RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The source of tissue for genomic profiling of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is often limited to osseous metastases. To guide patient management, metastatic site selection and the technique for targeted bone biopsies are critical for identifying deleterious gene mutations. Our objective was to identify key parameters associated with successful large-panel DNA sequencing. METHODS: We analyzed parameters for 243 men with progressing mCRPC who underwent 269 bone biopsies for genomic profiling between 2014 and 2018. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for clinical, imaging (bone scan; fluorodeoxyglucose [FDG] positron emission tomography [PET]; computed tomography [CT]; magnetic resonance imaging), and technical (biopsy site, number of samples, needle gauge) features associated with successful genomic profiling. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 159 of 269 biopsies (59%) generated sufficient tumor material for a genomic profile. Seventy (26%) of the failures were histopathologically negative for mCRPC and 40 (15%) had insufficient tumor for genomic profiling. Of 199 mCRPC samples submitted for molecular testing, 159 (80%) yielded a genomic profile. On univariate analysis, PSA, serum acid phosphatase, number of biopsy samples, FDG PET positivity, CT attenuation, and CT morphology were significantly associated with genomic profiling success. On multivariate analysis, higher FDG maximum standardized uptake value (odds ratio [OR] 7.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.01-18.78; p < 0.001), higher number of biopsy samples (OR 4.73, 95% CI 1.49-15.02; p = 0.008), and lower mean CT attenuation (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.18-0.89; p = 0.025) were significantly associated with sequencing success. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In patients with mCRPC, bone biopsies from sites with metabolic activity and lower CT attenuation are associated with higher success rates for genomic profiling via a large-panel DNA sequencing platform. PATIENT SUMMARY: We identified factors associated with successful genetic testing of bone tissue for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Our findings may help in guiding the right scan technique and biopsy site for personalized treatment planning.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) and high tumor mutational burden (TMB-H) prostate cancers are candidates for pembrolizumab. We define the genomic features, clinical course, and response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in patients with MSI-H/dMMR and TMB-H prostate cancers without MSI [TMB-H/microsatellite stable (MSS)]. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We sequenced 3,244 tumors from 2,257 patients with prostate cancer. MSI-H/dMMR prostate cancer was defined as an MSIsensor score ≥10 or MSIsensor score ≥3 and <10 with a deleterious MMR alteration. TMB-H was defined as ≥10 mutations/megabase. PSA50 and RECIST responses were assigned. Overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) were compared using log-rank test. RESULTS: Sixty-three (2.8%) men had MSI-H/dMMR, and 33 (1.5%) had TMB-H/MSS prostate cancers. Patients with MSI-H/dMMR and TMB-H/MSS tumors more commonly presented with grade group 5 and metastatic disease at diagnosis. MSI-H/dMMR tumors had higher TMB, indel, and neoantigen burden compared with TMB-H/MSS. Twenty-seven patients with MSI-H/dMMR and 8 patients with TMB-H/MSS tumors received ICB, none of whom harbored polymerase epsilon (polE) catalytic subunit mutations. About 45% of patients with MSI-H/dMMR had a RECIST response, and 65% had a PSA50 response. No patient with TMB-H/MSS had a RECIST response, and 50% had a PSA50 response. rPFS tended to be longer in patients with MSI-H/dMMR than in patients with TMB-H/MSS who received immunotherapy. Pronounced differences in genomics, TMB, or MSIsensor score were not detected between MSI-H/dMMR responders and nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: MSI-H/dMMR prostate cancers have greater TMB, indel, and neoantigen burden than TMB-H/MSS prostate cancers, and these differences may contribute to profound and durable responses to ICB.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: HOXB13 is an androgen receptor (AR) coregulator specifically expressed in cells of prostatic lineage. We sought to associate circulating tumor cell (CTC) HOXB13 expression with outcomes in men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the multicenter prospective PROPHECY trial of mCRPC men (NCT02269982, n = 118) treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide. CTC detection and HOXB13 complementary DNA (cDNA) expression was measured using a modified Adnatest, grouping patients into 3 categories: CTC 0 (undetectable); CTC+ HOXB13 CTC low (<4 copies); or CTC+ HOXB13 CTC high. The HOXB13 threshold was determined by maximally selected rank statistics for prognostic associations with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We included 102 men with sufficient CTC HOXB13 cDNA, identifying 25%, 31%, and 44% of patients who were CTC 0, CTC+ HOXB13 low, and CTC+ HOXB13 high, respectively. Median OS were 25.7, 27.8, and 12.1 months whereas the median PFS were 9.0, 7.7, and 3.8 months, respectively. In subgroup analysis among men with CellSearch CTCs ≥5 copies/mL and adjusting for prior abi/enza treatment and Halabi clinical risk score, the multivariate HR for HOXB13 CTC detection was 2.39 (95% CI, 1.06-5.40) for OS and 2.78 (95% CI, 1.38-5.59) for PFS, respectively. Low HOXB13 CTC detection was associated with lower CTC PSA, PSMA, AR-FL, and AR-V7 detection, and more liver/lung metastases (41% vs. 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Higher CTC HOXB13 expression is associated with AR-dependent biomarkers in CTCs and is adversely prognostic in the context of potent AR inhibition in men with mCRPC.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Xaluritamig (AMG 509) is a six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate 1 (STEAP1)-targeted T-cell engager designed to facilitate lysis of STEAP1-expressing cancer cells, such as those in advanced prostate cancer. This first-in-human study reports monotherapy dose exploration for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), primarily taxane pretreated. Ninety-seven patients received ≥1 intravenous dose ranging from 0.001 to 2.0 mg weekly or every 2 weeks. MTD was identified as 1.5 mg i.v. weekly via a 3-step dose. The most common treatment-related adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 72%), fatigue (45%), and myalgia (34%). CRS occurred primarily during cycle 1 and improved with premedication and step dosing. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and RECIST responses across cohorts were encouraging [49% PSA50; 24% objective response rate (ORR)], with greater frequency at target doses ≥0.75 mg (59% PSA50; 41% ORR). Xaluritamig is a novel immunotherapy for prostate cancer that has shown encouraging results supporting further development. SIGNIFICANCE: Xaluritamig demonstrated encouraging responses (PSA and RECIST) compared with historical established treatments for patients with late-line mCRPC. This study provides proof of concept for T-cell engagers as a potential treatment for prostate cancer, validates STEAP1 as a target, and supports further clinical investigation of xaluritamig in prostate cancer. See related commentary by Hage Chehade et al., p. 20. See related article by Nolan-Stevaux et al., p. 90. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 5.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: Use of the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) during chemotherapy is associated with decreased hospitalization rates, improved quality of life, and longer survival. Limited data exist on the benefit of this symptom assessment tool for monitoring immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Methods: We incorporated irAE-related items from the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) PRO-CTCAE in a trial evaluating ipilimumab in combination with androgen deprivation therapy in 16 patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For comparison, NCI's CTCAE version 4.0 was used by clinicians. Results: IrAE-related PRO-CTCAE surveys and matched CTCAEs (184 pairs) reporting abdominal pain, diarrhea, fatigue, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, rash, and pruritus were collected at each treatment administration and during follow-up. Fatigue, diarrhea, rash, and pruritus were the symptoms most frequently reported by both patients and clinicians. Agreement was lowest for pruritus (κ = 0.10) and highest for rash (κ = 0.64). IrAEs were more commonly reported and of higher grade with PRO-CTCAE scores compared with CTCAE grades. Conclusion: PRO-CTCAEs focused on irAEs capture the patient's immunotherapy experience while complementing the clinician's toxicity assessment measures. Further study is needed to assess PRO-CTCAE's utility in identifying and managing irAEs.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Niraparib is a highly selective poly (adenosine diphosphateribose) polymerase-1 and poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase-2 inhibitor indicated for select patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. The phase 2 GALAHAD trial (NCT02854436) demonstrated that niraparib monotherapy is tolerable and efficacious in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, particularly those with breast cancer gene (BRCA) alterations who had progressed on prior androgen signaling inhibitor therapy and taxane-based chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To report the prespecified patient-reported outcomes analysis from GALAHAD. METHODS: Eligible patients with alterations to BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) and with pathogenic alterations in other HRR genes (other HRR cohort) were enrolled and received niraparib 300 mg once daily. Patient-reported outcome instruments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate and the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. Changes from baseline were compared using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. RESULTS: On average, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved in the BRCA cohort by cycle 3 (mean change = 6.03; 95% CI = 2.76-9.29) and was maintained above baseline until cycle 10 (mean change = 2.84; 95% CI = -1.95 to 7.63), whereas the other HRR cohort showed no early change in HRQoL from baseline (mean change = -0.07; 95% CI = -4.69 to 4.55) and declined by cycle 10 (mean change = -5.10; 95% CI = -15.3 to 5.06). Median time to deterioration in pain intensity and pain interference could not be estimated in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced mCRPC and BRCA alterations treated with niraparib experienced more meaningful improvement in overall HRQoL, pain intensity, and pain interference compared with those with other HRR alterations. In this population of castrate, heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC and HRR alterations, stabilization, and improvement in HRQoL may be relevant to consider when making treatment decisions. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Janssen Research & Development, LLC (no grant number). Dr Smith has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, Janssen, and Lilly; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Sandhu has received grants from Amgen, Endocyte, and Genentech; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Merck; and has received personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck Serono. Dr George has received personal fees from the American Association for Cancer Research, Axess Oncology, Capio Biosciences, Constellation Pharma, EMD Serono, Flatiron, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Michael J. Hennessey Association, Millennium Medical Publishing, Modra Pharma, Myovant Sciences, Inc., NCI Genitourinary, Nektar Therapeutics, Physician Education Resource, Propella TX, RevHealth, LLC, and UroGPO; has received grants and personal fees from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bayer and UroToday; has received grants from Calithera and Novartis; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Exelixis, Inc., Sanofi, and Janssen Pharma. Dr Chi has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, POINT Biopharma, Roche, and Sanofi; and has received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Saad has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen during the conduct of the study; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Bayer, Myovant, Sanofi, and Novartis. Dr Thiery-Vuillemin has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Astellas Pharma; and has received personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Olmos has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and has received nonfinancial support from Astellas Pharma, F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Genentech, and Ipsen. Dr Danila has received research support from the US Department of Defense, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, Stand Up to Cancer, Janssen Research & Development, Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Agensys, Genentech, and CreaTV. Dr Gafanov has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study. Dr Castro has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Janssen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Clovis. Dr Moon has received research funding from SeaGen, HuyaBio, Janssen, BMS, Aveo, Xencor, and has received personal fees from Axess Oncology, MJH, EMD Serono, and Pfizer. Dr Joshua has received nonfinancial support from Janssen; consulted or served in an advisory role for Neoleukin, Janssen Oncology, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Noxopharm, IQvia, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, and Eisai; and received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mayne Pharma, Roche/Genentech, Bayer, MacroGenics, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Corvus Pharmaceuticals. Drs Mason, Liu, Bevans, Lopez-Gitlitz, and Francis and Mr Espina are employees of Janssen Research & Development. Dr Mason owns stocks with Janssen. Dr Fizazi has participated in advisory boards and talks for Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, MSD, Novartis/AAA, Pfizer, and Sanofi, with honoraria to his institution (Institut Gustave Roussy); has participated in advisory boards for, with personal honoraria from, Arvinas, CureVac, MacroGenics, and Orion. Study registration number: NCT02854436.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Despite advancements in the early-stage detection and expansion of treatments for prostate cancer (PCa), patient mortality rates remain high in patients with aggressive disease and the overtreatment of indolent disease remains a major issue. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a standard PCa blood biomarker, is limited in its ability to differentiate disease subtypes resulting in the overtreatment of non-aggressive indolent disease. Here we assess engorged cancer-associated macrophage-like cells (CAMLs), a ≥50 µm, cancer-specific, polynucleated circulating cell type found in the blood of patients with PCa as a potential companion biomarker to PSA for patient risk stratification. We found that rising PSA is positively correlated with increasing CAML size (r = 0.307, p = 0.004) and number of CAMLs in circulation (r = 0.399, p < 0.001). Over a 2-year period, the presence of a single engorged CAML was associated with 20.9 times increased likelihood of progression (p = 0.016) in non-metastatic PCa, and 2.4 times likelihood of progression (p = 0.031) with 5.4 times likelihood of death (p < 0.001) in metastatic PCa. These preliminary data suggest that CAML cell monitoring, in combination with PSA, may aid in differentiating non-aggressive from aggressive PCas by adding biological information that complements traditional clinical biomarkers, thereby helping guide treatment strategies.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Genetic testing may alter clinical management for individuals with metastatic prostate cancer by identifying additional therapies. Traditional counseling models are unlikely to enable time-sensitive therapeutic decision-making. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and clinical impact of an alternative hereditary genetic testing model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of a multicenter, single-arm prospective trial, individuals with advanced prostate cancer were referred by their oncologist for testing of 14 genes associated with hereditary prostate cancer. Pretest education (brochure and video) was provided in the oncology clinic. Questionnaires assessing participant satisfaction with both pretest education and decision to undergo genetic testing were collected. A genetic counselor contacted participants by phone to obtain family history and discuss results. Medical records were queried to determine whether a change in clinical management was discussed. RESULTS: Of 501 participants consented to germline analysis, 51 (10.2%) had at least 1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant. Change in treatment was discussed with 22/48 (45.8%) of eligible participants who tested positive. Feasibility of this model was assessed by participant satisfaction and turnaround time. Average±SD satisfaction with the pretest education (15.5±2.2, 4-20 scale) and with the decision to undergo genetic testing (17.1±2.9, 4-20 scale) were both high. Results were returned 20 days (median) after sample collection. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist-initiated germline genetic testing in collaboration with a genetic counselor is a feasible approach to testing advanced prostate cancer patients with impactful clinical actionability. The testing model and educational material serve as resources to clinicians treating prostate cancer patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: In men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radioligand therapy has drastically improved clinical outcomes. A liquid biopsy characterizing PSMA expression could be useful in guiding optimal therapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the prospective multicenter PROPHECY (Prospective CiRculating PrOstate Cancer Predictors in HighEr Risk mCRPC StudY) trial of men with mCRPC (n = 118) treated with abiraterone (abi) or enzalutamide (enza). Circulating tumor cells (CTC) were enriched (CTC/mL) and characterized for PSMA protein expression/heterogeneity at baseline and progression. We utilized proportional hazards modeling of the association between PSMA-positive (PSMA+) CTC enumeration with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Overall, 97 men with mCRPC had evaluable blood samples for baseline CTC PSMA detection; 78 men (80%) had detectable CTCs. Of these, 55% (43/78) of men had any PSMA CTC detection, 21% (16/78) had ≥2 PSMA+ CTCs/mL, and 19% (8/43) were 100% PSMA+. At progression on abi/enza, 88% (50/57) of men had detectable CTCs, 68% (34/50) had any PSMA CTCs, and 12% (4/34) had 100% PSMA+ CTCs. Among paired cases (n = 57), PSMA+ CTC detection increased slightly after abi/enza progression. Using an optimal cutoff of ≥2 PSMA+ CTCs/mL, median OS was 26, 21, and 11 months for men without CTCs, PSMA- CTCs, and PSMA+ CTCs. Adjusting for prior abi/enza therapy, Halabi clinical risk score, and CTC enumeration, the HRs for OS and PFS for PSMA+ CTC+ were 3.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1-7.8] and 2.3 (95% CI = 0.9-5.8). CONCLUSIONS: We observed PSMA CTC heterogeneity between and within patients with mCRPC over time during abi/enza progression. CTC PSMA enumeration was adversely prognostic independent of clinical factors and disease burden. Further validation is warranted in the context of PSMA-targeted therapies.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Tumor-only genomic profiling is an important tool in therapeutic management of men with prostate cancer. Since clinically actionable germline variants may be reflected in tumor profiling, it is critical to identify which variants have a higher risk of being germline in origin to better counsel patients and prioritize genetic testing. OBJECTIVE: To determine when variants found on tumor-only sequencing of prostate cancers should prompt confirmatory germline testing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men with prostate cancer who underwent both tumor and germline sequencing at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from January 1, 2015 to January 31, 2020 were evaluated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Tumor and germline profiles were analyzed for pathogenic and likely pathogenic ("pathogenic") variants in 60 moderate- or high-penetrance genes associated with cancer predisposition. The germline probability (germline/germline + somatic) of a variant was calculated for each gene. Clinical and pathologic factors were analyzed as potential modifiers of germline probability. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 1883 patients identified, 1084 (58%) had a somatic or germline pathogenic variant in one of 60 cancer susceptibility genes, and of them, 240 (22%) had at least one germline variant. Overall, the most frequent variants were in TP53, PTEN, APC, BRCA2, RB1, ATM, and CHEK2. Variants in TP53, PTEN, or RB1 were identified in 746 (40%) patients and were exclusively somatic. Variants with the highest germline probabilities were in PALB2 (69%), MITF (62%), HOXB13 (60%), CHEK2 (55%), BRCA1 (55%), and BRCA2 (47%), and the overall germline probability of a variant in any DNA damage repair gene was 40%. Limitations were that most of the men included in the cohort had metastatic disease, and different thresholds for pathogenicity exist for somatic and germline variants. CONCLUSIONS: Of patients with pathogenic variants found on prostate tumor sequencing, 22% had clinically actionable germline variants, for which the germline probabilities varied widely by gene. Our results provide an evidenced-based clinical framework to prioritize referral to genetic counseling following tumor-only sequencing. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with advanced prostate cancer are recommended to have germline genetic testing. Genetic sequencing of a patient's prostate tumor may also identify certain gene variants that are inherited. We found that patients who had variants in certain genes, such as ones that function in DNA damage repair, identified in their prostate tumor sequencing, had a high risk for having an inherited cancer syndrome.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Routine clinical data from clinical charts are indispensable for retrospective and prospective observational studies and clinical trials. Their reproducibility is often not assessed. We developed a prostate cancer-specific database for clinical annotations and evaluated data reproducibility. METHODS: For men with prostate cancer who had clinical-grade paired tumor-normal sequencing at a comprehensive cancer center, we performed team-based retrospective data collection from the electronic medical record using a defined source hierarchy. We developed an open-source R package for data processing. With blinded repeat annotation by a reference medical oncologist, we assessed data completeness, reproducibility of team-based annotations, and impact of measurement error on bias in survival analyses. RESULTS: Data elements on demographics, diagnosis and staging, disease state at the time of procuring a genomically characterized sample, and clinical outcomes were piloted and then abstracted for 2261 patients (with 2631 samples). Completeness of data elements was generally high. Comparing to the repeat annotation by a medical oncologist blinded to the database (100 patients/samples), reproducibility of annotations was high; T stage, metastasis date, and presence and date of castration resistance had lower reproducibility. Impact of measurement error on estimates for strong prognostic factors was modest. CONCLUSIONS: With a prostate cancer-specific data dictionary and quality control measures, manual clinical annotations by a multidisciplinary team can be scalable and reproducible. The data dictionary and the R package for reproducible data processing are freely available to increase data quality and efficiency in clinical prostate cancer research.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by Prostate Cancer Working Group (PCWG) criteria is a radiographic endpoint. The automated bone scan index (aBSI) quantifies osseous disease burden on bone scintigraphy as a percentage of total skeletal weight. Using the aBSI, we sought to quantify increase in tumor burden represented by PCWG progression criteria, and to determine the interval increase that best associates with overall survival (OS). PATIENT AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of trials using androgen receptor axis-targeted drugs for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer patients (mCRPC). aBSI increase in bone disease was assessed from baseline scan to time-to-progression (per PCWG criteria). Threshold for time to aBSI increase were explored and the association between each time-to-threshold and OS was computed. RESULTS: A total of 169 mCPRC patients had bone scans available for aBSI analysis. Of these, 90 (53%) had progression in bone meeting PCWG criteria. Total aBSI increase in patients meeting PCWG criteria was 1.22 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.65-2.49), with a median relative increase of 109% (IQR: 40%-377%). Median aBSI at baseline was 3.1 (IQR: 1.3-7.1). The best association between OS and time-to-progression occurred with an absolute increase in aBSI equal to 0.6 (Kendall's tau 0.52). CONCLUSION: An absolute increase of 0.6 or more in aBSI from the first follow-up scan results in the highest association with OS in patients with mCRPC. The rPFS by PCWG, identified progression at nearly twice this tumor burden, suggesting that aBSI may be used to further develop the PCWG criteria without degrading its association with OS.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers are enriched for DNA repair gene defects (DRDs) that can be susceptible to synthetic lethality through inhibition of PARP proteins. We evaluated the anti-tumour activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers and DRDs who progressed on previous treatment with an androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mixed histology accepted, with the exception of the small cell pure phenotype) and DRDs (assessed in blood, tumour tissue, or saliva), with progression on a previous next-generation androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 or Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were eligible. Enrolled patients received niraparib 300 mg orally once daily until treatment discontinuation, death, or study termination. For the final study analysis, all patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis population; patients with germline pathogenic or somatic biallelic pathogenic alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) or biallelic alterations in other prespecified DRDs (non-BRCA cohort) were included in the efficacy analysis population. The primary endpoint was objective response rate in patients with BRCA alterations and measurable disease (measurable BRCA cohort). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02854436. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2016, and June 26, 2020, 289 patients were enrolled, of whom 182 (63%) had received three or more systemic therapies for prostate cancer. 223 (77%) of 289 patients were included in the overall efficacy analysis population, which included BRCA (n=142) and non-BRCA (n=81) cohorts. At final analysis, with a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 6·6-13·3), the objective response rate in the measurable BRCA cohort (n=76) was 34·2% (95% CI 23·7-46·0). In the safety analysis population, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were nausea (169 [58%] of 289), anaemia (156 [54%]), and vomiting (111 [38%]); the most common grade 3 or worse events were haematological (anaemia in 95 [33%] of 289; thrombocytopenia in 47 [16%]; and neutropenia in 28 [10%]). Of 134 (46%) of 289 patients with at least one serious treatment-emergent adverse event, the most common were also haematological (thrombocytopenia in 17 [6%] and anaemia in 13 [4%]). Two adverse events with fatal outcome (one patient with urosepsis in the BRCA cohort and one patient with sepsis in the non-BRCA cohort) were deemed possibly related to niraparib treatment. INTERPRETATION: Niraparib is tolerable and shows anti-tumour activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DRDs, particularly in those with BRCA alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Black men die from prostate cancer twice as often as White men, a disparity likely due to inherited genetics, modifiable cancer risk factors, and healthcare access. It is incompletely understood how and why tumor genomes differ by self-reported race and genetic ancestry. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Among 2,069 men with prostate cancer (1,841 self-reported White, 63 Asian, 165 Black) with access to clinical-grade sequencing at the same cancer center, prevalence of tumor and germline alterations was assessed in cancer driver genes reported to have different alteration prevalence by race. RESULTS: Clinical characteristics such as prostate-specific antigen and age at diagnosis as well as cancer stage at sample procurement differed by self-reported race. However, most genomic differences persisted when adjusting for clinical characteristics. Tumors from Black men harbored fewer PTEN mutations and more AR alterations than those from White men. Tumors from Asian men had more FOXA1 mutations and more ZFHX3 alterations than White men. Despite fewer TP53 mutations, tumors from Black men had more aneuploidy, particularly chromosome arm 8q gains, an adverse prognostic factor. Genetic ancestry was associated with similar tumor alterations as self-reported race, but also with modifiable cancer risk factors. Community-level average income was associated with chr8q gains after adjusting for race and ancestry. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor genomics differed by race even after accounting for clinical characteristics. Equalizing access to care may not fully eliminate such differences. Therapies for alterations more common in racial minorities are needed. Tumor genomic differences should not be assumed to be entirely due to germline genetics.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Phase 2 trial endpoints that can be utilized in high-risk biochemical recurrence (BCR) after prostatectomy as a way of more rapidly identifying treatments for phase 3 trials are urgently needed. The efficacy of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in BCR is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of complete biochemical responses after testosterone recovery after 8 mo of AAP and degarelix, a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, alone or in combination. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with BCR (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥1.0 ng/ml, PSA doubling time ≤9 mo, no metastases on standard imaging, and testosterone ≥150 ng/dl) after prostatectomy (with or without prior radiotherapy) were included in this study. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to AAP (arm 1), AAP with degarelix (arm 2), or degarelix (arm 3) for 8 mo, and monitored for 18 mo. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was undetectable PSA with testosterone >150 ng/dl at 18 mo. Secondary endpoints were undetectable PSA at 8 mo and time to testosterone recovery. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: For the 122 patients enrolled, no difference was found between treatments for the primary endpoint (arm 1: 5.1% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1-17%], arm 2: 17.1% [95% CI: 7-32%], arm 3: 11.9% [95% CI: 4-26%]; arm 1 vs 2, p = 0.93; arm 2 vs 3, p = 0.36). AAP therapy showed the shortest median time to testosterone recovery (36.0 wk [95% CI: 35.9-36.1]) relative to degarelix (52.9 wk [95% CI: 49.0-56.0], p < 0.001). Rates of undetectable PSA at 8 mo differed between AAP with degarelix and degarelix alone (p = 0.04), but not between AAP alone and degarelix alone (p = 0.12). Limitations of this study include a lack of long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of undetectable PSA levels with testosterone recovery were similar between arms, suggesting that increased androgen suppression with AAP and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is unlikely to eradicate recurrent disease compared with ADT alone. PATIENT SUMMARY: We evaluated the use of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), AAP alone, or ADT alone in men with biochemically recurrent, nonmetastatic prostate cancer. While more men who received the combination had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at 8 mo on treatment, once men came off treatment and testosterone level rose, there was no difference in the rates of undetectable PSA levels. This suggests that the combination is not able to eradicate disease any better than ADT alone.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: While the detection of AR-V7 in circulating tumor cells (CTC) is associated with resistance to abiraterone or enzalutamide in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), it only accounts for a minority of this resistance. Neuroendocrine (NE) differentiation or chromosomal instability (CIN) may be additional mechanisms that mediate resistance. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: PROPHECY was a multicenter prospective study of men with high-risk mCRPC starting abiraterone or enzalutamide. A secondary objective was to assess Epic CTC CIN and NE phenotypes before abiraterone or enzalutamide and at progression. The proportional hazards (PH) model was used to investigate the prognostic importance of CIN and NE in predicting progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) adjusting for CTC number (CellSearch), AR-V7, prior therapy, and clinical risk score. The PH model was utilized to validate this association of NE with OS in an external dataset of patients treated similarly at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC; New York, NY). RESULTS: We enrolled 118 men with mCRPC starting on abiraterone or enzalutamide; 107 were evaluable on the Epic platform. Of these, 36.4% and 8.4% were CIN positive and NE positive, respectively. CIN and NE were independently associated with worse OS [HR, 2.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-4.0 and HR 3.8; 95% CI, 1.2-12.3, respectively] when treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide. The prognostic significance of NE positivity for worse OS was confirmed in the MSKCC dataset (n = 173; HR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.6-12.7). CONCLUSIONS: A high CIN and NE CTC phenotype is independently associated with worse survival in men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide, warranting further prospective controlled predictive studies to inform treatment decisions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Alterations in DNA damage repair (DDR) pathway genes occur in 20%-25% of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Although PARP inhibitors (PARPis) have been shown to benefit men with mCRPC harboring DDR defects due to mutations in BRCA1/2 and ATM, additional treatments are necessary because the effects are not durable. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We performed transcriptomic analysis of publicly available mCRPC cases, comparing BRCA2 null with BRCA2 wild-type. We generated BRCA2-null prostate cancer cells using CRISPR/Cas9 and treated these cells with PARPis and SRC inhibitors. We also assessed the antiproliferative effects of combination treatment in 3D prostate cancer organoids. RESULTS: We observed significant enrichment of the SRC signaling pathway in BRCA2-altered mCRPC. BRCA2-null prostate cancer cell lines had increased SRC phosphorylation and higher sensitivity to SRC inhibitors (e.g., dasatinib, bosutinib, and saracatinib) relative to wild-type cells. Combination treatment with PARPis and SRC inhibitors was antiproliferative and had a synergistic effect in BRCA2-null prostate cancer cells, mCRPC organoids, and Trp53/Rb1-null prostate cancer cells. Inhibition of SRC signaling by dasatinib augmented DNA damage in BRCA2-null prostate cancer cells. Moreover, SRC knockdown increased PARPi sensitivity in BRCA2-null prostate cancer cells. CONCLUSIONS: This work suggests that SRC activation may be a potential mechanism of PARPi resistance and that treatment with SRC inhibitors may overcome this resistance. Our preclinical study demonstrates that combining PARPis and SRC inhibitors may be a promising therapeutic strategy for patients with BRCA2-null mCRPC.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) detection in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) is associated with a low probability of response and short progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone. However, it is unclear whether such men benefit from taxane chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PROPHECY is a multicenter prospective blinded study of patients with poor-risk mCRPC starting abiraterone or enzalutamide and observed through subsequent progression and taxane chemotherapy. We assessed AR-V7 status using the Johns Hopkins modified AdnaTest CTC AR-V7 messenger RNA assay and the Epic Sciences CTC nuclear-localized AR-V7 protein assay before treatment. The primary objective was to validate the independent prognostic value of CTC AR-V7 status based on radiographic/clinical PFS. OS, confirmed prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and objective radiologic responses were secondary end points. RESULTS: We enrolled 118 men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide, 51 of whom received subsequent docetaxel or cabazitaxel. Pretreatment CTC AR-V7 status by the Johns Hopkins and Epic Sciences assays was independently associated with worse PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.9 and HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.0 to 4.4, respectively) and OS (HR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.7 to 6.3 and HR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4 to 6.3, respectively) and a low probability of confirmed PSA responses, ranging from 0% to 11%, during treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide. At progression, subsequent CTC AR-V7 detection was not associated with an inferior PSA or radiographic response or worse PFS or OS with subsequent taxane chemotherapy after adjusting for CellSearch CTC enumeration and clinical prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: Detection of AR-V7 in CTCs by two different blood-based assays is independently associated with shorter PFS and OS with abiraterone or enzalutamide, but such men with AR-V7-positive disease still experience clinical benefits from taxane chemotherapy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Germline genetic testing is now routinely recommended for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) because of expanded guidelines and options for targeted treatments. However, integrating genetic testing into oncology and urology clinical workflows remains a challenge because of the increased number of patients with PCa requiring testing and the limited access to genetics providers. This suggests a critical unmet need for genetic services outside of historical models. This review addresses current guidelines, considerations, and challenges for PCa genetic testing and offers a practical guide for genetic counseling and testing delivery, with solutions to help address potential barriers and challenges for both providers and patients. As genetic and genomic testing become integral to PCa care, developing standardized systems for implementation in the clinic is essential for delivering precision oncology to patients with PCa and realizing the full scope and impact of genetic testing.

Asunto(s)