Addressing the risk and management of cardiometabolic complications in prostate cancer patients on androgen deprivation therapy and androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy: consensus statements from the Hong Kong Urological Association and the Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology

Background

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the foundational treatment for metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). Androgen receptor (AR) axis-targeted therapies are a new standard of care for advanced PCa. Although these agents have significantly improved patient survival, the suppression of testosterone is associated with an increased risk of cardiometabolic syndrome. This highlights the urgency of multidisciplinary efforts to address the cardiometabolic risk of anticancer treatment in men with PCa.

Methods

Two professional organizations invited five urologists, five clinical oncologists, and two cardiologists to form a consensus panel. They reviewed the relevant literature obtained by searching PubMed for the publication period from April 2013 to April 2023, to address three discussion areas: (i) baseline assessment and screening for risk factors in PCa patients before the initiation of ADT and AR axis-targeted therapies; (ii) follow-up and management of cardiometabolic complications; and (iii) selection of ADT agents among high-risk patients. The panel convened four meetings to discuss and draft consensus statements using a modified Delphi method. Each drafted statement was anonymously voted on by every panelist.

Results

The panel reached a consensus on 18 statements based on recent evidence and expert insights.

Conclusion

These consensus statements serve as a practical recommendation for clinicians in Hong Kong, and possibly the Asia-Pacific region, in the management of cardiometabolic toxicities of ADT or AR axis-targeted therapies in men with PCa.

A multicenter, retrospective observational study investigating baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with primary androgen deprivation therapy

OBJECTIVE

This multicenter, retrospective, observational study investigated baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer who received primary androgen deprivation therapy, using Japan Study Group of Prostate Cancer registry data.

METHODS

Among patients in the Japan Study Group of Prostate Cancer registry, those who initiated primary androgen deprivation therapy and were aged 20 years or older were enrolled in this study. The primary endpoint was time to disease progression, defined as time from primary androgen deprivation therapy initiation to either prostate-specific antigen or clinical progression. Secondary endpoints included prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival, prostate-specific antigen response (90% or greater reduction from baseline) and distribution of second-line treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 2494 patients (goserelin, n = 564; leuprorelin, n = 1148; surgical castration, n = 161; degarelix, n = 621), those who received degarelix had higher prostate-specific antigen levels and Gleason scores and were at a more advanced clinical stage than those receiving goserelin or leuprorelin. The median time to disease progression (identical to the prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival result) was not reached for goserelin and leuprorelin, 52.7 months for surgical castration and 54.0 months for degarelix. Although baseline prostate-specific antigen values in the degarelix cohort were higher than those of the leuprorelin or goserelin cohorts, prostate-specific antigen responses were not different among the three cohorts. Regarding second-line treatment, the largest patient group received degarelix followed by leuprorelin (n = 195).

CONCLUSIONS

This study clarified patient characteristics and long-term effectiveness of primary androgen deprivation therapy in real-world clinical practice. Japanese urologists appear to select appropriate primary androgen deprivation therapy based on patient background and tumour characteristics, with degarelix largely reserved for higher risk patients.

Investigation of the GnRH antagonist degarelix isomerization in biological matrices

One of the main objectives of peptide drug design is the improvement of peptide pharmacokinetics with maintaining biological activity, which can be achieved by the complex modifications of the primary structure of the peptides. However, these changes often lead to the formation of peculiar impurities in the peptide drugs and their metabolites, which require the development of advanced analytical methods to properly assess their content. Here, we investigated the degradation of the potent long-acting GnRH antagonist degarelix in various biologic media by the tailor-made HPLC method, which allows precise determination of 5-Aph(Hyd)-degarelix isomer, an impurity found in the degarelix active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) during its manufacturing. Unexpectedly, we discovered a rapid and irreversible conversion of degarelix API into the corresponding hydantoin isomer in serum, suggesting that this impurity can be also a potential drug metabolite in vivo. This finding underlines the importance of the development of more accurate and performing analytical techniques to correctly characterize the chemical composition of the manufactured drugs and their behavior under physiological conditions.

Efficacy of Degarelix in the Neoadjuvant Setting in Managing Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

Background Prostate cancer holds a substantial presence in the global cancer landscape, and a considerable proportion of diagnoses occur at late stages, particularly in India. Management of locally advanced prostate cancer necessitates a multimodal treatment strategy. A critical part of this strategy is neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy, typically administered via luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogs. This study explores the potential of an alternative approach: neoadjuvant therapy with degarelix, an LHRH antagonist, and its impact on perioperative and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for locally advanced or high-risk prostate cancer. Methodology We conducted a retrospective, non-randomized clinical study at Apollo Hospitals in Chennai, India. Patients diagnosed with locally advanced or high-risk prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy were included. Participants were patients treated with neoadjuvant degarelix and subsequent radical prostatectomy between March 2020 and June 2022. We excluded patients receiving radical radiotherapy, those switching from LHRH agonists to antagonists, and those contraindicated for androgen deprivation therapy due to existing comorbidities. For comparison, we selected a group from the institutional database who received conventional treatment (i.e., without neoadjuvant therapy). Results The study compared two groups, each with 32 patients. The groups had no significant difference in total operative duration and console times. The postoperative pathological assessment showed significantly lower margin positivity rates and notable pathological downstaging in the group receiving neoadjuvant degarelix compared to the control group. The incidence of node positivity, prostate-specific antigen levels at three months postoperative, and number of pads used per day at one month did not differ significantly between the two groups. Conclusions Our study suggests that neoadjuvant degarelix could notably enhance patient outcomes in locally advanced prostate cancer management. The benefits include improved symptom control, significant reductions in margin positivity rates, and facilitated surgical procedures. Neoadjuvant degarelix therapy could potentially enhance the feasibility of the surgical intervention in locally advanced prostate cancer management, thus suggesting a promising pathway for improved patient care.

The Blade Study

CONTEXT

As patients are now living with prostate cancer for longer, the long-term impact of hormonal treatment on bone health is an increasingly debated subject.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers after degarelix administration in prostate cancer patients without bone metastases. To explore the predictive role of body composition on treatment induced bone loss.

METHODS

BMD and body composition (lean body mass, fat body mass, and appendicular mass index [ALMI]) were assessed by dual X-ray absorptiometry on study entry and after 12 months of degarelix therapy. Alkaline phosphate (ALP) and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) were assessed at baseline, and 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients entered the study. Degarelix administration was associated with a significant decrease in BMD after 12 months (2.4% reduction from baseline at lumbar spine). Serum CTX and ALP increased significantly (median increase from baseline 99% and 19.3%, respectively). An inverse correlation was observed between ALMI and CTX, but not ALP, at both baseline (Pearson r = -0.62, P < .0001) and month 12 (Pearson r = -0.41, P = .032). Moreover, a significant inverse correlation between changes in ALMI and CTX at 12 months (Pearson r = -0.43, P = .019) and a direct relationship between changes of ALMI and ALP (Pearson r = 0.44, P = .016) during degarelix therapy were observed.

CONCLUSION

Degarelix administration is associated with a significant decrease in BMD and increase in bone turnover markers. ALMI is a promising predictor of bone loss in prostate cancer patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy, and ALMI changes during therapy are associated with bone turnover derangement favoring bone quality alterations.

Relugolix in the management of prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Relugolix is the first oral gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist. Based on the phase III HERO trial results, relugolix received Food and Drug Administration approval for adult patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa).

AREAS COVERED

: We provide an overview of the preclinical and clinical development of relugolix and its role in the current treatment landscape of PCa.

EXPERT OPINION

Relugolix leads to rapid inhibition of testicular production of testosterone and its rapid recovery upon discontinuation. In the HERO trial, relugolix was associated with a superior cardiovascular safety profile compared to GnRH agonists. These attributes make relugolix a promising therapy for patients with pre-existing cardiovascular co-morbidities, those pursuing intermittent androgen deprivation therapy, and those who desire rapid testosterone recovery during "off-treatment" periods. In the HERO trial, very few patients received concomitant enzalutamide (n=17, 2.7%) or docetaxel (n<10, 1.3%). Safety of relugolix has not been established in combination with many androgen-receptor-axis targeted therapies (e.g. abiraterone, apalutamide), cabazitaxel, or lutetium Lu 177 vipivotide tetraxetan, which precludes its use in combination with these agents. In addition, being an oral drug, relugolix may also be associated with challenges of affordability, adherence, and compliance in this predominantly elderly population.

Impact of add-back FSH on human and mouse prostate following gonadotropin ablation by GnRH antagonist treatment

OBJECTIVE

During androgen ablation in prostate cancer by the standard gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist treatment, only luteinizing hormone (LH) is permanently suppressed while circulating follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) rebounds. We explored direct prostatic effects of add-back FSH, after androgen ablation with GnRH antagonist, permanently suppressing both gonadotropins.

METHODS

The effects of recombinant human (rFSH) were examined in mice treated with vehicle (controls), GnRH antagonist degarelix (dgx), dgx + rFSH, dgx + flutamide, or dgx + rFSH + flutamide for 4 weeks. Prostates and testes size and expression of prostate-specific and/or androgen-responsive genes were measured. Additionally, 33 young men underwent dgx-treatment. Seventeen were supplemented with rFSH (weeks 1-5), and all with testosterone (weeks 4-5). Testosterone, gondotropins, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and inhibin B were measured.

RESULTS

In dgx and dgx + flutamide treated mice, prostate weight/body weight was 91% lower than in controls, but 41 and 11%, respectively, was regained by rFSH treatment (P = 0.02). The levels of seminal vesicle secretion 6, Pbsn, Nkx3.1, beta-microseminoprotein, and inhibin b were elevated in dgx + rFSH-treated animals compared with only dgx treated (all P < 0.05). In men, serum inhibin B rose after dgx treatment but was subsequently suppressed by testosterone. rFSH add-back had no effect on PSA levels.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide novel evidence for the direct effects of FSH on prostate size and gene expression in chemically castrated mice. However, in chemically castrated men, FSH had no effect on PSA production. Whether FSH effects on the prostate in humans also require suppression of the residual adrenal-derived androgens and/or a longer period of rFSH stimulation, remains to be explored.

A review of clinical evidence to assess differences in efficacy and safety of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist (goserelin) and LHRH antagonist (degarelix)

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRH-A), goserelin, and antagonist, degarelix, are both indicated for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer (PCa); however, large comparative trials evaluating their efficacy and safety are lacking. In this review, we assessed the available evidence for both the drugs. Although degarelix achieves an early rapid decline in testosterone (T) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, median T and PSA levels, in addition to prostate volume and International Prostate Symptom Scores, become comparable with goserelin over the remaining treatment period. Degarelix causes no initial flare, therefore it is recommended in patients with spinal metastases or ureteric obstruction. Goserelin achieves lower PSA, improved time to progression, and better survival outcomes when administered adjunctively to radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone, with significant results even over long-term follow-up. The evidence supporting adjuvant degarelix use is limited. Goserelin has better injection site safety, single-step delivery, and an efficient administration schedule compared with degarelix, which has significantly higher injection site reactions and less efficient administration mechanism. There is conflicting evidence about the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), and caution is required when using LHRH-A in patients with preexisting CVD. There is considerable long-term evidence for goserelin in patients with advanced PCa, with degarelix being a more recent option. The available comparative evidence of goserelin versus degarelix has several inherent limitations related to study design, sample size, conduct, and statistical analyses, and hence warrants robust prospective trials and long-term follow-up.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist associated with lower cardiovascular risk compared with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist in prostate cancer: A nationwide cohort and in vitro study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine whether cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) differs between those who receive gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (GnRHa) therapy and those who receive GnRH antagonist therapy.

METHODS

Using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we analyzed data by comparing 666 participants receiving GnRH antagonists and 1332 propensity score-matched participants treated with GnRHa in a 1:2 fashion during the period from May 1, 2015, to September 30, 2018. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate the treatment effect on CV outcomes. Furthermore, we conducted an in vitro study to investigate the effect of a GnRHa (leuprolide) or a GnRH antagonist (degarelix) on matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) expression and invasion ability in THP-1 differentiated macrophages.

RESULTS

GnRH antagonist therapy was associated with a lower risk of composite CV events of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or CV death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.90) than GnRHa therapy, with a mean follow-up period of 1.21 years. Significantly lower risks of CV death (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.70) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.97) were observed in the GnRH antagonist group. In the in vitro study, leuprolide, but not degarelix, significantly increased the expression of MMP-9 activity and the invasive ability of THP-1 differentiated macrophages through gelatin zymography and the matrix invasion assay, respectively.

CONCLUSION

GnRH antagonists were associated with reduced risk CV events compared with the GnRHa among patients with PCa, which may be through effects on macrophages.

Current and emerging gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists for the treatment of prostate cancer

Introduction:Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is currently the backbone treatment of metastatic prostate cancer and is also used in combination with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Castration may be achieved either by bilateral orchiectomy or by administration of LHRH agonists or GnRH antagonists.Areas covered: In this article, the authors assess the current and emerging role of GnRH antagonists for the treatment of prostate cancer focusing on oncological results and safety (i.e. cardiovascular risk). In addition, updated data regarding the first orally administered GnRH antagonist, relugolix, is presented.Expert opinion: Studies demonstrate that GnRH antagonists are at least equal with LHRH agonists in terms of testosterone suppression and PSA progression free survival with a major advantage being rapid testosterone suppression. Thus, the optimal group of patients included symptomatic metastatic prostate cancer patients especially if cardiovascular comorbidities or LUTS are also present. Emerging data regarding benefit of the use of GnRH antagonists in patients with concomitant cardiovascular disease are of great interest. Relugolix has emerged as the first orally administered GnRH antagonist able to achieve and maintain testosterone castration levels and it is associated with a profound reduction of major cardiovascular events.

Progress in Clinical Research on Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Receptor Antagonists for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor agonists are still the most commonly used androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) drugs for prostate cancer in clinical practice. Currently, the GnRH receptor antagonists used for endocrine therapy for prostate cancer primarily include degarelix and relugolix (TAK-385). The former is administered by subcutaneous injection, while the latter is an oral drug. Compared to GnRH agonists, GnRH antagonists reduce serum testosterone levels more rapidly without an initial testosterone surge or subsequent microsurges. This review focuses on the mechanism of action of GnRH antagonists and agonists, the developmental history of GnRH antagonists, and emerging data from clinical studies of the two antagonists used as endocrine therapy for prostate cancer.

Does Exist a Differential Impact of Degarelix Versus LHRH Agonists on Cardiovascular Safety? Evidences From Randomized and Real-World Studies

The main systemic therapy for the management of hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (PC) is androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), with the use of long-acting luteinizing hormone releasing-hormone (LHRH) agonists considered the main form of ADT used in clinical practice to obtain castration in PC. The concomitant administration of antiandrogens for the first weeks could reduce the incidence of clinical effects related to the testosterone flare-up in the first injection of LHRH. On the contrary, Gonadotropin Rh (GnRH) antagonists produce a rapid decrease of testosterone levels without the initial flare-up, with degarelix commonly used in clinical practice to induce castration in PC patients. Even if no long-term data are reported in terms of survival to define a superiority of GnRH or LHRH, for oncological efficacy and PC control, data from randomized clinical trials and from real-life experiences, suggest a difference in cardiovascular risk of patients starting ADT. The age-related decline in testosterone levels may represent a factor connected to the increase of cardiovascular disease risk, however, the role of ADT in increasing CV events remains controversial. For these reasons, the aim of the paper is to synthesize the difference in cardiovascular risk between LHRH and degarelix in patients undergoing ADT. A difference in cardiovascular risk could be indeed an important parameter in the evaluation of these two forms of castration therapy. The Randomized trials analyzed in this paper sustain a possible protective role for degarelix versus LHRH agonists in reducing the rate of new CV events and interventions in the short-term period. On the contrary, real-word data are contradictory in different national experiences and are strongly conditioned by huge differences between the LHRH agonists group and the degarelix group.

The Effects of Quassinoid-Rich Eurycoma longifolia Extract on Bone Turnover and Histomorphometry Indices in the Androgen-Deficient Osteoporosis Rat Model

Male osteoporosis is associated with higher rates of disability and mortality. Hence the search for suitable intervention and treatment to prevent the degeneration of skeletal health in men is necessary. Eurycoma longifolia (EL), a traditional plant with aphrodisiac potential may be used to treat and prevent male osteoporosis. The skeletal protective effect of quassinoid-rich EL extract, which has a high content of eurycomanone, has not been studied. This study aimed to determine whether EL could prevent skeletal deteriorations in gonadal hormone-deficient male rats. Ninety-six male Sprague⁻Dawley rats were randomly assigned to baseline, sham-operated (Sham), orchidectomised or chemically castrated groups. Chemical castration was achieved via subcutaneous injection of degarelix at 2 mg/kg. The orchidectomised and degarelix-castrated rats were then divided into negative control groups (ORX, DGX), testosterone-treated groups (intramuscular injection at 7 mg/kg weekly) (ORX + TES, DGX + TES), and EL-supplemented groups receiving daily oral gavages at doses of 25 mg/kg (ORX + EL25, DGX + EL25), 50 mg/kg (ORX + EL50, DGX + EL50), and 100 mg/kg (ORX + EL100, DGX + EL100). Following 10 weeks of treatment, the rats were euthanized and their blood and femora were collected. Bone biochemical markers, serum testosterone, osteoprotegerin (OPG), and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa β-ligand (RANKL) levels and histomorphometric indices were evaluated. Quassinoid-rich EL supplementation was found to reduce degenerative changes of trabecular structure by improving bone volume, trabecular number, and separation. A reduction in the percentage of osteoclast and increase in percentage of osteoblast on bone surface were also seen with EL supplementation. Dynamic histomorphometric analysis showed that the single-labeled surface was significantly decreased while the double-labeled surface was significantly increased with EL supplementations. There was a marginal but significant increase in serum testosterone levels in the ORX + EL25, DGX + EL50, and DGX + EL100 groups compared to their negative control groups. Quassinoid-rich EL extract was effective in reducing skeletal deteriorations in the androgen-deficient osteoporosis rat model.

Efficacy and safety of 3-month dosing regimen of degarelix in Japanese subjects with prostate cancer: A phase III study

Non‐inferiority in the cumulative castration rate of the 3‐month formulation of degarelix compared with the 3‐month formulation of goserelin was evaluated in subjects with prostate cancer. A phase III, open‐label, parallel‐arm study was carried out. An initial dose of 240 mg degarelix or 3.6 mg goserelin was given s.c.; after day 28, a maintenance dose of 480 mg degarelix or 10.8 mg goserelin was given once every 84 days. Non‐inferiority in castration rate and safety of degarelix to goserelin were evaluated. The primary end‐point was the cumulative castration rate from day 28 to day 364 and the non‐inferiority margin was set to be 10%. A total of 234 subjects with prostate cancer were randomized to the degarelix group (n = 117) and the goserelin group (n = 117). The cumulative castration rate was 95.1% in the degarelix group and 100.0% in the goserelin group. As there were no events in the goserelin group, an additional analysis was carried out using 95% confidence intervals of the difference in the proportion of subjects with castration. Analyses indicated the non‐inferiority of the 3‐month formulation of degarelix to goserelin. Degarelix showed more rapid decreases in testosterone, luteinizing hormone, follicle stimulating hormone, and prostate‐specific antigen levels compared with goserelin. The most common adverse events in the degarelix group were injection site reactions. Non‐inferiority of the 3‐month formulation of degarelix to goserelin was shown for testosterone suppression. The 3‐month formulation of degarelix was also found to be tolerated as an androgen deprivation therapy for patients with prostate cancer. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT01964170).

A Proof-of-Concept Clinical Trial of A Single Luteal Use of Long-Acting Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Antagonist Degarelix in Controlled Ovarian Stimulation for In Vitro Fertilization: Long Antagonist Protocol

INTRODUCTION

A drawback of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocols in in vitro fertilization (IVF) is that they have limited flexibility in cycle programming. This proof of concept study explored the efficacy of a single-dose, long-acting GnRH antagonist IVF protocol. Trial registration number is NCT03240159, retrospectively registered on March 08, 2017.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The efficacy of a single-dose long-acting antagonist, degarelix, was explored initially in healthy donors and subsequently in infertile patients. In the first part, five healthy oocyte donors underwent ovarian stimulation with this new protocol: in the late luteal phase, at day 24, a bolus injection of degarelix was administered subcutaneously to control the LH surge in the follicular phase. Ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins was initiated subsequently from day 7 to day 10. End points were first to inhibit the LH surge later in the follicular phase and, second, to retrieve mature oocytes for IVF. In the second part, five infertile women received the same bolus injection of degarelix administered during the luteal phase at day 24. Different gonadotropin starting days (day 2 through day 8) were tested in order to observe possible differences in ovarian stimulation. In these infertile patients, fresh embryo transfers were performed to assess the pregnancy efficacy of this protocol on pregnancy outcomes and to address any possible negative effects on endometrium receptivity.

RESULTS

In the first part of the study, all donors were effectively downregulated with a single luteal dose of 0.5 ml of degarelix for up to 22 days until the final oocyte maturation triggering day. Mature oocytes were retrieved after 36 h from all patients and all produced 2-7 blastocysts. In the second part, all five infertile patients achieved sufficient LH downregulation and completed ovarian stimulation without any LH surge. All patients (except one with freeze all strategy) had blastocysts transferred and pregnancy occurred in three out of five women.

CONCLUSION

A single dose of the long-acting antagonist degarelix during the luteal phase appears to be effective in downregulating hypophysis during ovarian stimulation. This represents a possible new protocol for IVF, which should be further elucidated in RCTs.

Degarelix treatment is compatible with diabetes and antithrombotic therapy in patients with prostate cancer

Introduction

Therapeutically induced androgen deficiency (AD) is a standard treatment for patients with prostate cancer, but it is often associated with various adverse effects (AEs) that may lead to discontinuation. Some AEs may depend on the patient's health condition, while others may be due to complications of the drug delivery method. Degarelix is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist widely used for the treatment of androgen-dependent prostate cancer. This study aimed to ascertain the following: 1) the compatibility of degarelix treatment with diabetes and 2) any specific causal associations of degarelix injections with increased blood clotting and antithrombotic therapy requirements.

Patients and methods

The medical records of 162 patients with prostate cancer who had undergone degarelix treatment were retrospectively examined. The association of a medical history of diabetes and anticoagulant co-treatment with degarelix treatment discontinuation was analyzed statistically.

Results

Rapid and significant decreases in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels during the course of degarelix treatment were detected for patients with prostate cancer regardless of clinical state. During the 27 months of treatment, 68 subjects (48%) ceased degarelix treatment, owing to several reasons, mainly financial issues. Among these subjects, 19 had diabetes, while 35 were treated with antithrombotics. Extensive statistical analysis indicated that there were no causal associations between degarelix treatment discontinuation and preexisting diabetes or antithrombotic therapy.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that preexisting diabetes and antithrombotic therapy were not significant factors for the discontinuation of degarelix treatment in patients with prostate cancer.

Efficacy and safety of a 3-month dosing regimen of degarelix in Japanese patients with prostate cancer: a phase II maintenance-dose-finding study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of degarelix 3-month depot in Japanese patients with prostate cancer.

Methods

In this Phase II, open-label, parallel-group study, 155 Japanese prostate cancer patients were randomized to treatment with degarelix administered subcutaneously at a maintenance dose of 360 or 480 mg every 84 days for 12 months, after receiving an initial dose of 240 mg. The primary endpoint was the cumulative probability of serum testosterone ≤0.5 ng/ml (Days 28–364). Secondary endpoints included percent change in serum prostate-specific antigen level and proportion of patients with prostate-specific antigen failure at Day 364. For safety, adverse events were evaluated.

Results

The cumulative probability of serum testosterone ≤0.5 ng/ml (Days 28–364) was 88.3% (95% confidence interval: 77.9–94.0%) and 97.2% (95% confidence interval: 89.4–99.3%) in the 360 and 480 mg groups, respectively. The median percent change in serum prostate-specific antigen level from baseline to Day 364 was −95.05% and −96.43% in the 360 and 480 mg groups, respectively; the proportion of patients with prostate-specific antigen failure was 2.7% and 1.3%. The most frequent adverse event was injection site reaction; however, this did not cause any patient to discontinue treatment.

Conclusions

The 3-month dosing regimen of degarelix 360/480 mg was effective and well tolerated for treatment of Japanese prostate cancer patients. The 480 mg group showed a higher cumulative castration rate than the 360 mg group; thus, 480 mg was considered to be the optimal clinical dosage for future Phase III trials.

The Relationship of Industry Payments to Prescribing Behavior: A Study of Degarelix and Denosumab

INTRODUCTION

The influence of financial ties to pharmaceutical companies remains controversial. We aimed to assess a potential relationship between pharmaceutical payments and prescription patterns for degarelix and denosumab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (Medicare B) data containing 2012 claims compared to OpenPayments (Sunshine Act) data for the second half of 2013. Urologists and medical oncologists who billed Medicare for degarelix or denosumab were cross referenced in both databases and payments were aggregated into a consolidated dataset. Adjusted beneficiary count and total Medicare reimbursement were compared according to receipt of Sunshine payment, and an association between Sunshine payment amount and total Medicare reimbursement was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 160 prescribers of degarelix and 1,507 prescribers of denosumab, 91 (57%) and 854 (57%) received Sunshine payment, respectively. Degarelix prescribers who received Sunshine payment had higher median total Medicare reimbursement ($13,257 vs. $9,554, p = 0.01). Denosumab prescribers who received Sunshine payment had both higher median adjusted beneficiary count (55 vs. 50, p < 0.001) and median total Medicare reimbursement ($69,620 vs. $60,732, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, both receipt of Sunshine payment (adjusted median difference $5,844, 95% CI $937 - $10,749) and oncology specialty (adjusted median difference $34,380, 95% CI $26,715 - $42,045) were independently associated with total Medicare reimbursement for denosumab.

CONCLUSIONS

In the case of degarelix and denosumab, there is a weak association between pharmaceutical company payments on prescribers' prescription behavior patterns.

A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials with degarelix versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists for advanced prostate cancer

Our aim was to systematically evaluate the benefits of degarelix as antagonist versus agonists of gonadotropin-releasing hormones (GnRH) for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer (PC). This comparison was performed either in terms of biochemical or oncological or safety profiles. To this end we, carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.We selected only studies directly and prospectively analyzing the two treatments in the same population (randomized phase III studies). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-analyses process for reporting studies.After we eliminated studies according to the exclusion criteria, 9 publications were considered relevant to this review. These articles described 5 clinical trials that were eligible for inclusion. The follow-up duration in all trials did not exceed 364 days. This meta-analysis and review comprised a total of 1719 men, 1061 randomized to degarelix versus 658 to GnRH agonists treatment for advanced PC. Oncological results were evaluated only in 1 trial (CS21:408 cases) and they were not the primary endpoints of the study. Treatment emerging adverse events were reported in 61.4% and 58.8% of patients in the degarelix and GnRH agonists group, respectively (odds ratio, OR = 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 0.78-1.77, P > 0.1). Treatment related severe cardiovascular side effects were reported (trial CS21-30-35) in 1.6% and 3.6% of patients in the degarelix and GnRH agonists group, respectively (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.26-1.14, P > 0.1).Our analysis evidences relevant limitations in particular for the comparative evaluation of the efficacy and the oncological results related to degarelix.

Degarelix monotherapy compared with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists plus anti-androgen flare protection in advanced prostate cancer: an analysis of two randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess differences in efficacy outcomes between luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist plus antiandrogen (AA) flare protection and monotherapy with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist degarelix in patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

Data from 1455 patients were pooled from two prospective, phase III randomized 1-year clinical trials of degarelix versus LHRH agonist with or without AA. The AA bicalutamide was administered at the investigator's discretion. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model and a conditional logistic regression model was used for a case-control analysis of odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Patients received degarelix monotherapy (n = 972) or LHRH agonist (n = 483) of whom 57 also received AA. Overall, prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PSA PFS) was improved with degarelix versus LHRH agonist + AA (Cox proportional hazards regression model-adjusted HR for PSA PFS failure was 0.56 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.97, p = 0.038]). To compensate for a higher proportion of patients with metastases, Gleason score 7-10, and PSA >20 ng/ml in the LHRH agonist + AA group, a case-control analysis using a conditional logistic regression model was utilized. This resulted in an OR for PSA PFS of 0.42 (95% CI 0.20-0.89; p = 0.023) in the overall population, and 0.35 (95% CI 0.13-0.96; p = 0.042) in patients with PSA >50 ng/ml at baseline, when treated with degarelix versus LHRH agonists + AA. There were a small number of deaths, 1.9% with degarelix and 7% with LHRH agonists + AA (case-control analysis OR = 0.37; p = 0.085).

CONCLUSIONS

Degarelix monotherapy produced a more favorable effect on PSA PFS outcomes than a LHRH agonist + AA flare protection therapy in patients with prostate cancer when a case-control analysis was used to compensate for differences between treatment groups.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of degarelix for prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists have been the mainstay of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for advanced prostate cancer for over two decades. However, their limitations include a transient initial rise in testosterone, failure to reduce testosterone to castrate levels in some patients, incomplete suppression of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and an increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in those with pre-existing CV disease. This article considers whether the LHRH antagonist degarelix offers significant advantages over LHRH agonists.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the development and introduction of degarelix, its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and the efficacy and safety results of Phase II and III clinical studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Degarelix has clear pharmacodynamic advantages over the LHRH agonist leuprolide in terms of almost immediate suppression of testosterone to castrate levels and sustained suppression of FSH levels. It reduces the risk of CV events vs agonists in men with pre-existing CV disease. This finding, which may reflect differential effects on FSH and/or endothelial plaques, requires confirmation in a prospective study; however, it is the view of the author that the differential effects on CV events are real and suggest that men with pre-existing CV disease requiring ADT should preferentially be treated with degarelix.

Efficacy of degarelix in prostate cancer patients following failure on luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist treatment: results from an open-label, multicentre, uncontrolled, phase II trial (CS27)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of second-line degarelix in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) after treatment failure with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist.

METHODS

This 1-year exploratory, multicentre, open-label phase II trial was performed in 2 patient cohorts (Cohort 1, n = 25; Cohort 2, n = 12) in Germany. Patients with castrate-resistant PCa after primary hormonal treatment received degarelix 240 mg, followed by 11 monthly maintenance doses of 80 mg. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with decreasing/stable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (relative change ⩽+10% of baseline PSA) after 3 months.

RESULTS

At Month 3, the response rate (intention-to-treat, last observation carried forward analysis) was 16.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 4.74-37.38] in Cohort 1 and 33.3% (95% CI: 9.92-65.11) in Cohort 2. The probability of completing 12 months without PSA progression was 8.8% (95% CI: 1.51-24.3) in Cohort 1 and 8.3% (95% CI: 0.5-31.1) in Cohort 2. Degarelix was well tolerated; the most frequently reported adverse events were local injection-site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

In PCa patients who failed LHRH therapy, degarelix was well tolerated and achieved a limited PSA response. Phase III trials show that disease control benefits with degarelix versus agonists are more clearly demonstrated as first-line therapy.

An update on the use of degarelix in the treatment of advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy remains the mainstay of medical treatment for advanced prostate cancer. Commonly, this is achieved with medical androgen deprivation rather than surgical intervention as the permanence and psychological effects of the latter are unacceptable for most patients. Degarelix is a third generation antagonist of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH, also termed gonadotropin-releasing hormone) for the first-line treatment of androgen-dependent advanced prostate cancer. Degarelix acts directly on the pituitary receptors for LHRH, blocking the action of endogenous LHRH. The use of degarelix eliminates the initial undesirable surge in gonadotropin and testosterone levels, which is produced by agonists of LHRH. Degarelix is the most comprehensively studied and widely available LHRH antagonist worldwide. Clinical trials have demonstrated that degarelix has a long-term efficacy similar to the LHRH agonist leuprolide in achieving testosterone suppression in patients with prostate cancer. Degarelix, however, produces a faster suppression of testosterone and prostate-specific antigen (PSA), with no testosterone surges or microsurges, and thus prevents the risk of clinical flare in advanced disease. Recent clinical trials demonstrated that treatment with degarelix results in improved disease control when compared with an LHRH agonist in terms of superior PSA progression-free survival, suggesting that degarelix likely delays progression to castration-resistant disease and has a more significant impact on bone serum alkaline phosphatase and follicle-stimulating hormone. Degarelix is usually well tolerated, with limited toxicity and no evidence of systemic allergic reactions in clinical studies. Degarelix thus represents an important addition to the hormonal armamentarium for therapy of advanced androgen-dependent prostate cancer.

Experience with degarelix in the treatment of prostate cancer

Degarelix is a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the first-line treatment of androgen-dependent advanced prostate cancer. It has a direct mechanism of action that blocks the action of GnRH on the pituitary with no initial surge in gonadotrophin or testosterone levels. Degarelix is the most extensively studied and widely available GnRH antagonist worldwide. Clinical studies have demonstrated similar efficacy to the GnRH agonist leuprolide in achieving testosterone suppression in patients with prostate cancer. However, degarelix produces a faster suppression of testosterone and prostate-specific antigen (PSA), with no testosterone surge or microsurges, thus preventing the risk of clinical flare in advanced disease. Clinical trials have demonstrated that degarelix can offer improved disease control when compared with a GnRH agonist in terms of superior PSA progression-free survival (suggesting that degarelix likely delays progression to castration-resistant disease), and a more significant impact on bone serum alkaline phosphatase and follicle-stimulating hormone. Degarelix is generally well tolerated, with no reports of systemic allergic reactions in any clinical studies. In conclusion, degarelix offers clinicians a rational first-line hormonal monotherapy option for the management of advanced prostate cancer.

An update on the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists in prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the main treatment approach in advanced prostate cancer and in recent years has primarily involved the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists. However, despite their efficacy, GnRH agonists have several drawbacks associated with their mode of action. These include an initial testosterone surge and testosterone microsurges on repeat administration. GnRH antagonists provide an alternative approach to ADT with a more direct mode of action that involves immediate blockade of GnRH receptors. Antagonists produce a more rapid suppression of testosterone (and prostate-specific antigen [PSA]) without a testosterone surge or microsurges and appear to offer an effective and well tolerated option for the hormonal treatment of prostate cancer. Comparisons with GnRH agonists have shown GnRH antagonists to be at least as effective in achieving and maintaining castrate testosterone levels in patients with prostate cancer. Furthermore, with antagonists, the lack of an initial testosterone surge (which may cause clinical flare) may allow more rapid relief of symptoms related to prostate cancer, avoid the need for concomitant antiandrogens to prevent clinical flare (so avoiding any antiandrogen-associated adverse events) and allow GnRH antagonist use in patients with high tumour burden and/or acute problems such as spinal cord compression. Although several antagonists have been investigated, only degarelix and abarelix are currently available for clinical use in prostate cancer. Currently, degarelix is the most extensively studied and widely available agent in this class. Degarelix is one of a newer generation of antagonists which, in a comprehensive and ongoing clinical development programme, has been shown to provide rapid, profound and sustained testosterone suppression without the systemic allergic reactions associated with earlier antagonists. This review examines the currently available data on GnRH antagonists in prostate cancer.

Evaluation of degarelix in the management of prostate cancer

Medical castration using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor agonists currently provides the mainstay of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Although effective, these agents only reduce testosterone levels after a delay of 14 to 21 days; they also cause an initial surge in testosterone that can stimulate the cancer and lead to exacerbation of symptoms ("clinical flare") in patients with advanced disease. Phase III trial data for the recently approved GnRH receptor blocker, degarelix, demonstrated that it is as effective and well tolerated as GnRH agonists. However, it has a pharmacological profile more closely matching orchiectomy, with an immediate onset of action and faster testosterone and PSA suppression, without a testosterone surge or microsurges following repeated injections. As a consequence, with this GnRH blocker, there is no risk of clinical flare and no need for concomitant antiandrogen flare protection. Degarelix therefore provides a useful addition to the hormonal armamentarium for prostate cancer and offers a valuable new treatment option for patients with hormone-sensitive advanced disease. Here, we review key preclinical and clinical data for degarelix, and look at patient-focused perspectives in the management of prostate cancer.

Degarelix and its therapeutic potential in the treatment of prostate cancer

Degarelix is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the treatment of patients with prostate cancer in whom hormonal therapy is indicated. Two phase II trials and one phase III have been published as full papers in the literature. In the dose-finding phase II studies an initial dose of 240 mg degarelix sc followed by a monthly injection of 80 mg or 160 mg degarelix sc was sufficient to keep testosterone levels < or = 0.5 ng/ml. In a phase III trial it was demonstrated that degarelix was not inferior (in terms of testosterone suppression and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] decline) compared to standard hormonal therapy, ie, a GnRH agonist such as leuprolide. In fact, degarelix was associated with a faster testosterone suppression and PSA decline than leuprolide. Adverse events such as injection site reactions (40% vs <1%) and chills (4% vs 0%) were more commonly associated with degarelix. Also, degarelix is currently only available as one-month depot whereas in daily practice three-month depots (of GnRH agonists) are the preferred regimen. However, degarelix was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.