health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was generally maintained in the intent-to-treat population, we further analyzed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in defined subgroups. Method(s): ARCHES was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Patients with mHSPC received enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus ADT (n = 574) or placebo plus ADT (n = 576). Questionnaires, including the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate, Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, and EuroQol 5-Dimension, 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), were completed at baseline, Week 13, and every 12 weeks until disease progression. PRO endpoints were time to first confirmed clinically meaningful deterioration (TTFCD) in HRQoL or pain. Subgroups included prognostic risk, pain/HRQoL, prior docetaxel, and local therapy (radical prostatectomy [RP] and/or radiotherapy [RT]). Result(s): There were several between-treatment differences in TTFCD for pain and functioning/HRQoL PROs. Enzalutamide plus ADT delayed TTFCD for worst pain in the prior RT group (not reached vs. 14.06 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.56 [95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.94]) and pain interference in low-baseline-HRQoL group (19.32 vs. 11.20 months; HR: 0.64 [0.44-0.94]) versus placebo plus ADT. In prior/no prior RP, prior RT, prior local therapy, no prior docetaxel, mild baseline pain, and low-risk subgroups, TTFCD was delayed for the EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale. Conclusion(s): Enzalutamide plus ADT provides clinical benefits in defined patient subgroups versus ADT alone, while maintaining lack of pain and high HRQoL, with delayed deterioration in several HRQoL measures.Copyright © 2022 The Authors. The Prostate published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Background: While enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly reduces the risk of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and improves overall survival in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the efficacy in clinically relevant subgroups of patients based on prior local and systemic therapy, disease volume, and risk has not been analyzed to date. These post hoc analyses of the phase 3 ARCHES trial (NCT02677896) evaluated the efficacy of enzalutamide plus ADT according to prior local and systemic treatment, disease volume, and risk, assessed at trial baseline. Method(s): In ARCHES, a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, 1150 patients with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to receive enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT, stratified by prior docetaxel therapy and disease volume. Primary endpoint was rPFS. Secondary endpoints included time to prostate-specific antigen progression, symptomatic skeletal events, and prostate-specific antigen and radiographic responses. Analyses of clinical endpoints were completed by prior local therapy, prior docetaxel exposure, CHAARTED (NCT00309985)-defined disease volume, and LATITUDE (NCT01715285)-defined risk groups. Result(s): Patients were randomized to enzalutamide plus ADT (n = 574) and placebo plus ADT (n = 576). Enzalutamide plus ADT significantly improved rPFS (hazard ratio: 0.39; p < 0.0001), with similar improvements reported in all subgroups based on prior local and docetaxel treatment, disease volume, and risk. Treatment benefits were observed with enzalutamide plus ADT in multiple secondary clinical endpoints in the overall population and all subgroups. Conclusion(s): Enzalutamide plus ADT demonstrated clinical benefit across all patients with mHSPC, irrespective of prior local and systemic treatment, disease volume, and risk.Copyright © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Background: In ARCHES (NCT02677896) ENZA + ADT reduced the risk of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) events, primary endpoint, and improved key secondary endpoints vs PBO + ADT in men with mHSPC (also known as metastatic castration-sensitive PC). Given the progressive nature of PC, this exploratory analysis evaluated efficacy of ENZA + ADT in patients (pts) who progressed to M1 HSPC following initial diagnosis (M0) vs pts who presented with de novo mHSPC at diagnosis (M1). Method(s): mHSPC pts (n=1150) were randomized 1:1 to ENZA (160 mg/day) + ADT or PBO + ADT, stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel use. In this post hoc analysis, pts previously centrally categorized as MX/unknown metastasis at initial diagnosis (n=213) were adjudicated as either M0 or M1 disease following review of their medical profiles; efficacy outcomes were compared according to M0 vs M1 disease at initial diagnosis. Result(s): In this analysis, 246 pts (ENZA n=117; PBO n=129) had M0 and 890 pts (ENZA n=448; PBO n=442) had M1 disease at initial diagnosis; metastatic status of 14 pts (ENZA n=9; PBO n=5) were unknown (data not shown). Baseline characteristics were generally comparable between treatment arms; however, a greater proportion of M1 pts had high disease volume (n=606; 68.1% vs n=116; 47.2% [M0]) and prior docetaxel (n=173, 19.4% vs n=29, 11.8% [M0]). ENZA + ADT improved rPFS vs PBO + ADT irrespective of M0 or M1 disease at diagnosis; similar improvements were observed for secondary endpoints including prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and objective responses, time to PSA progression, time to new antineoplastic therapy (Table). Safety profiles were generally similar between subgroups and the overall population; exceptions include higher fatigue in M0 ENZA and PBO treatment arms. Conclusion(s): This post hoc analysis demonstrates clinical benefit of ENZA + ADT vs PBO + ADT based on rPFS and secondary endpoints in men who progressed from M0 to M1 HSPC and those with d

PURPOSE: Enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy has previously been shown to improve clinical outcomes in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (ARCHES; NCT02677896). Here, we assessed if and how the pattern of metastatic spread impacts efficacy of enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy in men enrolled in ARCHES. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg/day) plus androgen deprivation therapy or placebo plus androgen deprivation therapy, stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel treatment. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival. Secondary end points included time to prostate specific antigen progression, initiation of new antineoplastic therapy, first symptomatic skeletal event and castration resistance. Post hoc analyses were performed by pattern of metastatic spread based on study entry imaging. RESULT(S): Of the overall population with metastases identified at enrollment (1,146), the largest patient subgroups were those with bone metastases only (513) and those with bone plus lymph node metastases (351); there were fewer men with lymph node metastases only (154) and men with visceral+/-bone or lymph node metastases (128). Enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy reduced the risk of radiographic progression vs placebo plus androgen deprivation therapy in men with bone metastases only (HR 0.33) and bone plus lymph node metastases (HR 0.31). Similar improvements in secondary end points were also observed in these subgroups. CONCLUSION(S): These findings indicate that treatment with enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy provides improvements in men with bone and/or lymph node metastases but may be less effective in men with visceral patterns of spread.