Dataset Information

Risk for stroke and myocardial infarction with abiraterone versus enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Abiraterone and enzalutamide use is associated with significant cardiovascular (CV) morbidity in clinical trials, but the magnitude and clinical relevance of this association in real-world prostate cancer (PC) population remain unknown.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed the MarketScan claims databases (1 January 2013 to 30 September 2018) to identify adults with diagnosis of metastatic PC who received treatment with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and novel antiandrogen agents (abiraterone or enzalutamide). The primary CV outcome measure was composite outcome of acute myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. Secondary outcomes were individual risks of MI or stroke. We used an intention-to-treat approach to analyze the CV outcomes associated with drug exposure among patients with metastatic PC. Cox regression model was used to estimate the independent association of two drugs with CV risk after adjustment for age, baseline atrial fibrillation, and Charlson Comorbidity Index.

Results

A total of 6294 patients with metastatic PC who were treated with ADT and either abiraterone or enzalutamide were included in the final analysis. Of these, 4017 (63.8%) patients used abiraterone and 2217 (32.2%) patients used enzalutamide. During the study period, 255 (6.3%) primary endpoint events occurred, resulting in an incidence rate of 4.3 per 100 patient-years. In multivariable analysis, abiraterone use was associated with a 31% increased risk of MI or stroke compared to enzalutamide (hazard ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.63; P = 0.01). The incidence rate was similar in patients who switched initial therapy from abiraterone to enzalutamide or vice versa (5.0 versus 5.6 per 100 patient-years, respectively).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first real-world assessment of MI and stroke among metastatic PC patients receiving novel anti-androgens. Our findings of increased MI and stroke risk with abiraterone compared with enzalutamide are consistent with data from clinical trials and suggest that enzalutamide may be preferable for prostate cancer patients at high CV risk.

SUBMITTER: Kulkarni AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8437777 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is hypothesised that cotargeting the androgen receptor (AR) and paracrine androgen biosynthesis with enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) will dissipate adaptive feedback loops observed with either agent alone. OBJECTIVE:To assess the safety, efficacy, androgen signalling/metabolome, and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of enzalutamide with abiraterone acetate in progressive bone mCRPC (bmCRPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This open-label, single-centre interventional study was conducted in bmCRPC patients. INTERVENTION:Enzalutamide 160mg and abiraterone acetate 1000mg once daily; prednisone 5mg twice daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Adverse events (AEs), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, progression-free survival (PFS), tumour biomarker/metabolite expression, and Cmin plasma concentrations were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:Sixty patients were enrolled. Common AEs independent of grade/causality included fatigue (72%), hyperglycaemia (67%), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) elevation (53%), and hot flush (43%). Grade 3 AEs included hypertension (17%), alanine aminotransferase elevation (12%), ALP elevation (5%), and arthralgia (5%). No treatment-related grade 4 AEs or deaths were reported. Median treatment-discontinuation time was 312d (95% confidence interval [CI] 196.0-483.0). Maximal PSA decline ?50% and ?90% occurred in 46 (77%) and 29 (48%) patients, respectively. Median PFS was 251d (95% CI 147-337). At week 9, median tumour microenvironment androgens, precursors, and nuclear AR expression decreased (p<0.001). The baseline tumour AR C/N terminal ratio of ?80% was associated with treatment benefit. At enzalutamide steady state, abiraterone acetate Cmin was ?23% lower (range 14.05-200.5ng/ml) than when given alone. CONCLUSIONS:Enzalutamide combined with abiraterone acetate has a manageable safety profile, without a meaningful DDI. Both agents are pharmacodynamically active with no feedback. Efficacy findings do not support significant benefit of combined treatment for unselected bmCRPC. PATIENT SUMMARY:This is the first study combining enzalutamide plus abiraterone in bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Results show that this combination is safe.

Project description:ObjectiveEvaluation of the comparative effectiveness of enzalutamide and abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is limited to meta-analyses of randomized trials that exclude patients with significant comorbidities. We evaluated overall survival (OS) in patients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) in a real-world single payer setting.MethodsA retrospective analysis (4/1/2014-3/31/2018) of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database was conducted. Patients with mCRPC had ≥1 pharmacy claim for enzalutamide or abiraterone (first claim date = index date) following disease progression on surgical/medical castration, without chemotherapy <12 months prior to index date. Patients had continuous VHA enrollment for ≥12 months pre-index date and were followed until death, disenrollment, or end of study. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models examined the OS treatment effect.ResultsPatients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC (N = 3174; enzalutamide, n = 1229; abiraterone, n = 1945) had mean ages of 74 and 73 years, respectively. Median follow-up was 18.27 and 19.07 months with enzalutamide and abiraterone, respectively. Enzalutamide-treated patients had longer median treatment duration than abiraterone-treated patients (9.93 vs 8.47 months, respectively, p = 0.0008). After baseline comorbidity adjustment, enzalutamide-treated patients had a 16% reduced risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94; p = 0.0012). For patients who remained on first line-therapy only, enzalutamide-treated patients had improved OS versus abiraterone-treated patients (HR = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.82). Enzalutamide-treated patients who crossed over to abiraterone had a comparable risk of death versus abiraterone-treated patients who crossed over to enzalutamide (HR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89-1.35). These results were confirmed by sensitivity analysis, which considered prognostic variables.ConclusionsRetrospective analysis of the VHA database indicated that chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRPC initiating therapy with enzalutamide had improved survival versus abiraterone.

Project description:IntroductionProstate cancer (PC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among US men and accounts for considerable healthcare expenditures. We evaluated economic outcomes in men with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC) treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (abiraterone).MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis on 3174 men (18 years or older) utilizing the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database from 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2018. Men with mCRPC were included if they had at least one pharmacy claim for enzalutamide or abiraterone (first claim date = index date) following surgical or medical castration, had no chemotherapy treatment within 12 months prior to the index date, and had continuous VHA enrollment for at least 12 months pre- and post-index date. Men were followed until death, disenrollment, or end of study and were 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM). All-cause and PC-related resource use and costs per patient per month (PPPM) in the 12 months post index were compared between matched cohorts.ResultsWe identified 1229 men with mCRPC prescribed enzalutamide and 1945 prescribed abiraterone with mean ages of 74 and 73 years, respectively. After PSM, each cohort had 1160 patients. The enzalutamide cohort had fewer all-cause (2.51 vs 2.86; p < 0.0001) and PC-related outpatient visits (0.86 vs 1.03; p < 0.0001), with corresponding lower all-cause ($2588 vs $3115; p < 0.0001) and PC-related ($1356 vs $1775; p < 0.0001) PPPM outpatient costs compared with the abiraterone cohort. All-cause total costs (medical and pharmacy) PPPM ($8085 vs $9092; p = 0.0002) and PC-related total costs PPPM ($6321 vs $7280; p < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the enzalutamide cohort compared with the abiraterone cohort.ConclusionsEnzalutamide-treated men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC had significantly lower resource utilization and healthcare costs compared with abiraterone-treated men.

Project description:PurposeTo investigate the survival outcomes of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receiving first-line novel androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies (ARATs) and prognostic factors for patient survival.MethodsThis retrospective study obtained data from 202 patients who started abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide as first-line therapy for mCRPC between 2016 and 2021 from a single academic center. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) defined as the interval from the start of ARAT to death, loss to follow-up, or the end of the study period. The secondary endpoints were PSA decline, PSA nadir, and time to nadir (TTN) after ARATs. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were applied for depicting OS. Cox proportional hazards model with inversed probability of treatment weighing-adjustment was used to validate the effect of patient, disease, and treatment response factors on OS.ResultsAmong 202 patients, 164 patients were treated with first-line ARATs alone and 38 patients received second-line chemotherapy. The median OS was not reached in patients with first-line ARATs alone and was 38.8 months in those with subsequent chemotherapy after failure from ARATs. OS was not different between the use of abiraterone and enzalutamide, though enzalutamide showed a higher rate of PSA decline ≧ 90% (56% versus 40%, p = 0.021) and longer TTN (5.5 versus 4.7 months, p = 0.019). Multivariable analysis showed that PSA nadir > 2 ng/mL [hazard ratio (HR) 7.04, p < 0.001] and TTN<7 months (HR 2.18, p = 0.012) were independently associated with shorter OS. Patients with both of these poor prognostic factors had worse OS compared to those who had 0-1 factors (HR 9.21, p < 0.001).ConclusionsPatients with mCRPC who received first-line ARATs had better survival if they had a PSA nadir[Formula: see text]2 ng/mL or a TTN[Formula: see text]7 months. Further study is needed to determine if an early switch in therapy for those in whom neither is achieved may impact OS.

Project description:BackgroundBoth abiraterone and enzalutamide have shown to improve overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) regardless of previous treatment with chemotherapy (COU-AA3011, COU-AA3022, AFFIRM3 and PREVAIL4). The data regarding the impact of these treatments in the real world setting is scarce. This study assessed the real world survival and disease outcomes in mCRPC patients in a regional health service in Victoria with the use of abiraterone and enzalutamide.MethodsThis retrospective clinical audit included 75 patients with diagnosis of mCRPC treated with either abiraterone or enzalutamide between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019, at Goulburn Valley Health. Patients were stratified according to the drug received, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, Gleason score, burden of disease at diagnosis, presence of visceral metastases and use of previous chemotherapy. The primary end point was PSA response (defined as a reduction in the PSA level from baseline by 50% or more). The secondary outcomes were PSA PFS, radiographic PFS, and OS.ResultsThirty-seven patients received enzalutamide, and the other 38 received abiraterone. Only 20% of patients in either group had visceral metastases. 32% of patients receiving enzalutamide had a high burden of disease, compared to 53% receiving abiraterone. 38% of patients in the enzalutamide group and 53% in the abiraterone group had received prior chemotherapy. PSA response rates were higher in the enzalutamide group than abiraterone group (70.3% vs 37.8%). Both PSA and radiographic PFS were longer in the enzalutamide group than abiraterone group; 7 months vs 5 months for both end points. OS was also found to be longer in patients receiving enzalutamide; 30 months compared to only 13 months in patients receiving abiraterone.ConclusionBoth abiraterone and enzalutamide have shown to result in significant PSA response rates, as well as PFS and OS benefit in mCRPC patients in the real world setting. The difference in responses and survival benefit are probably impacted by the unbalanced burden of disease.

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal sequencing of the multiple active agents now available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unclear. Prior reports have suggested diminished responses to sequential lines of androgen receptor (AR)-targeted therapies, but it is unknown whether subsequent taxane-based chemotherapy may be more effective than sequential AR-targeting treatment. We sought to evaluate the clinical activity of enzalutamide versus docetaxel in men with mCRPC who progressed on abiraterone.MethodsWe performed a single-institution retrospective analysis of consecutive mCRPC patients who had progressed on abiraterone therapy and subsequently received either enzalutamide (n=30) or docetaxel (n=31). We evaluated clinical outcomes including prostate-specific antigen decline of >30% (PSA30) or >50% (PSA50), PSA-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), and clinical/radiographic PFS. We performed multivariable modeling to control for baseline and on-treatment differences between groups.ResultsCompared to subjects who received enzalutamide post-abiraterone, subjects who received docetaxel post-abiraterone had more bone metastases, more visceral metastases, higher baseline PSA, and had more frequent PSA tests while on-treatment. There were no significant differences in PSA30 (41% for enzalutamide vs. 53% for docetaxel) or PSA50 (34% vs. 40%) response rates between the two groups; there remained no difference after stratifying by presence/absence of prior response to abiraterone. Median PSA-PFS was 4.1 versus 4.1 months for the enzalutamide and docetaxel cohorts, respectively (HR 1.35, 95% CI, 0.53-3.66, P=0.502). Median PFS was 4.7 versus 4.4 months, respectively (HR 1.44, 95% CI, 0.77-2.71, P=0.257). PSA-PFS and PFS did not differ after stratifying by prior response to abiraterone. In multivariable analyses, there were no significant differences in PSA-PFS or PFS between the two groups.ConclusionsTreatment with either enzalutamide or docetaxel produced modest PSA responses and PFS intervals in this abiraterone-pretreated mCRPC population. In this retrospective study with small sample size, no significant differences in outcomes were observed between groups. Therefore, either enzalutamide or docetaxel may be a reasonable option in men who have progressed on abiraterone.