PROREPAIR-B: A Prospective Cohort Study of the Impact of Germline DNA Repair Mutations on the Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Germline mutation landscape of DNA damage repair genes in African Americans with prostate cancer highlights potentially targetable RAD genes

In prostate cancer, emerging data highlight the role of DNA damage repair genes (DDRGs) in aggressive forms of the disease. However, DDRG mutations in African American men are not yet fully defined. Here, we profile germline mutations in all known DDRGs (N = 276) using whole genome sequences from blood DNA of a matched cohort of patients with primary prostate cancer comprising of 300 African American and 300 European Ancestry prostate cancer patients, to determine whether the mutation status can enhance patient stratification for specific targeted therapies. Here, we show that only 13 of the 46 DDRGs identified with pathogenic/likely pathogenic mutations are present in both African American and European ancestry patients. Importantly, RAD family genes (RAD51, RAD54L, RAD54B), which are potentially targetable, as well as PMS2 and BRCA1, are among the most frequently mutated DDRGs in African American, but not in European Ancestry patients.

Angiogenesis as Therapeutic Target in Metastatic Prostate Cancer - Narrowing the Gap Between Bench and Bedside

Angiogenesis in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has been extensively investigated as a promising druggable biological process. Nonetheless, targeting angiogenesis has failed to impact overall survival (OS) in patients with mCRPC despite promising preclinical and early clinical data. This discrepancy prompted a literature review highlighting the tumor heterogeneity and biological context of Prostate Cancer (PCa). Narrowing the gap between the bench and bedside appears critical for developing novel therapeutic strategies. Searching clinicaltrials.gov for studies examining angiogenesis inhibition in patients with PCa resulted in n=20 trials with specific angiogenesis inhibitors currently recruiting (as of September 2021). Moreover, several other compounds with known anti-angiogenic properties - such as Metformin or Curcumin - are currently investigated. In general, angiogenesis-targeting strategies in PCa include biomarker-guided treatment stratification - as well as combinatorial approaches. Beyond established angiogenesis inhibitors, PCa therapies aiming at PSMA (Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen) hold the promise to have a substantial anti-angiogenic effect - due to PSMA´s abundant expression in tumor vasculature.

Clinical Management of Prostate Cancer in High-Risk Genetic Mutation Carriers

Simple Summary

Men with certain genetic differences are at much higher risks of developing metastatic and lethal prostate cancer. With the recent introduction of a new class of medications specifically targeted to these gene repair pathways (PARP inhibitors), it is critical to review the state of the literature surrounding the management of men with prostate cancer who have these genetic differences. We review the existing literature to address common clinical questions pertaining to this population. There is an urgent need for further research regarding clinical management in these scenarios as patients are increasingly seeking out genetic testing and consulting healthcare professionals for guidance.

Abstract

Background: Prostate cancer is a leading cause of death. Approximately one in eight men who are diagnosed with prostate cancer will die of it. Since there is a large difference in mortality between low- and high-risk prostate cancers, it is critical to identify individuals who are at high-risk for disease progression and death. Germline genetic differences are increasingly recognized as contributing to risk of lethal prostate cancer. The objective of this paper is to review prostate cancer management options for men with high-risk germline mutations. Methods: We performed a review of the literature to identify articles regarding management of prostate cancer in individuals with high-risk germline genetic mutations. Results: We identified numerous publications regarding the management of prostate cancer among high-risk germline carriers, but the overall quality of the evidence is low. Conclusions: We performed a review of the literature and compiled clinical considerations for the management of individuals with high-risk germline mutations when they develop prostate cancer. The quality of the evidence is low, and there is an immediate need for further research and the development of consensus guidelines to guide clinical practice for these individuals.

PARP Inhibitors and Radiometabolic Approaches in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: What’s Now, What’s New, and What’s Coming?

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer still represents an important health problem in men, considering its high frequency. Over the last decade, novel treatment options have emerged, leading to notable clinical benefits. These recent scientific acquisitions are creating the basis to widen the treatment scenario of this tumor, evolving from targeting the androgen receptor axis or the traditional chemotherapy approach.

Abstract

In recent years, the advances in the knowledge on the molecular characteristics of prostate cancer is allowing to explore novel treatment scenarios. Furthermore, technological discoveries are widening diagnostic and treatment weapons at the clinician disposal. Among these, great relevance is being gained by PARP inhibitors and radiometabolic approaches. The result is that DNA repair genes need to be altered in a high percentage of patients with metastatic prostate cancer, making these patients optimal candidates for PARP inhibitors. These compounds have already been proved to be active in pretreated patients and are currently being investigated in other settings. Radiometabolic approaches combine specific prostate cancer cell ligands to radioactive particles, thus allowing to deliver cytotoxic radiations in cancer cells. Among these, radium-223 and lutetium-177 have shown promising activity in metastatic pretreated prostate cancer patients and further studies are ongoing to expand the applications of this therapeutic approach. In addition, nuclear medicine techniques also have an important diagnostic role in prostate cancer. Herein, we report the state of the art on the knowledge on PARP inhibitors and radiometabolic approaches in advanced prostate cancer and present ongoing clinical trials that will hopefully expand these two treatment fields.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review (Part 6): Correlation of PD-L1 Expression with the Status of Mismatch Repair System, BRCA, PTEN, and Other Genes

Pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) is allowed in selected metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PC) patients showing microsatellite instability/mismatch repair system deficiency (MSI-H/dMMR). BRCA1/2 loss-of-function is linked to hereditary PCs and homologous recombination DNA-repair system deficiency: poly-ADP-ribose-polymerase inhibitors can be administered to BRCA-mutated PC patients. Recently, docetaxel-refractory metastatic castration-resistant PC patients with BRCA1/2 or ATM somatic mutations had higher response rates to pembrolizumab. PTEN regulates cell cycle/proliferation/apoptosis through pathways including the AKT/mTOR, which upregulates PD-L1 expression in PC. Our systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines) investigated the potential correlations between PD-L1 and MMR/MSI/BRCA/PTEN statuses in PC, discussing few other relevant genes. Excluding selection biases, 74/677 (11%) PCs showed dMMR/MSI; 8/67 (12%) of dMMR/MSI cases were PD-L1+. dMMR-PCs included ductal (3%) and acinar (14%) PCs (all cases tested for MSI were acinar-PCs). In total, 15/39 (39%) PCs harbored BRCA1/2 aberrations: limited data are available for PD-L1 expression in these patients. 13/137 (10%) PTEN- PCs were PD-L1+; 10/29 (35%) PD-L1+ PCs showed PTEN negativity. SPOP mutations may increase PD-L1 levels, while the potential correlation between PD-L1 and ERG expression in PC should be clarified. Further research should verify how the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant PCs is related to dMMR/MSI, DNA-damage repair genes defects, or PD-L1 expression.

Exploring anti-androgen therapies in hormone dependent prostate cancer and new therapeutic routes for castration resistant prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapies (ADTs) are important treatments which inhibit androgen-induced prostate cancer (PCa) progression by either preventing androgen biosynthesis (e.g. abiraterone) or by antagonizing androgen receptor (AR) function (e.g. bicalutamide, enzalutamide, darolutamide). A major limitation of current ADTs is they often remain effective for limited durations after which patients commonly progress to a lethal and incurable form of PCa, called castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) where the AR continues to orchestrate pro-oncogenic signalling. Indeed, the increasing numbers of ADT-related treatment-emergent neuroendocrine-like prostate cancers (NePC), which lack AR and are thus insensitive to ADT, represents a major therapeutic challenge. There is therefore an urgent need to better understand the mechanisms of AR action in hormone dependent disease and the progression to CRPC, to enable the development of new approaches to prevent, reverse or delay ADT-resistance. Interestingly the AR regulates distinct transcriptional networks in hormone dependent and CRPC, and this appears to be related to the aberrant function of key AR-epigenetic coregulator enzymes including the lysine demethylase 1 (LSD1/KDM1A). In this review we summarize the current best status of anti-androgen clinical trials, the potential for novel combination therapies and we explore recent advances in the development of novel epigenetic targeted therapies that may be relevant to prevent or reverse disease progression in patients with advanced CRPC.

Genetic predisposition to prostate cancer: an update

Improvements in DNA sequencing technology and discoveries made by large scale genome-wide association studies have led to enormous insight into the role of genetic variation in prostate cancer risk. High-risk prostate cancer risk predisposition genes exist in addition to common germline variants conferring low-moderate risk, which together account for over a third of familial prostate cancer risk. Identifying men with additional risk factors such as genetic variants or a positive family history is of clinical importance, as men with such risk factors have a higher incidence of prostate cancer with some evidence to suggest diagnosis at a younger age and poorer outcomes. The medical community remains in disagreement on the benefits of a population prostate cancer screening programme reliant on PSA testing. A reduction in mortality has been demonstrated in many studies, but at the cost of significant amounts of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Developing targeted screening strategies for high-risk men is currently the subject of investigation in a number of prospective studies. At present, approximately 38% of the familial risk of PrCa can be explained based on published SNPs, with men in the top 1% of the risk profile having a 5.71-fold increase in risk of developing cancer compared with controls. With approximately 170 prostate cancer susceptibility loci now identified in European populations, there is scope to explore the clinical utility of genetic testing and genetic-risk scores in prostate cancer screening and risk stratification, with such data in non-European populations eagerly awaited. This review will focus on both the rare and common germline genetic variation involved in hereditary and familial prostate cancer, and discuss ongoing research in exploring the role of targeted screening in this high-risk group of men.

Defining the Impact of Family History on Detection of High-grade Prostate Cancer in a Large Multi-institutional Cohort

BACKGROUND

The risk of high-grade prostate cancer, given a family history of cancer, has been described in the general population, but not among men selected for prostate biopsy in an international cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of high-grade prostate cancer on biopsy based on a family history of cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This is a multicenter study of men undergoing prostate biopsy from 2006 to 2019, including 12 sites in North America and Europe. All sites recorded first-degree prostate cancer family histories; four included more detailed data on the number of affected relatives, second-degree relatives with prostate cancer, and breast cancer family history.

OUTCOMES MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated odds of high-grade (Gleason grade group ≥2) prostate cancer. Separate models were fit for family history definitions, including first- and second-degree prostate cancer and breast cancer family histories.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A first-degree prostate cancer family history was available for 15 799 men, with a more detailed family history for 4617 (median age 65 yr, both cohorts). Adjusted odds of high-grade prostate cancer were 1.77 times greater (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.57-2.00, p < 0.001, risk ratio [RR] = 1.40) with first-degree prostate cancer, 1.38 (95% CI 1.07-1.77, p = 0.011, RR = 1.22) for second-degree prostate cancer, and 1.30 (95% CI 1.01-1.67, p = 0.040, RR = 1.18) for first-degree breast cancer family histories. Interaction terms revealed that the effect of a family history did not differ based on prostate-specific antigen but differed based on age. This study is limited by missing data on race and prior negative biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Men with indications for biopsy and a family history of prostate or breast cancer can be counseled that they have a moderately increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer, independent of other risk factors.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In a large international series of men selected for prostate biopsy, finding a high-grade prostate cancer was more likely in men with a family history of prostate or breast cancer.

The Pros and Cons of "Machination of Medicine" in Genitourinary Oncology Practice

The increasing availability of genomic sequencing of tumor tissue in oncology provided valuable insights into tumor evolution and offered clinicians the unprecedented opportunity to tailor therapies on each individual patient, according to the treatment-impacting alterations identified in the tumor cells. In addition to the characterization of somatic alterations in tumor samples, the identification of germline (i.e., constitutional) pathogenic variants can provide additional information to guide informed and personalized therapeutic planning for patients and to enable risk-based screening protocols for at-risk relatives. In genitourinary malignancies, only a few associations between germline mutations and cancer risk and behavior have been thoroughly investigated (e.g., alterations in DNA repair genes in prostate cancer or mutations in Lynch syndrome genes in upper tract urothelial carcinoma). To achieve a wider use of both tumor genomic and germline genetic testing, an integrative approach led by scientific societies is necessary to involve physicians, patients and advocacy groups, to develop a shared strategy to advance the field and provide value-based and reproducible standards of care for patients and their families.

Efficacy of systemic therapies in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer harboring germline ATM versus BRCA2 mutations

BACKGROUND

Among men with metastatic prostate cancer, about 10% have germline alterations in DNA damage response genes. Most studies have examined BRCA2 alone or an aggregate of BRCA1/2 and ATM. Emerging data suggest that ATM mutations may have distinct biology and warrant individual evaluation. The objective of this study is to determine whether response to prostate cancer systemic therapies differs between men with germline mutations in ATM (gATM) and BRCA2 (gBRCA2).

METHODS

This is an international multicenter retrospective matched cohort study of men with prostate cancer harboring gATM or gBRCA2. PSA₅₀ response (≥50% decline in prostate-specific antigen) was compared using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The study included 45 gATM and 45 gBRCA2 patients, matched on stage and year of germline testing. Patients with gATM and gBRCA2 had similar age, Gleason grade, and PSA at diagnosis. We did not observe differences in PSA₅₀ responses to abiraterone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer between the two groups; however, 0/7 with gATM and 12/14 with gBRCA2 achieved PSA₅₀ response to PARPi (p < .001). Median (95% confidence interval) overall survival from diagnosis to death was 10.9 years (9.5-not reached) versus 9.9 years (7.1-not reached, p = .07) for the gATM and gBRCA2 cohorts, respectively. Limitations include the retrospective design and lack of mutation zygosity data.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional therapies can be effective in gATM carriers and should be considered before PARPi, which shows limited efficacy in this group. Men with gATM mutations warrant prioritization for novel treatment strategies.

Genetics of prostate cancer and its utility in treatment and screening

Prostate cancer heritability is attributed to a combination of rare, moderate to highly penetrant genetic variants as well as commonly occurring variants conferring modest risks [single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)]. Some of the former type of variants (e.g., BRCA2 mutations) predispose particularly to aggressive prostate cancer and confer poorer prognoses compared to men who do not carry mutations. Molecularly targeted treatments such as PARP inhibitors have improved outcomes in men carrying somatic and/or germline DNA repair gene mutations. Ongoing clinical trials are exploring other molecular targeted approaches based on prostate cancer somatic alterations. Genome wide association studies have identified >250 loci that associate with prostate cancer risk. Multi-ancestry analyses have identified shared as well as population specific risk SNPs. Prostate cancer risk SNPs can be used to estimate a polygenic risk score (PRS) to determine an individual's genetic risk of prostate cancer. The odds ratio of prostate cancer development in men whose PRS lies in the top 1% of the risk profile ranges from 9 to 11. Ongoing studies are investigating the utility of a prostate cancer PRS to target population screening to those at highest risk. With the advent of personalized medicine and development of DNA sequencing technologies, access to clinical genetic testing is increasing, and oncology guidelines from bodies such as NCCN and ESMO have been updated to provide criteria for germline testing of "at risk" healthy men as well as those with prostate cancer. Both germline and somatic prostate cancer research have significantly evolved in the past decade and will lead to further development of precision medicine approaches to prostate cancer treatment as well as potentially developing precision population screening models.

Advances in urologic oncology "OncoUrology Forum Special Edition": The best of 2020

OBJECTIVE

To provide latest findings of Urologic Oncology on prostate, kidney, and bladder cancer, and analyze its impact on clinical practice as well as future schemes in the medium- and long-term.

METHODS

This document reviews the abstracts on Uro-Oncology presented at the 2020 Congresses (EUA, AUA, ASCO, ESMO and ASTRO), the publications with the highest impact and especially the new lines of development and progress in Uro-Oncology evaluated by the OncoForum committee.

RESULTS

The use of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioligands in the diagnosis of prostate cancer may have great potential and utility in the coming years due to their improved sensitivity and specificity. The genetic characterization of the tumor is important at both, germline and somatic levels, due to the significant role of BRCA2 mutations regarding risk. The cohort multiple randomised controlled trial is the most suitable study design at the genitourinary cancer level. The application of big data will lead to process improvements, savings in healthcare costs, and an empowerment of real-life studies through ease of data comparison, management, and storage.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of new diagnostic techniques with PSMA ligands will provide a more comprehensive diagnostic modality, increase the number of studies about tumor genetic profiling, and enhance their quality. The practical application of artificial intelligence will improve the treatment genitourinary cancer.

BRCA Mutations in Prostate Cancer: Assessment, Implications and Treatment Considerations

Prostate cancer ranks fifth in cancer-related mortality in men worldwide. DNA damage is implicated in cancer and DNA damage response (DDR) pathways are in place against this to maintain genomic stability. Impaired DDR pathways play a role in prostate carcinogenesis and germline or somatic mutations in DDR genes have been found in both primary and metastatic prostate cancer. Among these, BRCA mutations have been found to be especially clinically relevant with a role for germline or somatic testing. Prostate cancer with DDR defects may be sensitive to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors which target proteins in a process called PARylation. Initially they were used to target BRCA-mutated tumor cells in a process of synthetic lethality. However, recent studies have found potential for PARP inhibitors in a variety of other genetic settings. In this review, we explore the mechanisms of DNA repair, potential for genomic analysis of prostate cancer and therapeutics of PARP inhibitors along with their safety profile.

Finding the optimal treatment sequence in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer-a narrative review

Over the last two decades, there has been significant progress in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Multiple treatments with diverse mechanisms of action have improved clinical outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) including taxane chemotherapy, immunotherapy, potent androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI), and radiopharmaceuticals (radium-223). As these treatments have entered standard clinical practise, clinicians have been challenged on how to optimally select and sequence them as the landmark studies establishing their efficacy had control arms with placebo or minimally effective therapy and there is a paucity of prospective trials examining treatment sequencing. More recently, the situation has been further complicated as the earlier up-front use of docetaxel and ARPI with standard gonadal testosterone inhibition has been shown to impart substantial improvements in disease control and survival for patients with castration sensitive prostate cancer. As new therapies enter into clinical practise such as the inhibitors of Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase and Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA)-targeted therapy, how to optimally select and sequence available treatments will be a continued dilemma in the absence of validated predictive biomarkers. This review will summarize the literature supporting the use of each active agent in mCRPC. We will propose a framework which will guide the selection of appropriate agents based on prior therapies, disease characteristics and biomarkers.

Cabazitaxel activity in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with and without DNA damage repair defects

BACKGROUND

Cabazitaxel was shown to improve overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after abiraterone/enzalutamine and docetaxel failure, though benefit by the presence of DNA damage repair (DDR) defects is unknown. With the advent of poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) in partially overlapping indications with cabazitaxel, we aimed to determine cabazitaxel activity in men with mCRPC according to their DDR status.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicenter study that enrolled patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel who had undergone DDR tumour tissue profiling. Patients with at least one deleterious germline or somatic alterations were considered DDR positive (DDR+). Each DDR + patient has been matched with a DDR negative (DDR-) from the same institution who underwent the same test. An exploratory cohort of patients found to be DDR + by liquid biopsy was also included. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) decline≥50% (PSA50), PSA progression-free survival (PFS, PSA-PFS), radiographic PFS (rPFS), clinical PFS or radiographic PFS (c/rPFS) and OS were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 190 men (95 DDR+, 95 DDR-) with tissue sequencing, PSA50 was achieved with cabazitaxel in 29/92 (32%) and 33/92 (36%) in patients with DDR+ and DDR- (P = 0.64). The median rPFS was 5.33 months [95%CI 4.34-7.04] versus 5.75 months [95%CI 4.67-7.27] (P = 0.55). The median OS was 15.4 months [95%CI 12.16-26.6] and 11.5 months [95%CI 9.76-14.4] (P = 0.036), respectively. No PSA50 responses on cabazitaxel were observed in BRCA1/2 patients previously treated with PARPi (n = 10). Similar outcomes with cabazitaxel were observed in the liquid biopsy cohort (n = 63 DDR+).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that cabazitaxel is active in patients with mCRPC regardless of their DDR status, although its activity in men pretreated with a PARPi may be lower.

Inherited Mutations in Chinese Men With Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Although China accounts for 7.8% of worldwide new prostate cancer (PCa) cases and 14.5% of new deaths according to GLOBOCAN 2020, the risk of PCa associated with germline mutations is poorly defined, hampered in part by lack of nationwide evidence. Here, we sequenced 19 PCa predisposition genes in 1,836 Chinese patients with PCa and estimated disease risk associated with inherited mutations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were recruited from 4 tertiary cancer centers (n=1,160) and a commercial laboratory (n=676). Germline DNA was sequenced using a multigene panel, and pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) mutation frequencies in patients with PCa were compared with populations from the gnomAD (Genome Aggregation Database) and ChinaMAP (China Metabolic Analytics Project) databases. Clinical characteristics and progression-free survival were assessed by mutation status.

RESULTS

Of 1,160 patients from hospitals, 89.7% had Gleason scores ≥8, and 65.6% had metastases. P/LP mutations were identified in 8.49% of Chinese patients with PCa. Association with PCa risk was significant for mutations in ATM (odds ratio [OR], 5.9; 95% CI, 3.1-11.1), BRCA2 (OR, 15.3; 95% CI, 10.0-23.2), MSH2 (OR, 15.8; 95% CI, 4.2-59.6), and PALB2 (OR, 5.9; 95% CI, 2.7-13.2). Compared with those without mutations, patients with mutations in ATM, BRCA2, MSH2, or PALB2 showed a poor outcome with treatment using androgen deprivation therapy and abiraterone (hazard ratio, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.34-3.58] and 2.47 [95% CI, 1.23-4.96], respectively) but similar benefit from docetaxel.

CONCLUSIONS

The present multicenter study confirmed that a significant proportion of Chinese patients with PCa had inherited mutations and identified predisposition genes in this underreported ethnicity. These data provide empirical evidence for precision prevention and prognostic estimation in Chinese patients with PCa.

DNA-PKc inhibition overcomes taxane resistance by promoting taxane-induced DNA damage in prostate cancer cells

BACKGROUND

Overcoming taxane resistance remains a major clinical challenge in metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Loss of DNA repair proteins is associated with resistance to anti-microtubule agents. We propose that alterations in DNA damage response (DDR) pathway contribute to taxane resistance, and identification of these alterations may provide a potential therapeutic target to resensitize docetaxel-refractory mCRPC to taxane-based therapy.

METHODS

Alterations in DDR gene expression in our prostate cancer cell line model of docetaxel-resistance (DU145-DxR) derived from DU-145 cells were determined by DDR pathway-specific polymerase chain reaction array and immunoblotting. The PRKDC gene encoding DNA-PKc (DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic unit), was noted to be overexpressed and evaluated for its role in docetaxel resistance. Cell viability and clonogenic survival of docetaxel-treated DU145-DxR cells were assessed after pharmacologic inhibition of DNA-PKc with three different inhibitors-NU7441, LTURM34, and M3814. Response to second-line cytotoxic agents, cabazitaxel and etoposide upon DNA-PKc inhibition was also tested. The impact of DNA-PKc upregulation on DNA damage repair was evaluated by comet assay and analysis of double-strand breaks marker, γH2AX and Rad51. Lastly, DNA-PKc inhibitor's effect on MDR1 activity was assessed by rhodamine 123 efflux assay.

RESULTS

DDR pathway-specific gene profiling revealed significant upregulation of PRKDC and CDK7, and downregulation of MSH3 in DU145-DxR cells. Compared to parental DU145, DU145-DxR cells sustained significantly less DNA damage when exposed to etoposide and docetaxel. Pharmacologic inhibition of DNA-PKc, a component of NHEJ repair machinery, with all three inhibitors, significantly resensitized DU145-DxR cells to docetaxel. Furthermore, DNA-PKc inhibition also resensitized DU145-DxR to cabazitaxel and etoposide, which demonstrated cross-resistance. Inhibition of DNA-PKc led to increased DNA damage in etoposide- and docetaxel-treated DU145-DxR cells. Finally, DNA-PKc inhibition did not affect MDR1 activity, indicating that DNA-PKc inhibitors resensitized taxane-resistant cells via an MDR1-independent mechanism.

CONCLUSION

This study supports a role of DDR genes, particularly, DNA-PKc in promoting resistance to taxanes in mCRPC. Targeting prostatic DNA-PKc may provide a novel strategy to restore taxane sensitivity in taxane-refractory mCRPC.

Development and Verification of a Prostate Cancer Prognostic Signature Based on an Immunogenomic Landscape Analysis

Purpose

Prostate cancer (PCa) has a high incidence among older men. Until now, there are no immunological markers available to predict PCa patients’ survival. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the immunological characteristics of PCa.

Methods

First, we retrieved RNA-seq and clinical data of 499 PCa and 52 normal prostate tissue samples from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We identified 193 differentially expressed immune-related genes (IRGs) between PCa and normal prostate tissues. Functional enrichment analyses showed that the immune system can participate in PCa initiation. Then, we constructed a correlation network between transcription factors (TFs) and IRGs. We performed univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses and identified five key prognostic IRGs (S100A2, NOX1, IGHV7-81, AMH, and AGTR1). Finally, a predictive nomogram was established and verified by the C-index.

Results

We successfully constructed and validated an immune-related PCa prediction model. The signature could independently predict PCa patients’ survival. Results showed that high-immune-risk patients were correlated with advanced stage. We also validated the S100A2 expression in vitro using PCa and normal prostate tissues. We found that higher S100A2 expressions were related to lower biochemical recurrences. Additionally, higher AMH expressions were related to higher Gleason score, lymph node metastasis and positive rate, and tumor stages, and higher ATGR1 expressions were related to lower PSA value.

Conclusion

Overall, we detected five IRGs (S100A2, NOX1, IGHV7-81, AMH, and AGTR1) that can be used as independent PCa prognostic factors.

Clinical Utility of Olaparib in the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Review of Current Evidence and Patient Selection

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is an aggressive and fatal disease with a median survival of 36 months. With the advent of genetic sequencing to identify individual genomic profiles and acquired tumor-specific pathways, targeted therapies have revolutionized cancer treatment, including the treatment strategy in mCRPC. Poly(adenosine 5'-diphosphate) ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are oral drugs that target mutations in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, which are found in approximately 27% of prostate cancer patients. In May 2020, the first PARP inhibitor, olaparib, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for men with mCRPC with HHR gene mutations based on the findings of the Phase III PROfound trial that showed improved overall survival in men with mCRPC who received olaparib and whose disease had progressed on a novel hormonal agent. This review summarizes the current evidence and clinical utility of olaparib as treatment in men with mCRPC. We describe the mechanism of action of PARPi, key clinical trials of olaparib in men with mCRPC, and ongoing Phase II and III clinical trials investigating olaparib in combination therapy and as front-line therapy in mCRPC.

Current and Emerging Therapies for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC)

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) encompasses a heterogeneous wide range of molecular tumor behavior and a high risk of progression. Early detection and treatment are therefore crucial in these patients. Treatment has improved drastically in recent years and many novel therapeutic agents are currently under investigation. However, due to the rapidly changing therapeutic landscape in mCRPC, it is difficult for clinicians to keep up to date with the latest innovations in this area. In the present narrative review, we discuss the current and emerging therapies for mCRPC as well as the clinical and molecular factors that can help predict which patients are most likely to benefit from these novel agents.

Genetic Aberrations of DNA Repair Pathways in Prostate Cancer: Translation to the Clinic

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second most common cancer in men worldwide. Due to the large-scale sequencing efforts, there is currently a better understanding of the genomic landscape of PC. The identification of defects in DNA repair genes has led to clinical studies that provide a strong rationale for developing poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and DNA-damaging agents in this molecularly defined subset of patients. The identification of molecularly defined subgroups of patients has also other clinical implications; for example, we now know that carriers of breast cancer 2 (BRCA2) pathogenic sequence variants (PSVs) have increased levels of serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, increased proportion of high Gleason tumors, elevated rates of nodal and distant metastases, and high recurrence rate; BRCA2 PSVs confer lower overall survival (OS). Distinct tumor PSV, methylation, and expression patterns have been identified in BRCA2 compared with non-BRCA2 mutant prostate tumors. Several DNA damage response and repair (DDR)-targeting agents are currently being evaluated either as single agents or in combination in patients with PC. In this review article, we highlight the biology and clinical implications of deleterious inherited or acquired DNA repair pathway aberrations in PC and offer an overview of new agents being developed for the treatment of PC.

Optimal Sequencing and Predictive Biomarkers in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer

The treatment landscape of advanced prostate cancer has completely changed during the last decades. Chemotherapy (docetaxel, cabazitaxel), androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSi) (abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide), and radium-223 have revolutionized the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 is also going to become another treatment option for these patients. In addition, docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and radiotherapy to primary tumor have demonstrated the ability to significantly prolong the survival of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Finally, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide have recently provided impactful data in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant disease (nmCRPC). However, which is the best treatment sequence for patients with advanced prostate cancer? This comprehensive review aims at discussing the available literature data to identify the optimal sequencing approaches in patients with prostate cancer at different disease stages. Our work also highlights the potential impact of predictive biomarkers in treatment sequencing and exploring the role of specific agents (i.e., olaparib, rucaparib, talazoparib, niraparib, and ipatasertib) in biomarker-selected populations of patients with prostate cancer (i.e., those harboring alterations in DNA damage and response genes or PTEN).

A novel germline BRCA2 mutation in a Chinese patient with prostate cancer sensitive to platinum chemotherapy: a case report

Background

Germline BRCA2 mutation is associated with an aggressive prostate cancer phenotype and indicates higher risk for hereditary cancer. Recently, numerous studies have attempted to identify the genomic landscape of prostate cancer to better understand the genomic drivers of this disease and look for the molecular targets to guide treatment selection.

Case presentation

We report a 67-year-old patient diagnosed with prostate cancer who experienced rapid disease progression after androgen deprivation therapy and subsequent docetaxel treatment. The patient had a strong family history of malignancy as his mother was diagnosed with breast cancer and his father was died of lung cancer. Next generation sequencing demonstrated a novel pathogenic germline BRCA2 mutation (p.Gly2181Glufs*10) in the patient. His mother with breast cancer and his son were found to have the same BRCA2 mutation. The patient experienced impressive and durable responses to carboplatin treatment.

Conclusions

This case demonstrated that the carboplatin could have a dramatic antitumor effect on patients with prostate cancer with germline BRCA2 mutations and family history will help to ensure that patients and their families can be provided with proper genetic counseling.

Talazoparib monotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with DNA repair alterations (TALAPRO-1): an open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have antitumour activity against metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers with DNA damage response (DDR) alterations in genes involved directly or indirectly in homologous recombination repair (HRR). In this study, we assessed the PARP inhibitor talazoparib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers with DDR-HRR alterations.

METHODS

In this open-label, phase 2 trial (TALAPRO-1), participants were recruited from 43 hospitals, cancer centres, and medical centres in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, South Korea, the UK, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they were men aged 18 years or older with progressive, metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancers of adenocarcinoma histology, measurable soft-tissue disease (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 [RECIST 1.1]), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, DDR-HRR gene alterations reported to sensitise to PARP inhibitors (ie, ATM, ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, FANCA, MLH1, MRE11A, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C), had received one or two taxane-based chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease, and progressed on enzalutamide or abiraterone, or both, for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers. Eligible patients were given oral talazoparib (1 mg per day; or 0·75 mg per day in patients with moderate renal impairment) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, investigator decision, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate, defined as best overall soft-tissue response of complete or partial response per RECIST 1.1, by blinded independent central review. The primary endpoint was assessed in patients who received study drug, had measurable soft-tissue disease, and had a gene alteration in one of the predefined DDR-HRR genes. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03148795, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 18, 2017, and March 20, 2020, 128 patients were enrolled, of whom 127 received at least one dose of talazoparib (safety population) and 104 had measurable soft-tissue disease (antitumour activity population). Data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 4, 2020. After a median follow-up of 16·4 months (IQR 11·1-22·1), the objective response rate was 29·8% (31 of 104 patients; 95% CI 21·2-39·6). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (39 [31%] of 127 patients), thrombocytopenia (11 [9%]), and neutropenia (ten [8%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 43 (34%) patients. There were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

Talazoparib showed durable antitumour activity in men with advanced metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers with DDR-HRR gene alterations who had been heavily pretreated. The favourable benefit-risk profile supports the study of talazoparib in larger, randomised clinical trials, including in patients with non-BRCA alterations.

FUNDING

Pfizer/Medivation.

A real-world comparison of docetaxel versus abiraterone acetate for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

Background

Docetaxel (D) or secondary hormonal therapy (SHT) each combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) represent possible treatment options in males with metastasized hormone‐sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Real‐world data comparing different protocols are lacking yet. Thus, our objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of abiraterone acetate (AA)+ADT versus D+ADT in mHSPC.

Methods

In a retrospective multicenter analysis including males with mHSPC treated with either of the aforementioned protocols, overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival 1 (PFS1), and progression‐free survival 2 (PFS2) were assessed for both cohorts. Median time to event was tested by Kaplan–Meier method and log‐rank test. The Cox‐proportional hazards model was used for univariate and multivariate regression analyses.

Results

Overall, 196 patients were included. The AA+ADT cohort had a longer PFS1 in the log‐rank testing (23 vs. 13 mos., p < 0.001), a longer PFS2 (48 vs. 33 mos., p = 0.006), and longer OS (80 vs. 61 mos., p = 0.040). In the multivariate analyses AA+ADT outperformed D+ADT in terms of PFS1 (HR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.183–0.623; p = 0.001) and PFS2 (HR = 0.33 95% CI = 0.128–0.827; p = 0.018), respectively, while OS and toxicity rate were similar between both groups.

Conclusions

AA+ADT is mainly associated with a similar efficacy and overall toxicity rate as D+ADT. Further prospective research is required for validation of the clinical value of the observed benefit of AA+ADT for progression‐free end‐points.

Barriers and facilitators of germline genetic evaluation for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Genetic counseling and germline testing have an increasingly important role for patients with prostate cancer (PCa); however, recent data suggests they are underutilized. Our objective was to perform a qualitative study of the barriers and facilitators of germline genetic evaluation among physicians who manage PCa.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and urologists from different U.S. practice settings until thematic saturation was achieved at n = 14. The interview guide was based on the Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases Framework to identify key determinants of practice. Interview transcripts were independently coded by ≥2 investigators using a constant comparative method.

RESULTS

The decision to perform or refer for germline genetic evaluation is affected by factors at multiple levels. Although patient factors sometimes play a role, the dominant themes in the decision to conduct germline genetic evaluation were at the physician and organizational level. Physician knowledge, coordination of care, perceptions of the guidelines, and concerns about cost were most frequently discussed as the main factors affecting utilization of germline genetic evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

There are currently numerous barriers to implementation of germline genetic evaluation for PCa. Efforts to expand physician education, to develop tools to enhance genetics in practice, and to facilitate coordination of care surrounding genetic evaluation are important to promote guideline-concordant care.

Circulating androgen receptor gene amplification and resistance to 177Lu-PSMA-617 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results of a Phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

In a Phase 2 clinical trial, we aimed to determine the lutetium-177 [¹⁷⁷Lu]-PSMA-617 activity and the clinical utility of levels of plasma androgen receptor (AR) gene in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

METHODS

We determined AR copy number in pretreatment plasma samples. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) in order to evaluate the independent relevance of AR status and to evaluate patients with early progressive disease (PD) defined as treatment interruption occurring within 4 months after the start of ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617.

RESULTS

Twelve of the 15 (80%) with AR gene gain and 5 of the 25 (20%) patients with no gain of AR had early PD (p = 0.0002). The OR for patients without PSA response having AR gain was 3.69 (95% CI 0.83-16.36, p = 0.085). The OR for patients with early PD having AR gain was 16.00, (95% CI 3.23-79.27, p = 0.0007). Overall, median PFS and OS were 7.5 and 12.4 months, respectively. AR-gained had a significant shorter OS compared to AR-normal patients (7.4 vs 19.1 months, p = 0.020). No treatment interruptions due to adverse effects were reported.

DISCUSSION

Plasma AR status helped to indicate mCRPC with early resistance to ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03454750.

Mutations in TP53 or DNA damage repair genes define poor prognostic subgroups in primary prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Mutations in DNA damage repair genes, in particular genes involved in homology-directed repair, define a subgroup of men with prostate cancer with a more unfavorable prognosis but a therapeutic vulnerability to PARP inhibition. In current practice, mutational testing of prostate cancer patients is commonly done late i.e., when the tumor is castration resistant. In addition, most sequencing panels do not include TP53, one of the most crucial tumor suppressor genes in human cancer. In this proof-of-concept study, we sought to extend the clinical use of these molecular markers by exploring the early prognostic impact of mutations in TP53 and DNA damage repair genes in men with primary, nonmetastatic prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy (RPX).

METHODS

Tumor specimens from a cohort of 68 RPX patients with intermediate (n = 11, 16.2%) or high-risk (n = 57, 83.8%) disease were analyzed by targeted next generation sequencing using a 37 DNA damage repair and checkpoint gene panel including TP53. Sequencing results were correlated to clinicopathologic variables as well as PSA persistence or time to PSA failure. In addition, the distribution of TP53 and DNA damage repair gene mutations was analyzed in three large publicly available datasets (TCGA, MSKCC and SU2C).

RESULTS

Of 68 primary prostate cancers analyzed, 23 (33.8%) were found to harbor a mutation in either TP53 (n = 12, 17.6%) or a DNA damage repair gene (n = 11, 16.2%). The vast majority of these mutations (22 of 23, 95.7%) were detected in primary tumors from patients with high-risk features. These mutations were mutually exclusive in our cohort and additional data mining suggests an enrichment of DNA damage repair gene mutations in TP53 wild-type tumors. Mutations in either TP53 or a DNA damage repair gene were associated with a significantly worse prognosis after RPX. Importantly, the presence of TP53/DNA damage repair gene mutations was an independent risk factor for PSA failure or PSA persistence in multivariate Cox regression models.

CONCLUSION

TP53 or DNA damage repair gene mutations are frequently detected in primary prostate cancer with high-risk features and define a subgroup of patients with an increased risk for PSA failure or persistence after RPX. The significant adverse impact of these alterations on patient prognosis may be exploited to identify men with prostate cancer who may benefit from a more intensified treatment.

Differential Activity of PARP Inhibitors in BRCA1- Versus BRCA2-Altered Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

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.

A computational and structural analysis of germline and somatic variants affecting the DDR mechanism, and their impact on human diseases

DNA-Damage Response (DDR) proteins are crucial for maintaining the integrity of the genome by identifying and repairing errors in DNA. Variants affecting their function can have severe consequences since failure to repair damaged DNA can result in cells turning cancerous. Here, we compare germline and somatic variants in DDR genes, specifically looking at their locations in the corresponding three-dimensional (3D) structures, Pfam domains, and protein–protein interaction interfaces. We show that somatic variants in metastatic cases are more likely to be found in Pfam domains and protein interaction interfaces than are pathogenic germline variants or variants of unknown significance (VUS). We also show that there are hotspots in the structures of ATM and BRCA2 proteins where pathogenic germline, and recurrent somatic variants from primary and metastatic tumours, cluster together in 3D. Moreover, in the ATM, BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes from prostate cancer patients, the distributions of germline benign, pathogenic, VUS, and recurrent somatic variants differ across Pfam domains. Together, these results provide a better characterisation of the most recurrent affected regions in DDRs and could help in the understanding of individual susceptibility to tumour development.

Basic Science and Molecular Genetics of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness

Androgen receptor function, tumor cell plasticity, loss of tumor suppressors, and defects in DNA repair genes affect aggressive features of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer development, progression, and aggressive behavior are often attributable to function of the androgen receptor. Tumor cell plasticity, neuroendocrine features, and loss of tumor suppressors lend aggressive behavior to prostate cancer cells. DNA repair defects have ramifications for prostate cancer cell behavior.

In Vivo Assessment of Metastatic Cell Potential in Prostate Cancer

Metastasis is the main cause of death for cancer patients, but our ability to improve clinical outcome first requires a better understanding of the dynamics, cellular mechanisms, and kinetics of metastasis. In prostate cancer (PCa), metastatic tumor cells preferentially colonize to bone. However, a lack of applicable mouse models has limited our ability to study this process accurately. Here, we describe a strategy to bypass this limitation: human PCa cells are injected into immunodeficient mice (at tibia, the left ventricle of heart and the iliac artery). Using this novel technique, the metastatic capabilities of these human PCa cells (e.g., colonization and proliferation potential) can be analyzed in bone with an in vivo imaging system.

Genetic Contribution to Metastatic Prostate Cancer

Recent studies show that the prevalence of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (also known as mutations) in DNA repair genes in metastatic prostate cancer is higher than previously recognized and higher than in unaffected men. Specific gene dysfunction is important in prostate cancer initiation and/or evolution to metastases. This article reviews key literature on individual genes, recognizing BRCA2 as the gene most commonly altered in the metastatic setting. This article discusses the importance of representative and diverse inclusion, and efforts to advance management for at-risk carrier populations to maximize clinical benefit.

Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer Prognosis: Implications for Active Surveillance

Available evidence supports routine implementation of germline genetic testing for many aspects of prostate cancer (PCa) decision making. The purpose of obtaining genetic testing for newly diagnosed men would be focused on identifying mutations that predispose to aggressive PCa. Based on an evidence-based review, the authors review germline rare pathogenic mutations in several genes that are significantly associated with aggressiveness, metastases, and mortality. Then recent studies of these germline mutations in predicting tumor grade reclassification among patients undergoing active surveillance are discussed. Single nucleotide polymorphisms-based polygenic risk scores in differentiating PCa aggressiveness and prognosis are reviewed.

Genetically Informed Prostate Cancer Treatment for Metastatic Disease

Germline testing should be performed to support treatment selection for patients with metastatic prostate cancer, and should be identified in patients with high-risk localized disease. Patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations should be educated regarding additional personal cancer risk, and risk for family members. Guidelines recommend that all men with metastatic prostate cancer should also undergo somatic tissue and germline testing for priority genes BRCA1/2, PALB2, ATM, and MSH2/6. The advent of high throughput sequencing enables patients to be tested for a more comprehensive panel of germline and somatic mutations.

Recent Development and Future Prospects of Molecular Targeted Therapy in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PC) is a rapidly increasing ailment worldwide. The previous decade has observed a rapid advancement in PC therapies that was evident from the number of FDA approvals during this phase. Androgen deprivation therapies (ADT) have traditionally remained a mainstay for the management of PCs, but the past decade has experienced the emergence of newer classes of drugs that can be used with or without the administration of ADT. FDA approved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), such as olaparib and rucaparib, after successful clinical trials against gene-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Furthermore, drugs like apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide with an androgen-targeted mechanism of action have manifested superior results in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), respectively, with or without previously administered docetaxel. Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, and a combination of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone were also approved by FDA after a successful trial in advanced PC and mCRPC, respectively. This review aims to analyze the FDA-approved agents in PC during the last decade and provide a summary of their clinical trials. It also presents an overview of the ongoing progress of prospective molecules still under trial.

Plasma androgen receptor and response to adapted and standard docetaxel regimen in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A multicenter biomarker study

BACKGROUND

Plasma AR status has been identified as a potential biomarker of response in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receiving docetaxel or AR-targeted therapies. However, the relevance of plasma AR in the overall management of CRPC patients receiving different docetaxel doses is unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a multi-institution study of associations between baseline plasma AR copy number status, assessed by droplet digital PCR, and outcome in 325 mCRPC patients receiving docetaxel at standard or adapted regimen at the discretion of the treating physician. Upon analysis, patients were assigned randomly to either a training (n = 217) or validation (n = 108) cohort.

RESULTS

In the training cohort, AR-gained patients treated with adapted docetaxel regimen had a significantly worse median progression-free survival (PFS) (3.8 vs 6.3 months, hazard ratio [HR] 2.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-4.95, p < 0.0001), median overall survival (10.8 vs 20.6 months, HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.09-3.62, p = 0.0064) and PSA response (PSA > -50%: odds ratio 4.88 95%CI 1.55-14.32, p = 0.013) as compared to plasma AR normal patients. These findings were all confirmed in the validation cohort. However, in patients treated with standard docetaxel regimen, these differences were not seen. The interaction between AR CN status and dose reduction of docetaxel was considered as independent factor for PFS in both the training and validation cohort (HR 2.84, 95% CI 1.41-5.73, p = 0.003, and HR 4.79, 95% CI 1.79-12.82, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Despite the retrospective non-randomised design of this study, our hypothesis-generating findings could suggest plasma AR as a potential biomarker for optimal docetaxel timing and dose in mCRPC patients. Prospective trials are warranted.

Clinical implications of genomic alterations in metastatic prostate cancer

There has been a rapid expansion in treatment options for the management of metastatic prostate cancer, but individual patient outcomes can be variable due to inter-patient tumor heterogeneity. Fortunately, the disease can be stratified on the basis of common somatic features, providing potential for the development of clinically useful prognostic and predictive biomarkers. Tissue biopsy programs and studies leveraging circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) have revealed specific genomic alterations that are associated with aggressive disease biology. In this review, we discuss the potential for genomic subtyping to improve prognostication and to help guide treatment selection. We summarize data on associations between AR pathway alterations and patient response to AR signaling inhibitors and other standards of care. We describe the links between detection of different types of DNA damage repair defects and clinical outcomes with targeted therapies such as poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors. PI3K signaling pathway inhibitors are also in advanced clinical development and we report upon the potential for these and other novel targeted therapies to have impact in specific molecular subsets of metastatic prostate cancer. Finally, we discuss the growing use of blood-based analytes for prognostic and predictive biomarker development, and summarize ongoing prospective biomarker-driven clinical trials.

Genomic Analysis of Circulating Tumor DNA in 3,334 Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer Identifies Targetable BRCA Alterations and AR Resistance Mechanisms

PURPOSE

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is of increasing value for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). mCRPC tends to metastasize to bone, making tissue biopsies challenging to obtain. We hypothesized CGP of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) could offer a minimally invasive alternative to detect targetable genomic alterations (GA) that inform clinical care.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Using plasma from 3,334 patients with mCRPC (including 1,674 screening samples from TRITON2/3), we evaluated the landscape of GAs detected in ctDNA and assessed concordance with tissue-based CGP.

RESULTS

A total of 3,129 patients (94%) had detectable ctDNA with a median ctDNA fraction of 7.5%; BRCA1/2 was mutated in 295 (8.8%). In concordance analysis, 72 of 837 patients had BRCA1/2 mutations detected in tissue, 67 (93%) of which were also identified using ctDNA, including 100% of predicted germline variants. ctDNA harbored some BRCA1/2 alterations not identified by tissue testing, and ctDNA was enriched in therapy resistance alterations, as well as possible clonal hematopoiesis mutations (e.g., in ATM and CHEK2). Potential androgen receptor resistance alterations were detected in 940 of 2,213 patients (42%), including amplifications, polyclonal and compound mutations, rearrangements, and novel deletions in exon 8.

CONCLUSIONS

Genomic analysis of ctDNA from patients with mCRPC recapitulates the genomic landscape detected in tissue biopsies, with a high level of agreement in detection of BRCA1/2 mutations, but more acquired resistance alterations detected in ctDNA. CGP of ctDNA is a compelling clinical complement to tissue CGP, with reflex to tissue CGP if negative for actionable variants.See related commentary by Hawkey and Armstrong, p. 2961.

The 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) White Paper on Contemporary Grading of Prostate Cancer

CONTEXT.—

Controversies and uncertainty persist in prostate cancer grading.

OBJECTIVE.—

To update grading recommendations.

DATA SOURCES.—

Critical review of the literature along with pathology and clinician surveys.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Percent Gleason pattern 4 (%GP4) is as follows: (1) report %GP4 in needle biopsy with Grade Groups (GrGp) 2 and 3, and in needle biopsy on other parts (jars) of lower grade in cases with at least 1 part showing Gleason score (GS) 4 + 4 = 8; and (2) report %GP4: less than 5% or less than 10% and 10% increments thereafter. Tertiary grade patterns are as follows: (1) replace "tertiary grade pattern" in radical prostatectomy (RP) with "minor tertiary pattern 5 (TP5)," and only use in RP with GrGp 2 or 3 with less than 5% Gleason pattern 5; and (2) minor TP5 is noted along with the GS, with the GrGp based on the GS. Global score and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies are as follows: (1) when multiple undesignated cores are taken from a single MRI-targeted lesion, an overall grade for that lesion is given as if all the involved cores were one long core; and (2) if providing a global score, when different scores are found in the standard and the MRI-targeted biopsy, give a single global score (factoring both the systematic standard and the MRI-targeted positive cores). Grade Groups are as follows: (1) Grade Groups (GrGp) is the terminology adopted by major world organizations; and (2) retain GS 3 + 5 = 8 in GrGp 4. Cribriform carcinoma is as follows: (1) report the presence or absence of cribriform glands in biopsy and RP with Gleason pattern 4 carcinoma. Intraductal carcinoma (IDC-P) is as follows: (1) report IDC-P in biopsy and RP; (2) use criteria based on dense cribriform glands (>50% of the gland is composed of epithelium relative to luminal spaces) and/or solid nests and/or marked pleomorphism/necrosis; (3) it is not necessary to perform basal cell immunostains on biopsy and RP to identify IDC-P if the results would not change the overall (highest) GS/GrGp part per case; (4) do not include IDC-P in determining the final GS/GrGp on biopsy and/or RP; and (5) "atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP)" is preferred for an intraductal proliferation of prostatic secretory cells which shows a greater degree of architectural complexity and/or cytological atypia than typical high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, yet falling short of the strict diagnostic threshold for IDC-P. Molecular testing is as follows: (1) Ki67 is not ready for routine clinical use; (2) additional studies of active surveillance cohorts are needed to establish the utility of PTEN in this setting; and (3) dedicated studies of RNA-based assays in active surveillance populations are needed to substantiate the utility of these expensive tests in this setting. Artificial intelligence and novel grading schema are as follows: (1) incorporating reactive stromal grade, percent GP4, minor tertiary GP5, and cribriform/intraductal carcinoma are not ready for adoption in current practice.

Unravelling the molecular mechanisms of prostate cancer evolution from genotype to phenotype

Prostate cancer (PC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men in the Western society. Unfortunately, although the vast majority of patients are initially responsive to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), most cases eventually develop from hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). The main reason is PC heterogeneity and evolution during therapy. PC evolution is a continuously progressive process with combination of genomic alterations including canonical AR, TMPRSS2-ERG fusion, SPOP/FOXA1, TP53/RB1/PTEN, BRCA2. Meanwhile, signaling pathways including PI3K, WNT/β-catenin, SRC, IL-6/STAT3 are activated, to promote epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT), cancer stem cell (CSC)-like features/stemness and neuroendocrine differentiation (NED) of PC. These improve our understanding of the genotype-phenotype relationships. The identification of canonical genetic alterations and signaling pathway activation in PC has shed more insight into genetic background, molecular subtype and disease landscape of PC evolution, resulting in a more flexible role of individual therapies targeting diverse genotype and phenotype presentation.

BRCA Germline Mutations in Prostate Cancer: The Future Is Tailored

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common neoplasm in men and the fifth leading cause of death worldwide [...].

Use of Circulating Tumor DNA for the Clinical Management of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter, Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe the aberrations of DNA damage repair genes and other important driving genes in Chinese patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) using circulating tumor (ctDNA) sequencing and to evaluate the associations between the clinical outcomes of multiple therapies and key genomic alterations in mCRPC, especially DNA damage repair genes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 292 Chinese patients with mCRPC enrolled from 8 centers. Multigene targeted sequencing was performed on 306 ctDNA samples and 23 matched tumor biopsies. The frequency of genomic alterations were compared with the Stand Up to Cancer-Prostate Cancer Foundation (SU2C-PCF) cohort. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) following standard systemic treatments for mCRPC. Cox regression analyses were performed to determine prognostic factors associated with PFS resulting from treatments for mCRPC.

RESULTS

In total, 33 of 36 (91.7%) mutations were found consistently between ctDNA and paired biopsy samples. The most common recurrent genomic alterations were found in AR (34.6%), TP53 (19.5%), CDK12 (15.4%), BRCA2 (13%), and RB1 (5.8%). The frequency of CDK12 alterations (15.4%) in our cohort was significantly higher than that in Western populations (5%-7%). AR amplification and TP53 and/or RB1 alterations were associated with resistance to abiraterone or docetaxel. Patients with a CDK12 defect showed rapid disease progression after abiraterone treatment. However, the clinical outcome after docetaxel treatment was similar between patients with and without CDK12 defects. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, a CDK12 defect was significantly associated with inferior PFS after abiraterone treatment. Patients with a BRCA2 defect showed marked response to both PARP inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study explored the genomic landscape of Chinese patients with mCRPC at different treatment stages using minimally invasive methods and evaluated the clinical implications of the driver genomic alterations on patients' response to the most widely used therapies for mCRPC. We observed a significantly higher alteration frequency of CDK12 in our cohort compared with the SU2C-PCF cohort.