Prevalence of Measurable Disease in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer

Fracture risk assessment and clinical decision making for patients with metastatic bone disease

Metastatic breast, prostate, lung, and other cancers often affect bone, causing pain, increasing fracture risk, and decreasing function. Management of metastatic bone disease (MBD) is clinically challenging when there is potential but uncertain risk of pathological fracture. Management of MBD has become a major focus within orthopedic oncology with respect to fracture and impending fracture care. If impending skeletal-related events (SREs), particularly pathologic fracture, could be predicted, increasing evidence suggests that prophylactic surgical treatment improves patient outcomes. However, current fracture risk assessment and radiographic metrics do not have high accuracy and have not been combined with relevant patient survival tools. This review first explores the prevalence, incidence, and morbidity of MBD and associated SREs for different cancer types. Strengths and limitations of current fracture risk scoring systems for spinal stability and long bone fracture are highlighted. More recent computed tomography (CT)-based structural rigidity analysis (CTRA) and finite element (FE) analysis methods offer advantages of increased specificity (true negative rate), but are limited in availability. Other fracture prediction approaches including parametric response mapping and positron emission tomography/computed tomography measures show early promise. Substantial new information to inform clinical decision-making includes measures of survival, clinical benefits, and economic analysis of prophylactic treatment compared to after-fracture stabilization. Areas of future research include use of big data and machine learning to predict SREs, greater access and refinement of CTRA/FE approaches, combination of clinical survival prediction tools with radiographically based fracture risk assessment, and net benefit analysis for fracture risk assessment and prophylactic treatment.

Can RECIST response predict success in phase 3 trials in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND

Intermediate endpoints are needed in early phase studies of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) that can reliably predict success in phase 3 trials. Among men with measurable disease, objective response may provide information as to whether a treatment is likely to be successful.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of systemic agents that have proceeded to phase 3 trials in men with mCRPC and examined the relationship between improvements in measurable disease response in phase 2 trials and successful phase 3 trials leading to regulatory approval. Only trials that included men with radiographically measurable disease were included.

RESULTS

We examined 31 eligible mCRPC phase 3 trials between 1992 and 2017 and 29 of the preceding phase 2 trials for RECIST responses. Measurable tumor responses in phase 2 trials were higher for successful therapies in phase 3 trials in chemotherapy-naive men with mCRPC, but were less correlated with success in trials investigating docetaxel combination regimens or the post chemotherapy mCRPC setting. Many failed agents did not produce higher than expected response rates over control arms; however, several agents such as anti-angiogenic therapies or orteronel produced higher than expected responses without survival benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Objective responses in men with mCRPC may be associated with prolonged survival, but this association is mechanism dependent and inconsistent across trials or disease states. These data support considering RECIST response as a supportive but not sole endpoint in phase 2 trials to support launching phase 3 trials.

Validation of the Association of RECIST Changes With Survival in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated on SWOG Study S0421

BACKGROUND

Phase 2 trials evaluating new agents for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have relied on bone scan and prostate-specific antigen changes to assess activity. Given the increasing detection of measurable disease, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) changes warrant consideration to evaluate activity. We validated the association of RECIST 1.0 changes with survival in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data for men with measurable disease from the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0421, a phase 3 trial in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel and prednisone plus placebo or atrasentan, were used. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association of RECIST 1.0 outcomes within 120 days, ie, unconfirmed partial response (uPR), stable disease, and progressive disease (PD), with overall survival (OS) from day 120, adjusted for prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 326 men were evaluable for landmark analysis, of whom 23 had PD, 230 stable disease, and 73 uPR. OS beyond day 120 was significantly different (P = .004) among these subgroups, with median (95% confidence interval) OS of 7.1 (3.5-8.8), 13.4 (11.4-15.6), and 16.3 (10.0-19.6) months for those with PD, stable disease, and uPR, respectively. In a multivariable model, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for patients with PD was 2.47 (1.42-4.29) compared to patients with an uPR (P = .002).

CONCLUSION

The association of RECIST 1.0 changes with OS in men with mCRPC receiving docetaxel was validated. Given limitations of bone scan and prostate-specific antigen alterations, improvements in objective RECIST 1.0 changes should be reported in phase 2 trials before launching phase 3 trials.