Evaluation of potential surrogate endpoints for prediction of overall survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: trial-level meta-analysis

The current landscape of stereotactic body radiation therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The onset of castration-resistance is associated with dismal outcomes in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Metastasis directed therapy has been investigated in multiple disease settings and may improve outcomes in selected patients. Our systematic review aims to summarize evidence with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

METHODS

The literature search was performed on March 2024, on Pubmed, using the keywords "SBRT" AND "CRPC", and "stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)" AND "CRPC". This search retrieved a total of 108 articles, 19 were included.

RESULTS

The literature is largely dominated by retrospective series. In men with metachronous oligoprogression, SBRT with androgen receptor pathway inhibitor significantly increased progression-free survival (PFS) including biochemical progression-free survival in a randomized phase II trial (hazard ratio of 0.35, p < 0.001). In patients continuing ADT, the bPFS ranged between 9.5 months to 17.9 months, and next systemic treatment-free survival (NEST-FS) reached up to 2 years. In men with induced oligoprogression, SBRT enabled NEST-FS up to 3 years. SBRT was well tolerated, with less than 5% grade 3 toxicity reported across studies.

CONCLUSION

In the population of patients with oligometastatic CRPC, SBRT enables long-term biochemical response and PFS. In the oligoprogressive setting, SBRT could be integrated to prolong the duration and efficacy of systemic therapies. Nevertheless, the level of evidence remains very low and inclusion within prospective trials remain the preferred option for this population of patients.

Comparative effectiveness of multiple androgen receptor signaling inhibitor medicines with androgen deprivation therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a study in the real world

Background

The current treatment strategy for metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (mHSPC) is the combination of Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibitors (ARSIs) medicines with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, there is a lack of real-world data comparing the efficacy of different ARSI pharmaceuticals. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of bicalutamide, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide in combination with ADT for patients with mHSPC.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 82 patients diagnosed with mHSPC, including 18 patients treated with abiraterone acetate with prednisone, 21 patients with enzalutamide, 20 patients with apalutamide, and 23 patients with bicalutamide. We evaluated PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), imaging progression-free survival (r PFS), castration resistance progression-free survival (CRPC-PFS), and overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Additionally, we explored relevant factors affecting prognosis through univariate and multivariate Cox risk-proportionality models. PSA response rates at 3, 6, and 12 months, nadir PSA levels (nPSA), and time to nadir (TTN) in different medication subgroups after treatment were documented, and we used one-way ANOVA to determine the effect of these measures on patient prognosis.

Results

In comparison with bicalutamide, both enzalutamide and apalutamide have shown significant advantages in delaying disease progression among mHSPC patients. Specifically, enzalutamide has been found to significantly prolong PSA-PFS (HR 2.244; 95% CI 1.366-3.685, p=0.001), rPFS (HR 2.539; 95% CI 1.181-5.461; p= 0.007), CRPC-PFS (HR 2.131; 95% CI 1.295-3.506; p= 0.003), and OS (HR 2.06; 95% CI 1.183-3.585; P=0.005). Similarly, apalutamide has significantly extended PSA-PFS (HR 5.071; 95% CI 1.711-15.032; P= 0.003) and CRPC-PFS (HR 6.724; 95% CI 1.976-22.878; P=0.002) among patients. On the other hand, the use of abiraterone in combination with ADT did not demonstrate a significant advantage in delaying diseases progression when compared with the other three agents in mHSPC patients. There were no significant differences in overall adverse event rates among the four pharmaceuticals in terms of safety. Additionally, the observation of PSA kinetics revealed that enzalutamide, apalutamide, and abiraterone acetate had a significant advantage in achieving deep PSA response (PSA ≤ 0.2 ng/ml) compared with bicalutamide (p=0.007 at 12 months). Enzalutamide and apalutamide exhibited preeminence efficacy, with no substantial difference observed between the two medications.

Conclusions

Abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide were found to significantly reduce and stabilize PSA levels in mHSPC patients more quickly and thoroughly than bicalutamide. Furthermore, enzalutamide and apalutamide were found to significantly prolong survival and delay disease progression in mHSPC patients compared with bicalutamide. It should be noted that abiraterone did not demonstrate a significant advantage in delaying disease compared with enzalutamide and apalutamide. After conducting drug toxicity analyses, it was determined that there were no significant differences among the four drugs.

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.

Longitudinal model-based meta-analysis for survival probabilities in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The aims of this longitudinal model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) were to indirectly compare the time courses of survival probabilities and to identify corresponding potential significant covariates across approved drugs in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

METHODS

A systematic literature review for monotherapy studies in patients with CRPC was conducted up to August 8, 2018. The time courses of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were fitted with parametric survival models. Covariate analyses were performed to determine the impact of treatment drugs, dosing regimens, and patient characteristics on the survival probabilities. Simulations were carried out to quantify the magnitude of covariate effects.

RESULTS

A total of 146 studies including clinical trials and real-world data on longitudinal survival probabilities in 20,712 patients with CRPC were included in our meta-database. The time courses of PFS and OS probabilities were best described by the log-logistic model. There was no significant difference in median OS and PFS between docetaxel, cabazitaxel, abiraterone acetate, and enzalutamide. There was no significant dose-response relationship in PFS or OS for docetaxel at 50 to 120 mg/m² every 3 weeks (Q3W) and cabazitaxel at 20 to 25 mg/m² Q3W. Model-based simulations indicated that PFS probability was associated with chemotherapy, Gleason score, and baseline prostate-specific antigen (BLPSA), while OS probability was associated with chemotherapy, Gleason score, visceral metastasis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and BLPSA.

CONCLUSION

Our modeling and simulation framework can be applied to support indirect comparison, dose selection, and go/no-go decision-making for new agents targeting CRPC.