Effect of abiraterone acetate treatment on the quality of life of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after failure of docetaxel chemotherapy

Optimizing assessments of quality of life in contemporary prostate cancer clinical trials

This editorial reviews the associations between quality of life (QOL) and prognosis in cancer clinical trials, and considers whether they may be different in the era of radioligand therapy. It also outlines novel approaches to QOL analysis that may enhance our ability to use patient‐reported outcomes in treatment decisions more effectively in the future.

Contemporary Systemic Therapy Intensification for Prostate Cancer: A Review for General Practitioners in Oncology

Prostate cancer accounts for a significant proportion of cancer diagnoses in Canadian men. Over the past decade, the therapeutic landscape for the management of metastatic prostate cancer has undergone rapid changes. Novel strategies use hormonal agents, chemotherapy, homologous recombination repair inhibitors, and radioligand therapy or combination strategies in addition to androgen deprivation therapy. In this review, we summarize the available data addressing key therapeutic areas along the disease continuum and focus on practical aspects for general practitioners in oncology managing patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Cardiovascular Complications in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Potential Molecular Connections

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and complications are often seen in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and affect their clinical management. Despite acceptable safety profiles and patient compliance, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), the mainstay of PCa treatment and chemotherapy, has increased cardiovascular risks and metabolic syndromes in patients. A growing body of evidence also suggests that patients with pre-existing cardiovascular conditions show an increased incidence of PCa and present with fatal forms of the disease. Therefore, it is possible that a molecular link exists between the two diseases, which has not yet been unraveled. This article provides insight into the connection between PCa and CVDs. In this context, we present our findings linking PCa progression with patients' cardiovascular health by performing a comprehensive gene expression study, gene set enrichment (GSEA) and biological pathway analysis using publicly available data extracted from patients with advanced metastatic PCa. We also discuss the common androgen deprivation strategies and CVDs most frequently reported in PCa patients and present evidence from various clinical trials that suggest that therapy induces CVD in PCa patients.

Quality of life outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and pretreatment prognostic score

BACKGROUND

A prognostic risk score (Halabi score) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) accurately predicts overall survival, but its association with quality of life (QOL) has not been defined. We hypothesize that a higher pretreatment Halabi score is associated with worse QOL outcomes over time in mCRPC patients.

METHODS

Patient-level data from the docetaxel plus prednisone control arm of Mainsail, a Phase 3 clinical trial in mCRPC were accessed via ProjectDataSphere. Pretreatment Halabi score included disease-related factors: metastatic site, opioid use, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS), alkaline phosphatase, albumin, hemoglobin, lactic acid dehydrogenase, and PSA, with higher score indicating worse survival. Three QOL scales were created: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P, higher score = better QOL), Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form Severity score (BPI-SFSS, higher score = higher pain severity), and BPI-SF Interference score (BPI-SFIS, higher score = greater pain interference). Mixed linear model was used to estimate the associations between Halabi score and QOL scores assessed at different time points (baseline, 2 months, and 6 months).

RESULTS

This analysis included 412 mCRPC patients (median age = 68 years, 82% white, 5% Black, median log PSA = 4.4 ng/mL). After multivariable adjustment, Halabi score was significantly associated with QOL scores at all time points. At 6 months, multivariable adjusted FACT-P decreased by 10.0 points (worsening), BPI-SFSS increased by 0.8 points (worsening), and BPI-SFIS increased by 0.9 points (worsening) for each unit increase in Halabi risk score. In multivariable analysis of individual components, ECOG-PS, site of metastasis, and opioid use were significantly associated with worse QOL scores at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients with poorer Halabi prognostic risk scores have poorer QOL and greater pain intensity and interference at baseline and during follow-up.

Real-world experience of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: long-term results of the prospective ABItude study

Background

Limited real-world data exist on the effectiveness and safety of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (abiraterone hereafter) in the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) naive to chemotherapy. Most of the few available studies had a retrospective design and included a small number of patients. In the interim analysis of the ABItude study, abiraterone showed good clinical effectiveness and safety profile in the chemotherapy-naive setting over a median follow-up of 18 months.

Patients and methods

We evaluated clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of chemotherapy-naive mCRPC patients treated with abiraterone as for clinical practice in the Italian, observational, prospective, multicentric ABItude study. mCRPC patients were enrolled at abiraterone start (February 2016-June 2017) and followed up for 3 years; clinical endpoints and PROs, including quality of life (QoL) and pain, were prospectively collected. Kaplan–Meier curves were estimated.

Results

Of the 481 patients enrolled, 454 were assessable for final study analyses. At abiraterone start, the median age was 77 years, with 58.6% elderly patients and 69% having at least one comorbidity (57.5% cardiovascular diseases). Visceral metastases were present in 8.4% of patients. Over a median follow-up of 24.8 months, median progression-free survival (any progression reported by the investigators), time to abiraterone discontinuation, and overall survival were, respectively, 17.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 14.1-19.4 months], 16.0 months (95% CI 13.1-18.2 months), and 37.3 months (95% CI 36.5 months-not estimable); 64.2% of patients achieved ≥50% reduction in prostate-specific antigen. QoL assessed by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy—Prostate, the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level, and European Quality of Life Visual Analog Scale remained stable during treatment. Median time to pain progression according to Brief Pain Inventory data was 31.1 months (95% CI 24.8 months-not estimable). Sixty-two patients (13.1%) had at least one adverse drug reaction (ADR) and 8 (1.7%) one serious ADR.

Conclusion

With longer follow-up, abiraterone therapy remains safe, well tolerated, and active in a large unselected population.

•

A prospective real-life study of abiraterone acetate in mCRPC patients.

•

In 481 chemotherapy-naive mCRPC patients (median follow-up: 25 months), abiraterone plus prednisone was effective and safe.

•

QoL, measured with various tools, remained stable during treatment with abiraterone plus prednisone.

•

The median time to pain progression was 31.1 months.

Pain and health-related quality of life with olaparib versus physician's choice of next-generation hormonal drug in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with homologous recombination repair gene alterations (PROfound): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The PROfound study showed significantly improved radiographical progression-free survival and overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with alterations in homologous recombination repair genes and disease progression on a previous next-generation hormonal drug who received olaparib then those who received control. We aimed to assess pain and patient-centric health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in patients in the trial.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and gene alterations to one of 15 genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM [cohort A] and BRIP1, BARD1, CDK12, CHEK1, CHEK2, FANCL, PALB2, PPP2R2A, RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, and RAD54L [cohort B]) and disease progression after a previous next-generation hormonal drug were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg orally twice daily) or a control drug (enzalutamide tablets [160 mg orally once daily] or abiraterone tablets [1000 mg orally once daily] plus prednisone tablets [5 mg orally twice daily]), stratified by previous taxane use and measurable disease. The primary endpoint (radiographical progression-free survival in cohort A) has been previously reported. The prespecified secondary endpoints reported here are on pain, HRQOL, symptomatic skeletal-related events, and time to first opiate use for cancer-related pain in cohort A. Pain was assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, and HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). All endpoints were analysed in patients in cohort A by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02987543.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 6, 2017, and June 4, 2019, 245 patients were enrolled in cohort A and received study treatment (162 [66%] in the olaparib group and 83 [34%] in the control group). Median duration of follow-up at data cutoff in all patients was 6·2 months (IQR 2·2-10·4) for the olaparib group and 3·5 months (1·7-4·9) for the control group. In cohort A, median time to pain progression was significantly longer with olaparib than with control (median not reached [95% CI not reached-not reached] with olaparib vs 9·92 months [5·39-not reached] with control; HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·22-0·91]; p=0·019). Pain interference scores were also better in the olaparib group (difference in overall adjusted mean change from baseline score -0·85 [95% CI -1·31 to -0·39]; pnominal=0·0004). Median time to progression of pain severity was not reached in either group (95% CI not reached-not reached for both groups; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·25-1·34]; pnominal=0·17). In patients who had not used opiates at baseline (113 in the olaparib group, 58 in the control group), median time to first opiate use for cancer-related pain was 18·0 months (95% CI 12·8-not reached) in the olaparib group versus 7·5 months (3·2-not reached) in the control group (HR 0·61; 95% CI 0·38-0·99; pnominal=0·044). The proportion of patients with clinically meaningful improvement in FACT-P total score during treatment was higher for the olaparib group than the control group: 15 (10%) of 152 evaluable patients had a response in the olaparib group compared with one (1%) of evaluable 77 patients in the control group (odds ratio 8·32 [95% CI 1·64-151·84]; pnominal=0·0065). Median time to first symptomatic skeletal-related event was not reached for either treatment group (olaparib group 95% CI not reached-not reached; control group 7·8-not reached; HR 0·37 [95% CI 0·20-0·70]; pnominal=0·0013).

INTERPRETATION

Olaparib was associated with reduced pain burden and better-preserved HRQOL compared with the two control drugs in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair gene alterations who had disease progression after a previous next-generation hormonal drug. Our findings support the clinical benefit of improved radiographical progression-free survival and overall survival identified in PROfound.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Assessment and Management of Cognitive Function in Patients with Prostate Cancer Treated with Second-Generation Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibitors

Preservation of cognitive function is an important outcome in oncology. Optimal patient management requires an understanding of cognitive effects of the disease and its treatment and an efficacious approach to assessment and management of cognitive dysfunction, including selection of treatments to minimize the risk of cognitive impairment. Awareness is increasing of the potentially detrimental effects of cancer-related cognitive dysfunction on functional independence and quality of life. Prostate cancer occurs most often in older men, who are more likely to develop cognitive dysfunction than younger individuals; this population may be particularly vulnerable to treatment-related cognitive disorders. Prompt identification of treatment-induced cognitive dysfunction is a crucial aspect of effective cancer management. We review the potential etiologies of cognitive decline in patients with prostate cancer, including the potential role of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors; commonly used tools for assessing cognitive function validated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and adopted in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer trials; and strategies for management of cognitive symptoms. Many methods are currently used to assess cognitive function. The prevalence and severity of cognitive dysfunction vary according to the instruments and criteria applied. Consensus on the definition of cognitive dysfunction and on the most appropriate approaches to quantify its extent and progression in patients treated for prostate cancer is lacking. Evidence-based guidance on the appropriate tools and time to assess cognitive function in patients with prostate cancer is required.

Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer-Current State and Future Perspectives

Simple Summary

In recent years, evidence regarding survival outcomes of novel therapies has increased significantly. However, less is known regarding the impact of novel therapy combinations on quality of life aspects of the treated patients. In the current comprehensive review, we discuss the importance of quality of life for patients with advanced prostate cancer, and present the most frequently used tools to evaluate quality of life in recent randomized trials. Further, we discuss the ease of use of these validated questionnaires for clinicians and try to focus on the suggested appropriate use as well as potential strategies for improvement of quality of life evaluation in these clinical scenarios of advanced prostate cancer.

Abstract

With the therapeutic landscape of advanced prostate cancer rapidly evolving and oncological benefits being shown for a plethora of new agents and indications, health-related quality of life (HRQOL)-associated evidence is still subpar. In the current comprehensive review, we discuss the importance of HRQOL for patients with advanced PC (metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC)), and present the most frequently used tools to evaluate HRQOL in recent randomized trials. Furthermore, we discuss the ease of use of these validated questionnaires for clinicians and try to focus on the suggested appropriate use in clinical practice, as well as potential strategies for improvement of HRQOL evaluation in these clinical scenarios of advanced prostate cancer.

The Impact of Enzalutamide on the Prostate Cancer Patient Experience: A Summary Review of Health-Related Quality of Life across Pivotal Clinical Trials

Simple Summary

Patients with prostate cancer often experience pain, fatigue and other negative symptoms that can lead to poorer quality of life. Enzalutamide is a prostate cancer therapy that is effective across the disease continuum from early-state cancer patients through to patients with metastatic castration-resistant disease. In this study, we evaluated how enzalutamide impacts patients’ quality of life. We found that patients with early disease maintained low pain levels and symptom-related burden when treated with enzalutamide or with a control treatment, and that patients with advanced disease who received enzalutamide experienced mitigated negative impacts compared to controls. Furthermore, it took longer for patients treated with enzalutamide to report experiencing a reduction in quality of life, and this was most pronounced for patients with advanced cancer. Enzalutamide can be tolerated by patients with early or advanced prostate cancer and delays both disease progression and the associated deterioration of quality of life.

Abstract

This review examines the impact of treatment with enzalutamide on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in prostate cancer patients across the disease continuum based on pivotal clinical trials. We assessed the effect of enzalutamide on pain, symptom burden and overall HRQoL from randomized controlled trials. Patient experience was evaluated in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) (pre-chemotherapy and post-chemotherapy). Patients across the disease continuum reported a generally positive status at baseline, with relatively low levels of pain and impairment due to cancer-related symptoms and high HRQoL. For patients with earlier-state prostate cancer, pain and symptom-related burden were low at study entry and remained so, regardless of whether patients received enzalutamide or control treatment. Patients with more advanced disease reported mitigation in pain and symptom burden while receiving treatment with enzalutamide. Enzalutamide was observed to slow deterioration of overall HRQoL most for patients with nmCRPC or mCRPC (statistical significance for between-group difference in median time to deterioration: mHSPC (confirmed) p = 0.2998; nmCRPC (confirmed) p = 0.0044; mCRPC (unconfirmed) p < 0.0001). Across the prostate cancer continuum, enzalutamide is well-tolerated and delays the negative impact that disease progression has on quality of life.

An analysis of health-related quality of life in the phase III PROSELICA and FIRSTANA studies assessing cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Background

Men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are living longer, therefore optimizing health-related quality of life (HRQL), as well as survival outcomes, is important for optimal patient care. The aim of this study was to assess the HRQL in patients with mCRPC receiving docetaxel or cabazitaxel.

Patients and methods

PROSELICA (NCT01308580) assessed the non-inferiority of cabazitaxel 20 mg/m² (C20) versus 25 mg/m² (C25) in patients with mCRPC after docetaxel. FIRSTANA (NCT01308567) assessed the superiority of C25 or C20 versus docetaxel 75 mg/m² (D75) in patients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC. HRQL and pain were analyzed using protocol-defined, prospectively collected, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy—Prostate (FACT-P) and McGill-Melzack questionnaires. Analyses included definitive improvements in HRQL, maintained or improved HRQL, and HRQL over time.

Results

In total, 2131 patients were evaluable for HRQL across the two studies. In PROSELICA, 38.8% and 40.5% of patients receiving C20 and C25, respectively, had definitive FACT-P total score (TS) improvements. In FIRSTANA, 43.4%, 49.7%, and 44.9% of patients receiving D75, C20, and C25, respectively, had definitive FACT-P TS improvements. In both trials, definitive improvements started after cycle 1 and were maintained for the majority of subsequent treatment cycles. More than two-thirds of patients maintained or improved their FACT-P TS.

Conclusions

In PROSELICA and FIRSTANA, >40% of the 2131 evaluable patients with mCRPC had definitive FACT-P TS improvements; improvements occurred early and were maintained. More than 75% of patients maintained or improved their FACT-P TS.

•

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are living longer.

•

Optimizing health-related quality of life (HRQL), as well as survival outcomes, is important for optimal patient care.

•

This study analyzed the HRQL data from patients treated by cabazitaxel or docetaxel within the trials PROSELICA and FIRSTANA.

•

HRQL is often maintained or improved in patients with mCRPC who receive docetaxel or cabazitaxel.

•

This is the largest prospective clinical dataset assessing HRQL among patients with mCRPC treated with taxane chemotherapy.

Cognition and depression effects of androgen receptor axis-targeted drugs in men with prostate cancer: A systematic review

CONTEXT

Novel androgen receptor axis-targeting drugs (ARATs) have been shown to improve outcomes in men with prostate cancer. Central nervous system androgen blockade may be harmful for older adults who may be at increased risk of adverse cognitive and psychologic effects.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the effect of ARATs on cognition and depression in men with metastatic prostate cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched PubMed and EMBASE for articles published in English between September 2012 and September 2019 reporting cognition and depression outcomes in men receiving ARATs for metastatic prostate cancer using validated psychometric tools. The level of evidence and risk of bias were assessed using the GRADE approach for randomized clinical trials and observational studies.

RESULTS

15 reports studying 8954 men with metastatic castration-sensitive and -resistant, or non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were identified. Data were available for abiraterone, enzalutamide and apalutamide but not darolutamide. The mean (and 95% confidence interval) and median (and min-max) of the absolute scores and changes from baseline were included, when available. There was heterogeneity in the psychometric tools used which obviated statistical pooling of results. Very limited data assessing cognition suggested that abiraterone was associated with improved cognitive functioning or perhaps less cognitive harm versus enzalutamide. Fourteen reports assessed emotional wellbeing. ARATs reduced depressive symptoms when compared to prednisone alone or placebo but not compared to bicalutamide. Abiraterone may improve short-term emotional functioning relative to enzalutamide. The quality of evidence was low when examining ARAT effect on cognitive function and moderate when examining ARAT effect on depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Depression was assessed more frequently than cognition in men receiving ARATs. Self-reported depression measures favored abiraterone over enzalutamide and both abiraterone and enzalutamide over placebo. Data evaluating apalutamide and darolutamide are lacking. Further studies of ARATs using validated clinician-based psycho-cognition tools along with self-reported measures in men with metastatic prostate cancer are needed.

Time to health-related quality of life improvement analysis was developed to enhance evaluation of modern anticancer therapies

OBJECTIVES

Major advances have recently been made in the treatments of cancer, which now also have the potential to improve patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We propose the time to HRQOL improvement (TTI) and the time to sustained HRQOL improvement (TTSI) as potentially important cancer outcomes to be used in longitudinal HRQOL analyses.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

As proof of principle, we defined TTI and TTSI, using the Fine-Gray model to include competing risks in estimates, in a case study in real life of a cohort of newly diagnosed patients with cancer receiving a targeted therapy. HRQOL was evaluated before and during therapy with six assessments over a 24-month period, using the well-validated European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30.

RESULTS

For each assessed HRQOL domain, we assessed TTI and TTSI and estimated the cumulative incidence of patients' clinically meaningful improvements, also accounting for the occurrence of competing events.

CONCLUSION

TTI and TTSI are potentially important outcomes in the era of modern anticancer therapies. The analysis of TTI and TTSI by competing risks approach will further add to the statistical methods that can be used to inform on the impact of cancer therapies on patients' HRQOL.

Promotional Payments Made to Urologists by the Pharmaceutical Industry and Prescribing Patterns for Targeted Therapies

OBJECTIVE

To measure the association between market-level promotional payments to urologists by the manufacturers of abiraterone and enzalutamide and national prescribing patterns.

METHODS

A 20% national sample of the 2015 Part D event file was used to identify patients filling their first prescription for abiraterone and enzalutamide and their prescribing physicians. The 2015 Open Payments data were used to characterize promotional payments made to physicians at the market level. Generalized linear models were then used to measure the relationship between market-level payments to urologists and the physician specialty prescribing abiraterone or enzalutamide for the first time RESULTS: In 2015, 2318 men filled a prescription for abiraterone or enzalutamide by a urologist or medical oncologist. Increasing market-level promotional payments to urologists for abiraterone or enzalutamide was strongly associated with a urologist prescribing either drug-24.3% versus 5.8% of those residing in the markets with highest and lowest level of promotional payments to urologists, respectively (P <.01). Neither the number of urologists residing in a market nor other promotional payment measures (ie, to medical oncologists for these drugs, or to all physicians for all other drugs) were associated with a urologist prescribing either drug.

CONCLUSION

Promotional payments to urologists at the market level are strongly associated with the specialty of the physician prescribing abiraterone or enzalutamide for the first time. Future work should elucidate the effects of the shift in prescribing patterns on quality of care and financial hardship for men with advanced prostate cancer.

Quality of life in patients with metastatic prostate cancer following treatment with cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide (CARD): an analysis of a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study

BACKGROUND

In the CARD study, cabazitaxel significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. Here, we report the quality-of-life outcomes from the CARD study.

METHODS

CARD was a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study involving 62 clinical sites across 13 European countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤2) with confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive voice-web response system to receive cabazitaxel (25 mg/m² intravenously every 3 weeks, 10 mg daily prednisone, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus abiraterone (1000 mg orally once daily plus 5 mg prednisone twice daily) or enzalutamide (160 mg orally daily). Stratification factors were ECOG performance status, time to disease progression on the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor, and timing of the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival; here, we present more detailed analyses of pain (assessed using item 3 on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPI-SF]) and symptomatic skeletal events, alongside preplanned patient-reported outcomes, assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire and the EuroQoL-5 dimensions, 5 level scale (EQ-5D-5L). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Pain response was analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of BPI-SF item 3, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of either FACT-P or EQ-5D-5L (PRO population). Analyses of skeletal-related events were also done in the intention-to-treat population. The CARD study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02485691, and is no longer enrolling.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 17, 2015, and Nov 28, 2018, of 303 patients screened, 255 were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel (n=129) or abiraterone or enzalutamide (n=126). Median follow-up was 9·2 months (IQR 5·6-13·1). Pain response was observed in 51 (46%) of 111 patients with cabazitaxel and 21 (19%) of 109 patients with abiraterone or enzalutamide (p<0·0001). Median time to pain progression was not estimable (NE; 95% CI NE-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·5 months (4·9-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·55, 95% CI 0·32-0·97; log-rank p=0·035). Median time to symptomatic skeletal events was NE (95% CI 20·0-NE) with cabazitaxel and 16·7 months (10·8-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·35-1·01; log-rank p=0·050). Median time to FACT-P total score deterioration was 14·8 months (95% CI 6·3-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·9 months (6·3-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·72, 95% CI 0·44-1·20; log-rank p=0·21). There was a significant treatment effect seen in changes from baseline in EQ-5D-5L utility index score in favour of cabazitaxel over abiraterone or enzalutamide (p=0·030) but no difference between treatment groups for change from baseline in EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (p=0·060).

INTERPRETATION

Since cabazitaxel improved pain response, time to pain progression, time to symptomatic skeletal events, and EQ-5D-5L utility index, clinicians and patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer can be reassured that cabazitaxel will not reduce quality of life when compared with treatment with a second androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor.

FUNDING

Sanofi.

Evaluation of Cognitive Function in Trials Testing New-Generation Hormonal Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

In patients with prostate cancer, the use of new-generation hormonal therapy, added to androgen deprivation therapy, requires careful evaluation of cognitive function. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the evidence about cognitive function in randomized trials testing new-generation hormonal therapy (abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide, darolutamide). For each trial, we assessed the availability of both investigator-assessed cognitive impairment and disorders and patient-reported evaluation of cognitive function. Out of 19 trials, the investigator-based evaluation of cognitive impairment was available in seven (36.8%), while patient-reported evaluation of cognitive function results was presented only in one trial (5.3%). This analysis shows that, despite cognitive deterioration could be relevant in patients with prostate cancer, clinical development of new-generation hormonal drugs has not included a systematic evaluation of cognitive function.

Abstract

In patients with prostate cancer, earlier use and longer duration of new-generation hormonal therapy (NGHT), added to androgen deprivation therapy, requires careful evaluation of cognitive function. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the evidence about cognitive function in all the randomized trials (RCTs) testing NGHT (abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide, darolutamide). We assessed the availability of both investigator-assessed cognitive impairment and disorders and patient-reported evaluation of cognitive function. Nineteen RCTs (17,617 patients) were included. The investigator-based evaluation of cognitive impairment was available in seven RCTs (36.8%). In total, 19/19 RCTs (100%) included patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collection, but PRO tools adopted allowed evaluation of cognitive function in two RCTs (10.5%). Among them, PRO-based cognitive function results were presented only in one RCT (5.3%): in ENZAMET, mean changes from baseline were worse with enzalutamide than with placebo, but deterioration-free survival favored enzalutamide. Despite cognitive deterioration could be relevant, clinical development of NGHT has not included a systematic evaluation of cognitive function. Assessment by investigators is at risk of underreporting, and commonly used PROs do not allow proper cognitive function analysis. Furthermore, the methodology of analysis can jeopardize the interpretation of results. Although direct comparisons are scanty, there could be differences between different NGHTs.

Abiraterone acetate in combination with prednisone in the treatment of prostate cancer: safety and efficacy

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic prostate cancer is a life-threatening disease and an important public health concern with prevalence rates varying drastically between high- and low-income countries. Androgen-deprivation therapy alone has been the first-line treatment option for decades, temporarily controlling disease until invariable tumor regression. At the castration-resistant stage, metastatic disease becomes lethal. In recent years several new treatments, including second-generation hormone therapies, have proven to be life-prolonging in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and at an earlier hormone-sensitive stage. Abiraterone acetate in combination with prednisone was the first approved hormone therapy demonstrating survival benefit, and represents, to date, an alternative, or a second-line treatment after taxane-based chemotherapy, in addition to androgen-deprivation therapy, in hormone sensitive, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

AREA COVERED

We performed a literature review of papers from 2012 to 2020 using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase searching for the safety and efficacy of abiraterone acetate in prostate cancer management. Search results were limited to phase III-IV trials and post hoc analysis of Phase III trials evaluated Abiraterone acetate in the English language.

EXPERT OPINION

This literature review confirms the role of abiraterone acetate in the therapeutic landscape with well-proven safety and efficacy, demonstrated in trials and post-approval studies.

Expert recommendations on the management of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who progress after CHAARTED or LATITUDE

Objective

Our aim was to provide practical recommendations on the management of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who have progressed after docetaxel plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or abiraterone plus ADT.

Methods

Systematic literature review (SLR), nominal group meeting, and Delphi process. A panel of 12 experts was established who defined the scope, users, and sections of the document. We performed an SLR in order to assess the efficacy and safety of available drugs in patients with mCRPC. Abstracts from the American Society of Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings were also examined. The results were discussed during an expert meeting in which 14 recommendations were generated. The level of agreement with the recommendations was also tested by 13 additional experts following the Delphi process. Recommendations were voted by means of scores ranging from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement when at least 70% of the experts voted ⩾7. Next, we assigned a level of evidence and grade to the recommendation using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence, following which the final document was drafted.

Results

The literature search did not find any articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Finally, 13 out of 14 recommendations were accepted after two Delphi rounds (two were modified after the first round). They pertain to general and individual case-based treatment recommendations.

Conclusions

In mCRPC patients who have progressed after docetaxel or abiraterone plus ADT in the metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer setting, these recommendations may support treatment decision-making, due to the lack of evidence or other globally accepted sequencing algorithms.

Systemic treatment for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer: Does seqence matter?

BACKGROUND

Optimal sequencing of systemic therapy in the management for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains poorly elucidated. The CHAARTED and STAMPEDE studies have proven that early chemotherapy in the hormone-sensitive setting yields a greater net survival advantage than docetaxel for mCRPC. In a retrospective study, we attempt to investigate the two most common treatment sequences for mCRPC and investigate whether earlier chemotherapy for mCRPC is consequential to survival outcomes.

METHODS

We identified 112 patients with mCRPC treated at the Mayo Clinic between 2011 and 2017. We identified two cohorts, 80 patients (group A) received full course docetaxel chemotherapy followed by second generation hormone therapy (2nd gen androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]; Abiraterone or Enzalutamide) and 32 patients (group B) treated with 2nd gen ADT followed by docetaxel. The primary endpoint evaluated was 3-year cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

Mean prostate specific antigen at initiation of first treatment was 32.0 in group A and 21.7 in group B (P = .4). Bone metastases were more prevalent in group B (87% vs 58%, P = .01). All other clinicopathologic variables were statistically similar between group A and group B. Three-year cancer-specific survival was 87.4% vs 64.1% for group A and group B, respectively (P = .016). We report a univariate hazard ratio of 3.61 (95% CI, 1.74-9.5, 0 P = .01). Three-year overall survival was 82.4% and 60.8% for group A and group B, P = .01. These results held true when excluding patients with lymph node only metastasi.

CONCLUSION

Our data indicates that sequence of systemic therapy may influence outcomes for mCRPC and that docetaxel should be considered before 2nd generation ADT. Our results support the importance of earlier chemotherapy in the castration resistant state.

Application of the ASCO Value Framework and ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale to Assess the Value of Abiraterone and Enzalutamide in Advanced Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

As novel hormonal therapies, such as abiraterone and enzalutamide, move into earlier stages of treatment of advanced prostate cancer, there are significant cost implications. We used the ASCO Value Framework (AVF) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) to quantify and compare the incremental clinical benefit and costs of these agents in the metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) settings.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for randomized phase III trials of abiraterone and enzalutamide in mCRPC and mCSPC. Incremental clinical benefit was quantified using the AVF and ESMO-MCBS by 2 independent assessors. Incremental drug costs were calculated using average wholesale prices (AWPs) from the RED BOOK Online.

RESULTS

In mCRPC, 2 abiraterone trials (COU-AA-301 and COU-AA-302) and 2 enzalutamide trials (AFFIRM and PREVAIL) met search criteria. AVF scores ranged from 46.3 to 66.6, suggesting clinical benefit; ESMO-MCBS scores ranged from 3 to 5, with lower clinical benefit in the mCRPC predocetaxel setting. The overall incremental AWP ranged from $83,460.94 to $205,128.85. In mCSPC, 4 trials met criteria (LATITUDE, STAMPEDE, ENZAMET, and ARCHES; AVF scores were 79.8, 33.3, 59, and 17, respectively). All of the studies showed benefit except ARCHES. By ESMO-MCBS, both LATITUDE and STAMPEDE showed benefit (score for 4 for both studies); ENZAMET and ARCHES were not evaluable. The overall cost of treatment was significantly higher in the mCSPC setting.

CONCLUSION

The AVF and ESMO-MCBS frameworks generated slightly different results but suggested that abiraterone and enzalutamide show clinical benefit in both mCRPC and mCSPC but trended to lower clinical benefit and increased costs in earlier disease stages. Further refinement of the AVF and ESMO-MCBS is needed to facilitate their use and their ability to inform clinical practice in a rapidly changing treatment landscape.

Abiraterone Acetate: A Review in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostrate Cancer

Oral abiraterone acetate (Zytiga^®) is a selective inhibitor of CYP17 and thereby inhibits androgen biosynthesis, with androgen signalling crucial in the progression from primary to metastatic prostate cancer (PC) and subsequently, in the development of metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC). In large phase 3 trials and in the clinical practice setting, oral abiraterone acetate in combination with prednisone was an effective treatment and had an acceptable, manageable tolerability and safety profile in chemotherapy-naive and docetaxel-experienced men with mCRPC. In the pivotal global phase 3 trials, relative to placebo (+prednisone), abiraterone acetate (+prednisone) prolonged overall survival (OS) at data maturity (final analysis) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) at all assessed timepoints. Given its efficacy in prolonging OS and its convenient once-daily oral regimen, in combination with prednisone, abiraterone acetate is an important first-line option for the treatment of mCRPC.

Quality of Life During Treatment With Chemohormonal Therapy: Analysis of E3805 Chemohormonal Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial in Prostate Cancer

Purpose Chemohormonal therapy with docetaxel and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT+D) for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer improves overall survival as compared with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone. We compared the quality of life (QOL) between patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer who were treated with ADT+D and those who were treated with ADT alone. Methods Men were randomly assigned to ADT+ D (six cycles) or to ADT alone. QOL was assessed by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), FACT-Taxane, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, and the Brief Pain Inventory at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to examine changes over time. Mixed-effect models compared the QOL between arms at each time point. Results Seven hundred ninety men were randomly assigned (ADT+D [n = 397] and ADT[ n = 393]) and completed FACT-P (90% at baseline, 86% at 3 months, 83% at 6 months, 78% at 9 months, and 77% at 12 months). ADT+D patients reported a statistically significant decline in FACT-P at 3 months ( P < .001) but FACT-P did not differ significantly between baseline and 12 months ( P = .38). ADT+D FACT-P scores were significantly lower at 3 months ( P = .02) but significantly higher at 12 months ( P = .04) when compared with ADT FACT-P scores. Differences did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference at any time point. ADT+D patients reported significantly lower Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scores at 3 months than did ADT patients ( P < .001). Over time, both arms reported significantly poorer FACT-Taxane scores ( P < .001) when compared with baseline. Brief Pain Inventory scores were similar between arms. Conclusion Although ADT+D was associated with statistically worse QOL at 3 months, QOL was better at 12 months for ADT+D patients than for ADT patients. Both arms reported a similar minimally changed QOL over time, suggesting that ADT+D is not associated with a greater long-term negative impact on QOL.

Sensitisation to mitoxantrone-induced apoptosis by the oncolytic adenovirus Ad∆∆ through Bcl-2-dependent attenuation of autophagy

Anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 is frequently activated in human malignant cells to promote cell survival and inhibit cell death. Replication-selective oncolytic adenoviruses deleted in the functional Bcl-2 homologue E1B19K potently synergise with apoptosis-inducing chemotherapeutic drugs, including mitoxantrone for prostate cancer. Here, we demonstrate that our previously generated oncolytic mutant Ad∆∆ (E1B19K- and E1ACR2-deleted) caused potent synergistic apoptotic cell death in both drug-sensitive 22Rv1, and drug-insensitive PC3 and PC3M prostate cancer cells. The synergistic cell killing was dependent on Bcl-2 expression and was prevented by Bcl-2 knockdown, which led to activation of the autophagy pathway. Mitoxantrone-induced autophagy, which was decreased in combination with Ad∆∆-infection resulting in increased apoptosis. Expression of the viral E1A12S protein alone mimicked the synergistic effects with Ad∆∆ in combination with mitoxantrone while intact wild-type virus (Ad5) had no effect. Early and late-stage inhibition of autophagy by Atg7 knockdown and chloroquine respectively, promoted apoptotic cell killing with mitoxantrone similar to Ad∆∆. These findings revealed currently unexplored actions of E1B19K-deleted oncolytic adenoviruses and the central role of Bcl-2 in the synergistic cell killing. This study suggests that cancers with functional Bcl-2 expression may be selectively re-sensitised to drugs by Ad∆∆.

Abiraterone acetate and its use in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer: a review

Abiraterone acetate, which targets enzymatic complexes playing a central role in steroidogenesis, demonstrated to increase survival significantly in both chemo-naive and docetaxel pretreated, becoming one of the drugs of choice for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. More recently, this agent in combination to androgen deprivation therapy demonstrated to be efficacious also in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. The present review is aimed to outline the clinical development of abiraterone acetate, the pivotal trials which led to its approval for the clinical practice, new evidence about its efficacy in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, its place in the therapeutic landscape of prostate cancer and future directions of development.

The association between health-related quality-of-life scores and clinical outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients: Exploratory analyses of AFFIRM and PREVAIL studies

BACKGROUND

Our exploratory analysis examined the association between health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (baseline and change over time) and clinical outcomes (overall survival [OS]/radiographic progression-free survival [rPFS]) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

METHODS

HRQoL, OS and rPFS were assessed in phase III trials comparing enzalutamide with placebo in chemotherapy-naïve (PREVAIL; NCT01212991) or post-chemotherapy (AFFIRM; NCT00974311) mCRPC. HRQoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). Multivariate analyses evaluated the prognostic significance of baseline and time-dependent scores after adjusting for treatment and clinical/demographic variables. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) represented the hazard of rPFS or OS per minimally important difference (MID) score change in HRQoL variables.

RESULTS

In baseline and time-dependent multivariate analyses, OS was independently associated with multiple HRQoL measures across both studies. In time-dependent analyses, a 10-point (upper bound of MID range) increase (improvement) in FACT-P total score was associated with reductions in mortality risk of 19% in AFFIRM (HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.78-0.84]) and 21% in PREVAIL (HR 0.79 [0.76-0.83]). For baseline analyses, a 10-point increase in FACT-P total score was associated with reductions in mortality risk of 12% (HR 0.88 [0.84-0.93]) and 10% (HR 0.90 [0.86-0.95]) in AFFIRM and PREVAIL, respectively. rPFS was associated with a subset of HRQoL domains in both studies.

CONCLUSION

Several baseline HRQoL domains were prognostic for rPFS and OS in patients with mCRPC, and this association was maintained during treatment, indicating that changes in HRQoL are informative for patients' expected survival.

Second-line therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with progression after or under docetaxel: A systematic review of nine randomized controlled trials

Treatment decisions are challenging in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with progression after or under docetaxel. The current review systematically searched the published literature on all treatment options, and assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence. It found the best available evidence for effective prolongation of overall survival and progression-free survival for abiraterone acetate plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone and enzalutamide versus placebo. Other treatment modalities could be beneficial for individual patients by taking into consideration the: selection criteria of the randomized clinical trials, risk of bias, subgroup analyses, and quality of life and adverse events. Further research is needed to determine the sequence, timing asnd combination of different treatments.

Quality of Life in Second-Line Treatment of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Using Cabazitaxel or Other Therapies After Previous Docetaxel Chemotherapy: Swiss Observational Treatment Registry

BACKGROUND

The aim was to evaluate quality of life (QoL), pain, and fatigue in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with different regimens after first-line docetaxel, as well as disease progression.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mCRPC having received first-line chemotherapy with docetaxel were eligible. Second-line treatment choice was at the discretion of the local investigator. All patients had regular assessments of QoL with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire, of fatigue with the Brief Fatigue Inventory, and of pain with the McGill Pain Questionnaire-Short Form. The primary end point was QoL maintenance defined as having a maximum decrease in 2 functional domains of the FACT-P.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight patients were included in 36 oncology centers across Switzerland. QoL analysis was available for all patients (59 who received cabazitaxel; 79 who received other therapy [OT] including 75 who received abiraterone). No significant differences for any of the end points were found between groups. A numerically higher number of patients had QoL maintenance with OT (25 of 79 patients, 32%) compared with cabazitaxel (8 of 59 patients, 14%). QoL improvement was found in 20% of patients (12 of 59) who received cabazitaxel and 24% (19 of 79) who received OT. Mean FACT-P score did not change in a clinically relevant manner over time in either group. Pain was present in 70% of patients (96 of 138), and a pain response to treatment was noted in 22% (13 of 59) who received cabazitaxel and 29% (23 of 79) who received OT. A similar but minor improvement of fatigue was noted in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Some degree of QoL decrease was seen in most patients regardless of second-line treatment. No significant differences in QoL parameters between cabazitaxel or other second line treatments were found.

The Effect of Targeted Therapy for Genitourinary Malignancies on Sexual Function and Fertility

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Targeted therapy for genitourinary cancer is being used at an increasing rate. These medications show great survival benefit but are relatively lacking in long-term adverse effect data. With increasing survivability, measures to improve quality of life must be considered for GU cancer and a large proponent of this is sexual function.

RECENT FINDINGS

mTOR inhibitors have shown an effect on testosterone levels and may have a link to abnormal semen parameters. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have shown no adverse sexual outcomes in the literature. There are laboratory links to tyrosine kinases having a beneficial effect on erectile and sexual function. Possible sexual side effects must be discussed with patients receiving a diagnosis of cancer. Further research is required to determine the exact mechanisms and outcomes of sexual function with new and emerging targeted therapy.

Impact of abiraterone on patient-related outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: current perspectives

Abiraterone acetate has established a major role in the treatment paradigm of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer ever since pivotal trials, COU-AA-301 and COU-AA-302, have shown benefit in both the second-line and first-line (post- and pre-chemotherapy) setting, respectively, with improvement in overall survival as well as secondary end points such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and radiographic response rates, time to PSA progression, and progression-free survival. There has been a lot of interest and emphasis in the evaluation of patient-related outcomes (PROs) as it relates to quality of life, pain, adverse events, fatigue, and among others, in the use of different agents that have been shown to improve survival. This review examines the companion PROs in conjunction with abiraterone acetate use. This is particularly relevant since PROs are increasingly viewed as a key metric for drug label claims in granting approval across regulatory agencies, including the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency.

Measuring the Value of New Drugs: Validity and Reliability of 4 Value Assessment Frameworks in the Oncology Setting

BACKGROUND

Several organizations have developed frameworks to systematically assess the value of new drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the convergent validity and interrater reliability of 4 value frameworks to understand the extent to which these tools can facilitate value-based treatment decisions in oncology.

METHODS

Eight panelists used the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) frameworks to conduct value assessments of 15 drugs for advanced lung and breast cancers and castration-refractory prostate cancer. Panelists received instructions and published clinical data required to complete the assessments, assigning each drug a numeric or letter score. Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance for Ranks (Kendall's W) was used to measure convergent validity by cancer type among the 4 frameworks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to measure interrater reliability for each framework across cancers. Panelists were surveyed on their experiences.

RESULTS

Kendall's W across all 4 frameworks for breast, lung, and prostate cancer drugs was 0.560 (P= 0.010), 0.562 (P = 0.010), and 0.920 (P < 0.001), respectively. Pairwise, Kendall's W for breast cancer drugs was highest for ESMO-ICER and ICER-NCCN (W = 0.950, P = 0.019 for both pairs) and lowest for ASCO-NCCN (W = 0.300, P = 0.748). For lung cancer drugs, W was highest pairwise for ESMO-ICER (W = 0.974, P = 0.007) and lowest for ASCO-NCCN (W = 0.218, P = 0.839); for prostate cancer drugs, pairwise W was highest for ICER-NCCN (W = 1.000, P < 0.001) and lowest for ESMO-ICER and ESMO-NCCN (W = 0.900, P = 0.052 for both pairs). When ranking drugs on distinct framework subdomains, Kendall's W among breast cancer drugs was highest for certainty (ICER, NCCN: W = 0.908, P = 0.046) and lowest for clinical benefit (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0.345, P = 0.436). Among lung cancer drugs, W was highest for toxicity (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0. 944, P < 0.001) and lowest for certainty (ICER, NCCN: W = 0.230, P = 0.827); and among prostate cancer drugs, it was highest for quality of life (ASCO, ESMO: W = 0.986, P = 0.003) and lowest for toxicity (ASCO, ESMO, NCCN: W = 0.200, P = 0.711). ICC (95% CI) for ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN were 0.800 (0.660-0.913), 0.818 (0.686-0.921), 0.652 (0.466-0.834), and 0.153 (0.045-0.371), respectively. When scores were rescaled to 0-100, NCCN provided the narrowest band of scores. When asked about their experiences using the ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN frameworks, panelists generally agreed that the frameworks were logically organized and reasonably easy to use, with NCCN rated somewhat easier.

CONCLUSIONS

Convergent validity among the ASCO, ESMO, ICER, and NCCN frameworks was fair to excellent, increasing with clinical benefit subdomain concordance and simplicity of drug trial data. Interrater reliability, highest for ASCO and ESMO, improved with clarity of instructions and specificity of score definitions. Continued use, analyses, and refinements of these frameworks will bring us closer to the ultimate goal of using value-based treatment decisions to improve patient care and outcomes.

DISCLOSURES

This work was funded by Eisai Inc. Copher and Knoth are employees of Eisai Inc. Bentley, Lee, Zambrano, and Broder are employees of Partnership for Health Analytic Research, a health services research company paid by Eisai Inc. to conduct this research. For this study, Cohen, Huynh, and Neville report fees from Partnership for Health Analytic Research. Outside of this study, Cohen receives grants and direct consulting fees from various companies that manufacture and market pharmaceuticals. Mei reports a grant from Eisai Inc. during this study. The other authors have no disclosures to report. Study concept and design were contributed by Bentley and Broder, with assistance from Elkin and Cohen. Bentley took the lead in data collection, along with Elkin, Huynh, Mukherjea, Neville, Mei, Popescu, Lee, and Zambrano. Data interpretation was performed by Bentley and Broder, along with Elkin, Cohen, Copher, and Knoth. The manuscript was written primarily by Bentley, along with Elkin and Broder, and revised by Bentley, Broder, Elkin, Cohen, Copher, and Knoth. Select components of this work's methods were presented at ISPOR 19th Annual European Congress held in Vienna, Austria, October 29-November 2, 2016, and Society for Medical Decision Making 38th Annual North American Meeting held in Vancouver, Canada, October 23-26, 2016.

Impact of enzalutamide on patient-related outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: current perspectives

Prostate cancer claims the lives of more than 25,000 men in the United States yearly, most from metastatic disease. In the past decade, several new medications have been approved for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer including the antiandrogen enzalutamide. In addition, there has been mounting interest in evaluating health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients with cancer including new more detailed recommendations released by the Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 on how to evaluate patient-related outcomes in clinical trials. A total of four randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials have evaluated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) randomized to receive enzalutamide vs control or bicalutamide. Each study used validated health-related QoL and pain surveys to evaluate patient-related outcomes. The studies suggest that patients with mCRPC, including those aged 75 years and older, have favorable overall QoL scores taking enzalutamide compared to standard of care. There was short-term improved pain control in patients taking enzalutamide compared to those in the placebo group. Some commonly reported adverse effects included fatigue, back pain, and hot flashes. These studies were limited in their patient attrition in filling out surveys as well as difficulty in comparing them to each other. Future studies examining patients with mCRPC taking enzalutamide will have to rigorously standardize ways patient-reported outcomes are collected and evaluate patients in a more diversified real-world population.

Prostate cancer perspectives after chaarted: Optimizing treatment sequence

Prostate cancer is the most frequent cancer amongst men. Until recently, only two therapeutic options, initial androgen-deprivation therapy in patients without castration-resistant prostate cancer, with addition of docetaxel when the disease becomes castration-resistant, were considered as standard. In the last years, new drugs (abiraterone, enzalutamide, Ra-223, Sipuleucel) have been developed for prostate cancer treatment with important advantages in safety and efficacy. Results from the recent Chaarted study, in patients that received docetaxel for the hormone sensitive disease, have contributed to change the initial treatment approach in metastatic prostate cancer, in order to adapt the best sequence for each patient. Those results have been supported by the Stampede trial. Stampede survival data showed not only a benefit in overall survival of adding docetaxel initially, but also a prolonged time to first skeletal related event. Now it is discussed in which setting the available drugs should be administered. This review article summarizes the treatment options for patients treated with docetaxel initially for hormone sensitive prostate cancer after developing progressive disease, and offers an algorithm proposal for treatment.

Patient-reported outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Many novel therapies are available for use in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), some of which convey substantial progression-free survival and overall survival benefits. Delaying disease progression and providing palliation of symptoms are primary therapeutic aims of treating patients with mCRPC; therefore, ensuring that the benefit-to-harm ratios are acceptable to patients, through systematic measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) using validated tools, is vital. In this Perspectives, we appraised the published reports from clinical trials testing treatments of mCRPC over the past 5 years and found that PROs were either not being measured routinely, or if used, were often not reported adequately, thus hampering evaluation of the true effects of many of these treatments on patients' quality of life. Improvements are needed because data collected directly from patients, not just physician-collected safety data and adverse events, are crucial to inform clinical decision-making on treatment options.

Patient-reported quality-of-life analysis of radium-223 dichloride from the phase III ALSYMPCA study

BACKGROUND

Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223), a first-in-class α-emitting radiopharmaceutical, is recommended in both pre- and post-docetaxel settings in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and symptomatic bone metastases based on overall survival benefit demonstrated in the phase III ALSYMPCA study. ALSYMPCA included prospective measurements of health-related quality of life (QOL) using two validated instruments: the general EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) and the disease-specific Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Analyses were conducted to determine treatment effects of radium-223 plus standard of care (SOC) versus placebo plus SOC on QOL using FACT-P and EQ-5D. Outcomes assessed were percentage of patients experiencing improvement, percentage of patients experiencing worsening, and mean QOL scores during the study.

RESULTS

Analyses were carried out on the intent-to-treat population of patients randomized to receive radium-223 (n = 614) or placebo (n = 307). The mean baseline EQ-5D utility and FACT-P total scores were similar between treatment groups. A significantly higher percentage of patients receiving radium-223 experienced meaningful improvement in EQ-5D utility score on treatment versus placebo {29.2% versus 18.5%, respectively; P = 0.004; odds ratio (OR) = 1.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-2.74]}. Findings were similar for FACT-P total score [24.6% versus 16.1%, respectively; P = 0.020; OR = 1.70 (95% CI 1.08-2.65)]. A lower percentage of patients receiving radium-223 experienced meaningful worsening versus placebo measured by EQ-5D utility score and FACT-P total score. Prior docetaxel use and current bisphosphonate use did not affect these findings. Treatment was a significant predictor of EQ-5D utility score, with radium-223 associated with higher scores versus placebo (0.56 versus 0.50, respectively; P = 0.002). Findings were similar for FACT-P total score (99.08 versus 95.22, respectively; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

QOL data from ALSYMPCA demonstrated that improved survival with radium-223 is accompanied by significant QOL benefits, including a higher percentage of patients with meaningful QOL improvement and a slower decline in QOL over time in patients with CRPC.

Low-dose docetaxel, estramustine and prednisolone combination chemotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer

The objective of this study was to report our experience with weekly low-dose docetaxel (DOC) chemotherapy for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). From 2007 to 2014, 39 consecutive patients received weekly low-dose DOC; the oncological effectiveness, side effects and tolerability were prospectively analyzed. The median patient age, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and Gleason score at diagnosis of prostate cancer were 71 years (range, 55-83 years), 187 ng/ml (range, 2.0-1711 ng/ml) and 8 (range, 5-10), respectively. The median number of cycles of DOC was 7 (range, 1-45 cycles). Of the 39 patients, the PSA level decreased by >50% in 13 (33%). In the multivariate analysis of prediction of patient overall survival, a decrease of the PSA level to <50% was a significant predictor (hazard ratio = 6.913; 95% confidence interval: 1.147-41.669; P=0.035). The median cancer-specific overall survival from the diagnosis of CRPC was 16.7 months (range, 2-54 months). Grade 3 toxicities were observed in 5 patients (13%); specifically, limb edema, nausea and hepatic disorders were detected in 2 (5%), 2 (5%) and 1 patient (3%), respectively. Treatment-related death (grade 5) occurred in 1 patient due to interstitial pneumonia after two courses of chemotherapy. The chemotherapy was completed in the majority of the patients (n=37, 94.8%) in the outpatient department, without interruption. These findings suggest that weekly low-dose DOC is feasible and safe for selected patients with CRPC, without treament with novel agents, such as abiraterone, enzalutamide and cabazitaxel.

Patient experience in the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: state of the science

Background:

Contemporary therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have shown survival improvements, which do not account for patient experience and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Methods:

This literature review included a search of MEDLINE for randomized clinical trials enrolling ⩾50 patients with mCRPC and reporting on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) since 2010.

Results:

Nineteen of 25 publications describing seven treatment regimens (10 clinical trials and nine associated secondary analyses) met the inclusion criteria and were critically appraised. The most commonly used measures were the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (n=5 trials) and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (n=4 trials) questionnaires. The published data indicated that HRQoL and pain status augmented the clinical efficacy data by providing a better understanding of treatment impact in mCRPC. Abiraterone acetate and prednisone, enzalutamide, radium-223 dichloride and sipuleucel-T offered varying levels of HRQoL benefit and/or pain mitigation versus their respective comparators, whereas three treatments (mitoxantrone, estramustine phosphate and docetaxel, and cabazitaxel) had no meaningful impact on HRQoL or pain. The main limitation of the data were that the PROs utilized were not developed for use in mCRPC patients and hence may not have comprehensively captured symptoms important to this population.

Conclusions:

Recently published randomized clinical trials of new agents for mCRPC have captured elements of the patient experience while on treatment. Further research is required to standardize methods for measuring, quantifying and reporting on HRQoL and pain in patients with mCRPC in the clinical practice setting.

Addressing the expected survival benefit for clinical trial design in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Sensitivity analysis of randomized trials

We performed a sensitivity analysis, cumulating all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in which patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) received systemic therapy, to evaluate if the comparison of RCTs may drive to biased survival estimations. An overall survival (OS) significant difference according to therapeutic strategy was more likely be determined in RCTs evaluating hormonal drugs versus those studies testing immunotherapy, chemotherapy or other strategies. With regard to control arm, an OS significant effect was found for placebo-controlled trials versus studies comparing experimental treatment with active therapies. Finally, regarding to docetaxel (DOC) timing, the OS benefit was more likely to be proved in Post-DOC setting in comparison with DOC and Pre-DOC. These data suggest that clinical trial design should take into account new benchmarks such as the type of treatment strategy, the choice of the comparator and the phase of the disease in relation to the administration of standard chemotherapy.