A clinically relevant decrease in abiraterone exposure associated with carbamazepine use in a patient with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer

A new method to quantify the effect of co-medication on the efficacy of abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients

Background and Objective: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with abiraterone acetate (AA) have co-morbidities treated with different drugs. The aim was to quantify the potential effect of co-medications on AA treatment duration (TD) and overall survival (OS). Methods: A new parameter, called "individual drug score" (IDS) was calculated by summing the "drug score"-s (DS) of all co-medications for each patient. The DS was determined by quantifying the effect of a given co-drug on enzymes involved in steroidogenesis and metabolism of AA. The correlation between log (IDS) and TD was tested by non-linear curve fit. Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression was used for analysis of TD and OS. Results: The IDS and TD of AA+prednisolone showed a dose-response correlation (n = 166). Patients with high IDS had significantly longer TD and OS (p <0.001). In multivariate analysis IDS proved to be an independent marker of TD and OS. The same analysis was performed in a separate group of 81 patients receiving AA+dexamethasone treatment. The previously observed relationships were observed again between IDS and TD or OS. After combining the AA+prednisolone and AA+dexamethasone groups, analysis of the IDS composition showed that patients in the high IDS group not only used more drugs (p <0.001), but their drugs also had a higher mean DS (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The more co-drugs with high DS, the longer the duration of AA treatment and OS, emphasizing the need for careful co-medication planning in patients with mCRPC treated with AA. It is recommended that, where possible, co-medication should be modified to minimize the number of drugs with negative DS and increase the number of drugs with high DS. Our new model can presumably be adapted to other drugs and other cancer types (or other diseases).

Randomized Phase III Study of Enzalutamide Compared With Enzalutamide Plus Abiraterone for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (Alliance A031201 Trial)

PURPOSE

Enzalutamide and abiraterone both target androgen receptor signaling but via different mechanisms. The mechanism of action of one drug may counteract the resistance pathways of the other. We sought to determine whether the addition of abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) to enzalutamide prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the first-line setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Men with untreated mCRPC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive first-line enzalutamide with or without AAP. The primary end point was OS. Toxicity, prostate-specific antigen declines, pharmacokinetics, and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) were also examined. Data were analyzed using an intent-to-treat approach. The Kaplan-Meier estimate and the stratified log-rank statistic were used to compare OS between treatments.

RESULTS

In total, 1,311 patients were randomly assigned: 657 to enzalutamide and 654 to enzalutamide plus AAP. OS was not statistically different between the two arms (median, 32.7 [95% CI, 30.5 to 35.4] months for enzalutamide v 34.2 [95% CI, 31.4 to 37.3] months for enzalutamide and AAP; hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; one-sided P = .03; boundary nominal significance level = .02). rPFS was longer in the combination arm (median rPFS, 21.3 [95% CI, 19.4 to 22.9] months for enzalutamide v 24.3 [95% CI, 22.3 to 26.7] months for enzalutamide and AAP; HR, 0.86; two-sided P = .02). However, pharmacokinetic clearance of abiraterone was 2.2- to 2.9-fold higher when administered with enzalutamide, compared with clearance values for abiraterone alone.

CONCLUSION

The addition of AAP to enzalutamide for first-line treatment of mCRPC was not associated with a statistically significant benefit in OS. Drug-drug interactions between the two agents resulting in increased abiraterone clearance may partly account for this result, although these interactions did not prevent the combination regimen from having more nonhematologic toxicity.

Impact of trough abiraterone level on adverse events in patients with prostate cancer treated with abiraterone acetate

PURPOSE

We assessed the impact of plasma trough concentrations of abiraterone (ABI) and its metabolite Δ4-abiraterone (D4A) and related polymorphisms on adverse events (AEs) in patients with metastatic prostate cancer who received abiraterone acetate (AA).

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled patients with advanced prostate cancer treated with AA between 2016 and 2021. Plasma trough concentrations of ABI and D4A were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. The impact of HSD3B1 rs1047303, SRD5A2 rs523349, and cytochrome P450 family 3A member 4 rs2242480 polymorphisms on plasma concentrations of ABI and D4A and the incidence of AEs were also assessed.

RESULTS

In 68 patients treated with AA, the median ABI and D4A concentrations were 18.1 and 0.94 ng/mL, respectively. The high plasma trough concentration of ABI (≥ 20.6 ng/mL) was significantly associated with the presence of any AE and its independent risk factor based on multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 7.20; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.20-23.49). Additionally, a high plasma trough concentration of ABI was an independent risk factor of time to withdraw AA (hazard ratio, 4.89; 95% CI: 1.66-14.38). The risk alleles of three polymorphisms were not statistically associated with the ABI and D4A concentrations and the incidence of AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The plasma trough concentration of ABI is associated with the presence of AEs and treatment failure after AA administration. ABI concentration monitoring may be useful in patients with prostate cancer who received AA.

Preventing Lethal Prostate Cancer with Diet, Supplements, and Rx: Heart Healthy Continues to Be Prostate Healthy and "First Do No Harm" Part II

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the overall and latest observations of the effect of diet, lifestyle, supplements, and some prescription heart healthy medications for prostate cancer prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

The concept of maximizing heart health to prevent aggressive prostate cancer continues to be solidified with the addition of more prospective observational and randomized controlled trial data. Heart healthy is prostate healthy, and heart unhealthy is prostate unhealthy. The primary goal of reducing the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality also coincides with maximizing prostate cancer prevention. The obesity epidemic in children and adults along with recent diverse research has only strengthened the nexus between heart and prostate health. Greater dietary adherence toward a variety of healthy foods is associated with a graded improved probability of CVD and potentially aggressive cancer risk reduction. Preventing prostate cancer via dietary supplements should encourage a "first do no harm," or less is more approach until future evidence can reverse the concerning trend that more supplementation has resulted in either no impact or an increased risk of prostate cancer. Supplements to reduce side effects of some cancer treatments appear to have more encouraging data. A discussion of quality (QC) before utilizing any pill also requires attention. Medications or interventions that potentially improve heart health including statins, aspirin, and metformin (S.A.M.), specific beta-blocker medications, and even preventive vaccines are in general generic, low-cost, "natural," and should continue to garner research interest. A watershed moment in medical education has arrived where the past perception of a diverse number of trees seemingly separated by vast distances, in reality, now appear to exist within the same forest.

A clinically relevant decrease in abiraterone exposure associated with carbamazepine use in a patient with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer

ADVERSE EVENT

Decreased abiraterone exposure after introducing carbamazepine.

DRUGS IMPLICATED

Abiraterone acetate and carbamazepine.

THE PATIENT

A 65-year-old man with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, was treated with abiraterone acetate and prednisolone, and received concomitant carbamazepine for treatment of facial neuropathy.

EVIDENCE THAT LINKS THE DRUG TO THE EVENT

The interaction was confirmed by a decrease in abiraterone exposure >2-fold (area-under-the-curve and trough levels). After discontinuation of carbamazepine therapy, the abiraterone exposure normalized. No alternative causes were found that explain the decrease in abiraterone exposure.

MECHANISM

Induction of CYP3A and potentially phase I metabolism (SULT2A1) by carbamazepine.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THERAPY

Clinicians and pharmacists should be aware of this clinically relevant interaction. The national drug-drug interaction checker does not warn for this interaction, whereas both the Lexicomp® and Micromedex® advice to avoid if possible or to increase the abiraterone dose frequency to twice daily. Carbamazepine should not be combined with abiraterone to avoid underexposure and suboptimal therapy. Therapeutic drug monitoring of abiraterone is useful to guide therapy when drug-drug interactions cannot be avoided.