Patient and caregiver benefit-risk preferences for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Srinivas S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7520320 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Patient and caregiver benefit-risk preferences for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment.
Srinivas Sandy S Mohamed Ateesha F AF Appukkuttan Sreevalsa S Botteman Marc M Ng Xinyi X Joshi Namita N Tsai Jui-Hua JH Fang Jarjieh J Waldeck A Reginald AR Simmons Stacey J SJ
Cancer medicine 20200729 18
<h4>Background</h4>Recently approved second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine how nmCRPC patients and caregivers perceive the benefits versus risks of these new treatments.<h4>Methods</h4>An online DCE survey with 14 treatment choice questions was administered to nmCRPC patients and caregivers. Each choice quest ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:After the introduction of prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, we have witnessed a dramatic stage migration. As a result, an increasing number of patients are diagnosed at earlier stages and receive local treatments including surgery or radiation. When these local treatments fail by the definition of increasing PSA levels, patients are usually treated with androgen-deprivation therapy. A fraction of these patients will finally reach a state of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) even without radiological evidence of metastasis, which is referred to as nonmetastatic CRPC (NM-CRPC). Most men with advanced or metastatic prostate cancer initially respond to various types of androgen ablation, but a considerable portion of them eventually progress to NM-CRPC. Among patients with NM-CPRC, about one-third will develop bone metastasis within 2 years. In these patients, PSA kinetics is the most powerful indicator of progression and is usually used to trigger further imaging studies and enrollment in clinical trials. Although CRPC remains largely driven by the androgen receptor, the benefit of second-line hormonal manipulations, including first-generation antiandrogens, adrenal synthesis inhibitors, and steroids, has not been investigated in men with NM-CRPC. To date, denosumab is the only agent that has been shown to delay the onset of bone metastasis. However, overall survival did not differ. In treating NM-CRPC patients, physicians should recognize the heterogeneity of the disease and acknowledge that the recently approved second-line treatments have been studied only in advanced stages of the disease.
| S-EPMC3956942 | biostudies-other
Project description:The treatment for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is a highly unmet medical need. The classic treatment approach for these patients-androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone-until metastatic progression is now considered suboptimal. Several randomized phase III clinical trials have demonstrated significant clinical benefits-including significantly better overall survival (OS)-for treatments that combine ADT with apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide. As a result, these approaches are now included in treatment guidelines and are considered a standard of care. In the present article, we discuss the changing landscape of the management of patients with nmCRPC.
| S-EPMC8619952 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMen with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer and a rapidly rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level are at high risk for metastasis. We hypothesized that enzalutamide, which prolongs overall survival among patients with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer, would delay metastasis in men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer and a rapidly rising PSA level.MethodsIn this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer and a PSA doubling time of 10 months or less who were continuing androgen-deprivation therapy to receive enzalutamide (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was metastasis-free survival (defined as the time from randomization to radiographic progression or as the time to death without radiographic progression).ResultsA total of 1401 patients (median PSA doubling time, 3.7 months) underwent randomization. As of June 28, 2017, a total of 219 of 933 patients (23%) in the enzalutamide group had metastasis or had died, as compared with 228 of 468 (49%) in the placebo group. The median metastasis-free survival was 36.6 months in the enzalutamide group versus 14.7 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.24 to 0.35; P<0.001). The time to the first use of a subsequent antineoplastic therapy was longer with enzalutamide treatment than with placebo (39.6 vs. 17.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.21; P<0.001; such therapy was used in 15% vs. 48% of patients) as was the time to PSA progression (37.2 vs. 3.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.07; P<0.001; progression occurred in 22% vs. 69% of patients). At the first interim analysis of overall survival, 103 patients (11%) receiving enzalutamide and 62 (13%) receiving placebo had died. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 31% of the patients receiving enzalutamide, as compared with 23% of those receiving placebo.ConclusionsAmong men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a rapidly rising PSA level, enzalutamide treatment led to a clinically meaningful and significant 71% lower risk of metastasis or death than placebo. Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profile of enzalutamide. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; PROSPER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02003924 .).
| S-EPMC8288034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prostate carcinoma is a highly prevalent biologically and clinically diverse disease, generally associated with a consistent elevation of prostate-specific antigen levels. Castration-resistant prostate cancer represents a heterogeneous clinical setting that ranges from patients with an asymptomatic prostate-specific antigen elevation after hormone blockade failure and good performance status to patients with significant debilitating symptoms and rapidly progressive disease, leading to death. Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is a transient disease stage defined over specific criteria established within a sensitive time period. The majority of the patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer will eventually develop metastatic lesions, associated with prostate cancer-specific morbidity and mortality. However, progression to metastatic disease is a heterogeneous process still not fully understood, with studies suggesting that younger age, high Gleason score (> 7), high prostate-specific antigen levels, reduced prostate-specific antigen doubling time (< 6 months), and a rapid alkaline phosphatase rise as potentially associated factors. Although the nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment landscape has substantially evolved in recent years, the disease heterogeneity makes treatment decisions for this population challenging in the effort to achieve a balance between the risk of disease progression and the toxicity of new treatments in patients who often have associated comorbidities, yet are generally asymptomatic. The present article addresses the current main challenges in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer management, including in diagnosis, owing to the development of new imaging modalities with a direct impact in disease detection, prognostic classification, as a result of the traditionally oversimplified definition of disease aggressiveness (mainly based on prostate-specific antigen doubling time), and patient selection for the most adequate treatment.
| S-EPMC9338100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent approvals of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) have changed the treatment landscape for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). These SGARIs have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment to explore how United States physicians make treatment decisions between adverse events (AEs) and survival gains in nmCRPC, a largely asymptomatic disease.MethodsTreating physicians (n = 149) participated in an online survey that included 14 treatment choice questions, each comparing 2 hypothetical treatment profiles, which varied in terms of 5 safety and 2 efficacy attributes. We described safety attributes (fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, falls, and fractures) in terms of severity and frequency, and efficacy attributes (overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression) in terms of duration of effect. We used a random parameters logit model to estimate preference weights and importance scores for each attribute. We also estimated the amount of survival gain physicians were willing to trade for a reduction in specific AEs between treatment options.ResultsPhysicians placed more importance on survival than on time to pain progression, and viewed a reduction in cognitive problems from severe to none, a reduction in risk of a serious fracture from 8% to none, and a reduction in fatigue from severe to none as the most important safety attributes. Physicians were willing to forego 9.1 and 6.6 months of OS, respectively, to reduce cognitive problems and fatigue from severe to mild-to-moderate. To reduce the risk of a serious fracture from 8 to 5% and 5% to none, physicians were willing to trade 3.9 and 5.3 months of OS, respectively.ConclusionsPhysicians were willing to trade substantial amounts of survival to avoid AEs between hypothetical treatments. These results emphasize the importance of carefully balancing therapies' benefits and risks to ultimately optimize the overall quality of nmCRPC patients' survival. Nonetheless, it is noted that the results from the study sample of 149 physicans may not be representative of the viewpoints of all nmCRPC-treating physicians.
| S-EPMC7310549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is defined as a rising prostate-specific antigen concentration, despite castrate levels of testosterone with ongoing androgen-deprivation therapy or orchiectomy, and no detectable metastases by conventional imaging. Patients with nmCRPC progress to metastatic disease and are at risk of developing cancer-related symptoms and morbidity, eventually dying of their disease. While patients with nmCRPC are generally asymptomatic from their disease, they are often older and have chronic comorbidities that require long-term concomitant medication. Therefore, careful consideration of the benefit-risk profile of potential treatments is required.MethodsIn this review, we will discuss the rationale for early treatment of patients with nmCRPC to delay metastatic progression and prolong survival, as well as the factors influencing this treatment decision. We will focus on oral pharmacotherapy with the second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide, and the importance of balancing the clinical benefit they offer with potential adverse events and the consequential impact on quality of life, physical capacity, and cognitive function.Results and conclusionsWhile the definition of nmCRPC is well established, the advent of next-generation imaging techniques capable of detecting hitherto undetectable oligometastatic disease in patients with nmCRPC has fostered debate on the criteria that inform the management of these patients. However, despite these developments, published consensus statements have maintained that the absence of metastases on conventional imaging suffices to guide such therapeutic decisions. In addition, the prolonged metastasis-free survival and recently reported positive overall survival outcomes of the three second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors have provided further evidence for the early use of these agents in patients with nmCRPC in order to delay metastases and prolong survival. Here, we discuss the benefit-risk profiles of apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide based on the data available from their pivotal clinical trials in patients with nmCRPC.
| S-EPMC8134049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceNovel androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs; darolutamide, enzalutamide, and apalutamide) are standard-of-care treatments for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). However, there are sparse data comparing their clinical use and tolerability.ObjectiveTo compare clinical use and outcomes for darolutamide, enzalutamide, and apalutamide in patients with nmCRPC.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study reviewed electronic medical records from the Precision Point Specialty network of US urology practices. Eligible patients had nmCRPC and no prior novel hormonal therapy and initiated novel ARI treatment between August 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2019, to December 31, 2022.ExposuresPatients were prescribed darolutamide, enzalutamide, or apalutamide as their first novel ARI for nmCRPC.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was a composite of 2 end points, treatment discontinuation and progression to metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), whichever occurred first. Both end points were also assessed separately.ResultsAll 870 patients meeting eligibility criteria were included (362 receiving darolutamide [41.6%]; 382, enzalutamide [43.9%]; 126, apalutamide [14.5%]); mean (SD) age was 78.8 (8.7) years. Self-reported race was Black or African American in 187 patients (21.5%), White in 585 (67.2%), and other or unknown in 98 (11.3%). The darolutamide cohort had lower proportions of patients with a composite end point event (134 [37.0%] vs 201 [52.6%] for enzalutamide and 66 [52.4%] for apalutamide), discontinuation (110 [30.4%] for darolutamide vs 156 [40.8%] for enzalutamide and 58 [46.0%] for apalutamide), and progression to mCRPC (64 [17.7%] for darolutamide vs 108 [28.3%] for enzalutamide and 35 [27.8%] for apalutamide) during the study period. After adjusting for baseline covariates, patients receiving darolutamide had a lower risk of a composite end point event compared with enzalutamide (risk reduction, 33.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.84]) and apalutamide (risk reduction, 35.1%; HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.48-0.88]). Similarly, patients receiving darolutamide had a lower risk of discontinuation compared with enzalutamide (risk reduction, 27.4%; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.94]) and apalutamide (risk reduction, 39.1%; HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.44-0.85]) and a lower risk of progression to mCRPC compared with enzalutamide (risk reduction, 40.6%; HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.43-0.82]) and apalutamide (risk reduction, 35.3%; HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.42-0.99]). There was no difference between enzalutamide and apalutamide treatment across outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceIn this large cohort study of patients with nmCRPC treated with novel ARIs, results suggest better tolerability for darolutamide compared with enzalutamide and apalutamide, which may be associated with a clinical effectiveness advantage. Comparative clinical studies are needed to guide treatment decisions in the absence of head-to-head clinical trials.
| S-EPMC11350483 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThere is a need to identify prognostic biomarkers to guide treatment intensification in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).ObjectiveTo examine whether molecular subtypes predict response to apalutamide, using archived primary tumor samples from the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 SPARTAN trial.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study, gene expression data from 233 archived samples from patients with nmCRPC enrolled in the SPARTAN trial were generated using a human exon microarray. The present analysis was conducted from May 10, 2018, to October 15, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized (2:1) to apalutamide, 240 mg/d, with androgen deprivation therapy (apalutamide+ADT) or placebo+ADT.Main outcomes and measuresPatients were stratified into high-risk and low-risk categories for developing metastases based on genomic classifier (GC) scores for high (GC >0.6) and low to average (GC≤0.6) and into basal and luminal subtypes; associations between these molecular subtypes and metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis.ResultsMedian age of the 233 included patients was 73 (range, 49-91) years. A total of 116 of 233 patients (50%) in the SPARTAN biomarker subset had high GC scores. Although all patients receiving apalutamide+ADT had improved outcomes, having high GC scores was associated with the greatest improvement in MFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.40; P < .001), OS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29-0.94; P = .03), and PFS2 (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.23-0.67; P = .001) vs placebo+ADT. In total, 152 of 233 patients (65%) had the basal molecular subtype. Although there were no significant differences in MFS, PFS2, or OS between patients with the luminal vs basal subtype in the placebo+ADT arm, patients with the luminal subtype in the apalutamide+ADT arm had a significantly longer MFS (apalutamide+ADT: HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18-0.91; P = .03; placebo+ADT: HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.33-1.31; P = .23) compared with patients with basal subtype; similar trends were observed for OS (apalutamide+ADT: HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-0.98; P = .04; placebo+ADT: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.38-1.60; P = .50), and PFS2 (apalutamide+ADT: HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.42-1.22; P = .22; placebo+ADT: HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.39; P = .33). In regression analysis, the luminal-basal subtype score was significantly associated with MFS in patients receiving apalutamide+ADT (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.15-6.08; P = .02), whereas GC score was significantly associated with MFS in placebo+ADT recipients (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.02-4.27; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this study suggest that the GC score and basal-luminal subtype derived from archived tumor specimens may be biomarkers of response to apalutamide+ADT in the nmCRPC setting. Although overall, the addition of apalutamide to ADT was beneficial, higher-risk and luminal subtypes appeared to benefit most. Obtaining GC scores may be useful for identifying patients for early treatment intensification with apalutamide, and basal-luminal subtyping may be a beneficial approach for patient selection for further treatment intensification in trials combining novel therapies with apalutamide.
| S-EPMC8176389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo date, the efficacy of the androgen receptor inhibitors enzalutamide and apalutamide for the treatment of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) has not been compared directly in a clinical trial setting. Indirect comparisons can be used to assess relative efficacy and provide important information to guide treatment decisions. PROSPER and SPARTAN were double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trials in patients with nmCRPC with overall similar study designs and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Using an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison, based on the final data from the PROSPER and SPARTAN studies, we assessed the comparative efficacy of enzalutamide and apalutamide, both plus androgen deprivation therapy.MethodsUsing placebo as the common comparator, individual patient data from PROSPER were matched to the aggregate patient data from SPARTAN and efficacy endpoints from PROSPER were re-weighted accordingly. Patient baseline characteristics and endpoints were clinically and statistically tested to identify potential effect modifiers, according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Hazard ratios for overall survival (OS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and time to chemotherapy (TTCx) were re-estimated for PROSPER using weighted Cox proportional hazards models and indirectly compared with those of SPARTAN using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.ResultsEstimated hazard ratios [95% credible interval (CrI)] for enzalutamide versus apalutamide were 0.80 (95% CrI 0.58-1.10) for OS, 0.94 (95% CrI 0.69-1.29) for MFS2, and 0.90 (95% CrI 0.63-1.29) for TTCx. Similar results were seen for sensitivity analyses conducted for OS and MFS. Bayesian probability analyses showed a 91.7% favoring enzalutamide for OS, 65.1% for MFS, and 71.4% for TTCx.ConclusionsThe results of this matching-adjusted indirect comparison of final data from PROSPER and SPARTAN indicate comparable efficacy of enzalutamide and apalutamide with potentially a greater probability of longer MFS, OS, and TTCx in patients with nmCRPC treated with enzalutamide versus apalutamide.
| S-EPMC9271511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRacial and ethnic disparities in prostate cancer are poorly understood. A given disparity-related factor may affect outcomes differently at each point along the highly variable trajectory of the disease.ObjectiveTo examine clinical outcomes by race and ethnicity in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) within the US Veterans Health Administration.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective, observational cohort study using electronic health care records (January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2021) in a nationwide equal-access health care system was conducted. Mean (SD) follow-up time was 4.3 (3.3) years. Patients included in the analysis were diagnosed with prostate cancer from January 1, 2006, to December 30, 2020, that progressed to nmCRPC defined by (1) increasing prostate-specific antigen levels, (2) ongoing androgen deprivation, and (3) no evidence of metastatic disease. Patients with metastatic disease or death within the landmark period (3 months after the first nmCRPC evidence) were excluded.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was time from the landmark period to death or metastasis; the secondary outcome was overall survival. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, Kaplan-Meier estimates, and adjusted survival curves were used to evaluate outcome differences by race and ethnicity.ResultsOf 12 992 patients in the cohort, 826 patients identified as Hispanic (6%), 3671 as non-Hispanic Black (28%; henceforth Black), 7323 as non-Hispanic White (56%; henceforth White), and 1172 of other race and ethnicity (9%; henceforth other, including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, unknown by patient, and patient declined to answer). Median time elapsed from nmCRPC to metastasis or death was 5.96 (95% CI, 5.58-6.34) years for Black patients, 5.62 (95% CI, 5.11-6.67) years for Hispanic patients, 4.11 (95% CI, 3.96-4.25) years for White patients, and 3.59 (95% CI, 3.23-3.97) years for other patients. Median unadjusted overall survival was 6.26 (95% CI, 6.03-6.46) years among all patients, 8.36 (95% CI, 8.0-8.8) years for Black patients, 8.56 (95% CI, 7.3-9.7) years for Hispanic patients, 5.48 (95% CI, 5.2-5.7) years for White patients, and 4.48 (95% CI, 4.1-5.0) years for other patients.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this cohort study of patients with nmCRPC suggest that differences in outcomes by race and ethnicity exist; in addition, Black and Hispanic men may have considerably improved outcomes when treated in an equal-access setting.
| S-EPMC10568364 | biostudies-literature