Novel metastatic burden-stratified risk model in de novo metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shiota M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8409413 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundUpfront docetaxel or novel hormonal agents (NHA) such as abiraterone and enzalutamide have become the standard of care for metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). We evaluated real-world management of patients treated with these agents at a single center.Patients and methodsPatients with de novo mHSPC treated with upfront docetaxel or an NHA between January 2014 and April 2019 at Mount Sinai Health System were included. We evaluated time to next treatment (TTNT), PSA progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after initial treatment with these drugs. Kaplan Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used for analysis. We additionally assessed the prognostic value of post-treatment PSA.ResultsWe identified 94 de novo mHSPC patients; 52 and 42 treated with upfront docetaxel and NHAs, respectively. NHAs were associated with a median TTNT of 20.7 months compared to 10.1 months with docetaxel (log-rank p = 0.023). We also observed median PSA PFS of 19 months for NHAs and 13.2 months for docetaxel (p = 0.069). However, OS between the two treatment groups was unchanged. Among docetaxel treated patients, TTNT was shorter among those with high metastasis burden (9.63 vs 25.5 months, p = 0.026) which was not observed among NHA treated patients (25.1 vs 20.7 months, p = 0.79). Regardless of treatment, lower post-treatment PSA levels were associated with improved TTNT (58.95 vs. 11.57 vs. 9.4 months for PSA ≤0.2, 0.2-0.4, >0.4ng/ml, respectively; p<0.001).ConclusionReal world data demonstrated a shorter duration of treatment with docetaxel than NHAs, reflecting the time-limited nature of docetaxel regimens compared to the treat-till-progression approach of NHAs. While TTNT was generally longer for NHAs than docetaxel, some docetaxel-treated patients achieved significant periods of time off treatment. In addition, the depth of PSA response following combination treatment may hold prognostic value for mHSPC outcomes.
| S-EPMC9390935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe treatment landscape for de novo metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) is rapidly evolving. With an abundance of available treatment strategies, selecting the optimal strategy for an individual patient is becoming increasingly challenging. TripleAiM1 aims to evaluate the impact of mHSPC treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and to provide real-world data insights on diagnostics, treatment strategies, patient subgroups and related healthcare expenditure for mHSPC. The aspirational target of TripleAiM1 is that in the near future, a more tailored therapy can be offered based on the individual patient's wishes and needs in accordance with the overarching principle of value-based healthcare.Methods and analysisWe describe the TripleAiM1 study design; a nationwide registry comprising a retrospective and prospective cohort of patients with de novo mHSPC. Starting in May 2020, eligible patients are identified, selected and recruited in 14 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Our hypothesis is that, in a real-world setting, differences in clinically meaningful HRQoL deterioration will be observed for treatment strategies over time. HRQoL data, assessed with patient-reported outcome measures, costs and clinical data will be collected for 24 months.For the retrospective cohort, all patients diagnosed with de novo mHSPC from January 2017 onwards are eligible for inclusion. Patient and tumour characteristics, imaging modalities and treatment patterns will be analysed descriptively to provide a real-world overview.Time-to-event endpoints will be assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and regression models will be employed to analyse baseline characteristics associated with an increased likelihood of death, progression and HRQoL deterioration. Longitudinal mixed-effects models will be employed to assess change of patient-reported outcome scores from baseline until the end of follow-up.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Medical Research Ethics Committee, Twente. Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNL9719.
| S-EPMC10465920 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBone metastasis has been suggested to be a significant impactor on the prognosis of newly diagnosed de novo metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), and some risk stratification models have been proposed on the basis of this hypothesis. However, the effectiveness of these risk stratification criteria has not been fully evaluated in China. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk stratification models in China.MethodsA total of 140 patients who were newly diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer followed by primary androgen deprivation-based therapy from January 2008 to June 2021 at our institution were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into different groups on the basis of high- and low-volume disease (H/LVD) criteria, high-and low-risk disease (H/LRD) criteria, extremity bone metastasis criteria (EBM), and extent of disease (EOD) criteria. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to compare the validity and net benefit of these models. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, we performed univariable and multivariable analyses of the factors influencing overall survival (OS) and the time of progression to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).ResultsThe median patient age was 72 years. Most patients had a Gleason score ≥8 (102 cases, 72.9%) and clinical T stage >2 (75 cases, 53.6%). The median follow-up time was 25 months (range, 2-95 months). Ninety-two patients progressed to CRPC and fifty-seven patients died during the follow-up. The AUC of OS and CRPC showed that the EOD model had higher validity than the other risk stratification models. DCA shows that the net benefit of the EOD model on OS was better than that of the other risk stratification models. As for CRPC, the net benefit of the EOD model was second only to that of the H/LRD model when the threshold was <0.5; however, when the threshold was >0.5, the EOD model outperformed the other models. The effectiveness of EOD as an independent prognostic variable was verified through univariable and multivariable analyses.ConclusionThe EOD model yields reasonable risk stratification for use in Chinese mHSPC patients, providing further evidence supporting its role in clinical decision-making.
| S-EPMC9825052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Probably, patients with de novo (synchronous) and recurrent (metachronous) oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer have different oncologic outcomes. Thus, we are challenged with different scenarios in clinical practice, where different treatment options may apply. In the last years, several prospective studies have focused on the treatment of patients with de novo oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Not only the addition of systemic therapeutic treatments, such as chemotherapy with docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide, next to androgen deprivation therapy, demonstrated to improve outcomes in these patients but also local therapy of the primary has been demonstrated to improve outcomes of low-volume metastatic disease. Next to radiotherapy, also radical prostatectomy has been reported as a feasible and safe treatment option. Additional metastasis-directed therapy in de novo metastatic disease is currently examined by four trials. In the recurrent metastatic setting, less data are available, and it remains uncertain if patients can be treated in the same way as synchronous oligometastatic disease. Metastasis-directed therapy has demonstrated to prolong outcomes, while data on survival are still missing.
| S-EPMC8498729 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recently, mutations in speckle-type pox virus and zinc finger protein (SPOP) gene (mutant SPOP [mtSPOP]) have been associated with improved outcomes to abiraterone in the castration-resistant setting. We hypothesized that mtSPOP would be associated with improved outcomes to systemic therapy in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (d-mCSPC). Retrospective data of newly diagnosed d-mCSPC patients were collected from four institutions. Eligibility criteria included standard androgen deprivation therapy without intensification, and SPOP mutational status (mtSPOP or wild-type SPOP [wtSPOP]) determination by targeted next-generation sequencing from tumor biopsies. A total of 121 men (25 mtSPOP [21%] and 96 wtSPOP [79%]) were included. After adjusting for covariates, mtSPOP was significantly associated with better median progression-free survival (35 vs 13 mo; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.47; p = 0.016) and overall survival (97 vs 69 mo; adjusted HR 0.32; p = 0.027), with similar HR and p value on the univariate analysis. These findings, upon external validation, may assist with counseling and prognostication in the clinic, and inform the design of future clinical trials in this setting. PATIENT SUMMARY: : Presence of tumor mutation in speckle-type pox virus and zinc finger protein (SPOP) gene was associated with improved survival outcomes in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving standard androgen deprivation therapy.
| S-EPMC7572891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAndrogen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the backbone of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer since the 1940s. We assessed whether concomitant treatment with ADT plus docetaxel would result in longer overall survival than that with ADT alone.MethodsWe assigned men with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer to receive either ADT plus docetaxel (at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks for six cycles) or ADT alone. The primary objective was to test the hypothesis that the median overall survival would be 33.3% longer among patients receiving docetaxel added to ADT early during therapy than among patients receiving ADT alone.ResultsA total of 790 patients (median age, 63 years) underwent randomization. After a median follow-up of 28.9 months, the median overall survival was 13.6 months longer with ADT plus docetaxel (combination therapy) than with ADT alone (57.6 months vs. 44.0 months; hazard ratio for death in the combination group, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001). The median time to biochemical, symptomatic, or radiographic progression was 20.2 months in the combination group, as compared with 11.7 months in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; P<0.001). The rate of a prostate-specific antigen level of less than 0.2 ng per milliliter at 12 months was 27.7% in the combination group versus 16.8% in the ADT-alone group (P<0.001). In the combination group, the rate of grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia was 6.2%, the rate of grade 3 or 4 infection with neutropenia was 2.3%, and the rate of grade 3 sensory neuropathy and of grade 3 motor neuropathy was 0.5%.ConclusionsSix cycles of docetaxel at the beginning of ADT for metastatic prostate cancer resulted in significantly longer overall survival than that with ADT alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00309985.).
| S-EPMC4562797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGermline DNA damage repair gene mutations (gDDRm) have been found in approximately 12% of patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). Previous studies of the clinical impact of gDDRm have mainly been in the setting of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study aimed to determine the prognostic value of gDDRm in de novo metastatic and castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC).Materials and methodsWe retrospectively collected the records of 139 consecutive men with de novo mCSPC who initially received systemic therapies following guidelines. This included 128 patients who underwent genetic testing at our center and 11 patients referred to our center after being identified as gDDRm carriers. Time to mCRPC was collected. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analysis were used to analyze the association between gDDRm and clinical outcomes. Survival outcomes were adjusted using multivariable Cox regression models.ResultsOf the 139 patients with de novo mCSPC, 28 gDDRm carriers were identified. Median time progressing to mCRPC was significantly shorter in patients carrying gDDRm than in those without mutations (8.3 vs 13.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 2.37; p < .001). Moreover, median progression time was almost halved in BRCA2 carriers (6.3 vs. 13.2 months; HR, 3.73; p < .001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the presence of gDDRm indicated poor therapy response regardless of disease volume and prostate-specific antigen nadir within the first 7 months. Presence of gDDRm remained independently associated with increased risk of progression to mCRPC in multivariate analysis (adjusted HR, 1.98; p = .006).ConclusionOur study suggested that positive gDDRm status predicted rapid progression to castration resistance in patients with de novo mCSPC. We propose identifying gDDRm status at the time of diagnosis for mCSPC patients, considering it is the first step of tailoring individualized treatment. In addition, DNA repair genes were a good therapeutic target for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, and our results call for more frontline targeted therapy trials in gDDRm carriers to prolong the progression time.Implications for practiceResults of this study suggested that positive germline DNA damage repair gene mutation (gDDRm) status predicted earlier progression to castration resistance in patients with de novo metastatic and castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). These findings indicated the importance of intense therapy for some subgroups of mCSPC, especially for mCSPC harboring gDDRm with low-volume disease. Moreover, gDDRm was a good therapeutic target for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, and these findings call for more molecular marker driven trials moving to the mTNPC setting.
| S-EPMC7356812 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9525807 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDarolutamide is a potent androgen-receptor inhibitor that has been associated with increased overall survival among patients with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. Whether a combination of darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel would increase survival among patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer is unknown.MethodsIn this international, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive darolutamide (at a dose of 600 mg [two 300-mg tablets] twice daily) or matching placebo, both in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel. The primary end point was overall survival.ResultsThe primary analysis involved 1306 patients (651 in the darolutamide group and 655 in the placebo group); 86.1% of the patients had disease that was metastatic at the time of the initial diagnosis. At the data cutoff date for the primary analysis (October 25, 2021), the risk of death was significantly lower, by 32.5%, in the darolutamide group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.80; P<0.001). Darolutamide was also associated with consistent benefits with respect to the secondary end points and prespecified subgroups. Adverse events were similar in the two groups, and the incidences of the most common adverse events (occurring in ≥10% of the patients) were highest during the overlapping docetaxel treatment period in both groups. The frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 66.1% in the darolutamide group and 63.5% in the placebo group; neutropenia was the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event (in 33.7% and 34.2%, respectively).ConclusionsIn this trial involving patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, overall survival was significantly longer with the combination of darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel than with placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel, and the addition of darolutamide led to improvement in key secondary end points. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. (Funded by Bayer and Orion Pharma; ARASENS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02799602.).
| S-EPMC9844551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The number of treatment options for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer has increased substantially in recent years. The classic treatment approach for these patients-androgen-deprivation therapy alone-is now considered suboptimal. Several randomized phase III clinical trials have demonstrated significant clinical benefits-including significantly better overall survival and quality of life-for treatments that combine androgen-deprivation therapy with docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and/or radiotherapy to the primary tumour. As a result, these approaches are now included in treatment guidelines and considered standard of care. However, the different treatment strategies have not been directly compared, and thus treatment selection remains at the discretion of the individual physician or, ideally, a multidisciplinary team. Given the range of available treatment approaches with varying toxicity profiles, treatment selection should be individualized based on the patient's clinical characteristics and preferences, which implies active patient participation in the decision-making process. In the present document, we discuss the changing landscape of the management of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in the context of several recently-published landmark randomized trials. In addition, we discuss several unresolved issues, including the optimal sequencing of systemic treatments and the incorporation of local treatment of the primary tumour and metastases.
| S-EPMC7918528 | biostudies-literature