Population PK and Semimechanistic PK/PD Modeling and Simulation of Relugolix Effects on Testosterone Suppression in Men with Prostate Cancer

A Model-Informed Drug Development Approach to Design a Phase 3 Trial of Teverelix Drug Product in Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients with Increased Cardiovascular Risk

Teverelix drug product (DP) is a parenteral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist that has been successfully tested in phase 2 trials for hormone-sensitive advanced prostate cancer (APC) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In previous APC trials, teverelix DP was administered as intramuscular (IM) and subcutaneous (SC) injections, using a loading dose and (in a single trial) a maintenance dose. Our objective was to derive an optimal dosing regimen for phase 3 clinical development, using a pharmacometrics modeling approach. Data from 9 phase 2 studies (229 patients) was utilized to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model that described the concentration profile accommodating both IM and SC routes of administration. A 2-compartment model with sequential first-order absorption (slow and fast) and lag times best described the PK profiles of teverelix following SC and IM administration. An indirect response model with inhibition of production rate was fit to describe testosterone (T) concentrations based on physiological relevance. The final population PK-pharmacodynamic model was used to conduct simulations of various candidate dosing regimens to select the optimal dosing regimen to achieve clinical castration (T < 0.5 ng/mL by day 28) and to sustain clinical castration for 26 weeks. Model simulation showed that a loading dose of 360 mg SC and 180 mg IM with a maintenance dose of 360 mg SC 6-weekly (Q6W) starting at day 28 can achieve a ≥95% castration rate up to 52 weeks. This dose regimen was selected for phase 3 clinical development, which includes cardiovascular safety assessment in comparison to a GnRH agonist.

Is Higher Docetaxel Clearance in Prostate Cancer Patients Explained by Higher CYP3A? An In Vivo Phenotyping Study with Midazolam

Patients with prostate cancer (PCa) have a lower docetaxel exposure for both intravenous (1.8-fold) and oral administration (2.4-fold) than patients with other solid cancers, which could influence efficacy and toxicity. An altered metabolism by cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) due to castration status might explain the observed difference in docetaxel pharmacokinetics. In this in vivo phenotyping, pharmacokinetic study, CYP3A activity defined by midazolam clearance (CL) was compared between patients with PCa and male patients with other solid tumors. All patients with solid tumors who did not use CYP3A-modulating drugs were eligible for participation. Patients received 2 mg midazolam orally and 1 mg midazolam intravenously on 2 consecutive days. Plasma concentrations were measured with a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. Genotyping was performed for CYP3A4 and CYP3A5. Nine patients were included in each group. Oral midazolam CL was 1.26-fold higher in patients with PCa compared to patients with other solid tumors (geometric mean [coefficient of variation], 94.1 [33.5%] L/h vs 74.4 [39.1%] L/h, respectively; P = .08). Intravenous midazolam CL did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (P = .93). Moreover, the metabolic ratio of midazolam to 1'-hydroxy midazolam did not differ between the 2 groups for both oral administration (P = .67) and intravenous administration (P = .26). CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 genotypes did not influence midazolam pharmacokinetics. The observed difference in docetaxel pharmacokinetics between both patient groups therefore appears to be explained neither by a difference in midazolam CL nor by a difference in metabolic conversion rate of midazolam.

Early biochemical outcomes following neoadjuvant/adjuvant relugolix with stereotactic body radiation therapy for intermediate to high risk prostate cancer

Introduction

Injectable GnRH receptor agonists have been shown to improve cancer control when combined with radiotherapy. Prostate SBRT offers an abbreviated treatment course with comparable efficacy to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Relugolix is a new oral GnRH receptor antagonist which achieves rapid, sustained testosterone suppression. This prospective study sought to evaluate early testosterone suppression and PSA response following relugolix and SBRT for intermediate to high prostate cancer.

Methods

Relugolix was initiated at least 2 months prior to SBRT. Interventions to improve adherence were not utilized. PSA and total testosterone levels were obtained prior to and 1-4 months post SBRT. Profound castration was defined as serum testosterone ≤ 20 ng/dL. Early PSA nadir was defined as the lowest PSA value within 4 months of completion of SBRT. Per prior trials, we examined the percentage of patients who achieved PSA level of ≤ 0.5 ng/mL and ≤ 0.2 ng/mL during the first 4 months post SBRT.

Results

Between July 2021 and January 2023, 52 men were treated at Georgetown with relugolix (4-6 months) and SBRT (36.25-40 Gy in 5 fractions) per an institutional protocol (IRB 12-1775). Median age was 71 years. 26.9% of patients were African American and 28.8% were obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). The median pretreatment PSA was 9.1 ng/ml. 67% of patients were ≥ Grade Group 3. 44 patients were intermediate- and 8 were high-risk. Patients initiated relugolix at a median of 3.6 months prior to SBRT with a median duration of 6.2 total months. 92.3% of patients achieved profound castration during relugolix treatment. Poor drug adherence was observed in 2 patients. A third patient chose to discontinue relugolix due to side effects. By post-SBRT month 4, 87.2% and 74.4% of patients achieved PSA levels ≤ 0.5 ng/ml and ≤ 0.2 ng/ml, respectively.

Discussion

Relugolix combined with SBRT allows for high rates of profound castration with low early PSA nadirs. We observed a 96% testosterone suppresion rate without the utilization of scheduled cues/reminders. This finding supports the notion that patients with localized prostate cancer can consistently and successfully follow an oral ADT protocol without daily reminders. Given relugolix's potential benefits over injectable GnRH receptor agonists, its usage may be preferred in specific patient populations (fear of needles, prior cardiovascular events). Future studies should focus on boundaries to adherence in specific underserved populations.

Profile of Relugolix in the Management of Advanced Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Design, Development, and Place in Therapy

Androgen deprivation therapy, primarily via a gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor agonist or antagonist together with or without an androgen receptor antagonist, remains the mainstay of medical treatment for advanced prostate cancer. Meanwhile, relugolix has been developed as the first orally active, non-peptide, selective antagonist for the gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor. Previous randomized studies involving patients with prostate cancer have demonstrated comparable efficacy in androgen suppression between relugolix vs other gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists or agonists. This review summarizes available data on the design and development of relugolix and its therapeutic application, and discusses if relugolix represents a promising oral alternative to injectable androgen deprivation therapy. Based on current published evidence, further investigation is likely required to determine the actual clinical benefits of relugolix therapy against prostate cancer.

Relugolix: A Review in Advanced Prostate Cancer

Relugolix (Orgovyx^®), an orally active nonpeptide gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist that provides rapid testosterone suppression, is indicated in the USA for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer and in the EU for advanced hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. In the pivotal phase III HERO trial in men with advanced prostate cancer, once-daily oral relugolix (with a loading dose on day 1) led to a sustained castration rate over 48 weeks of treatment of > 90%, a rate that was non-inferior to that provided by intramuscular leuprolide depot every 3 months (with an exploratory analysis further indicating the superiority of relugolix over leuprolide). Relugolix was generally well tolerated, having an adverse event profile that is consistent with testosterone suppression. Furthermore, there is evidence that relugolix may be associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiac events compared with leuprolide. With the ability to provide the rapid testosterone suppression (with no initial surge in testosterone upon treatment initiation) combined with the benefits of oral administration and potentially improved cardiac safety, relugolix presents a valuable treatment option for men with advanced prostate cancer where androgen deprivation therapy is indicated.