Prognostic Impact of TP53 and RB1 Alterations in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Docetaxel

Second-line treatment options in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A comparison of key trials with recently approved agents

Emerging evidence suggests that RB1 inactivation may be a strong predictor of poor survival for men with prostate cancer (PC); however, large-scale validation is lacking. We analyzed whether RB1 alterations are associated with inferior survival in advanced PC and evaluated the impact of co-occurring genomic alterations on outcomes using retrospective data from the Veteran's Health Administration and Veterans Affairs Multi-Omics Analysis Platform for Prostate Cancer from 2016 to 2023. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from onset of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), as well as OS from initiation of life-prolonging therapy other than androgen deprivation therapy, and time to development of mCRPC. Eighty-seven (3.5%) of the 2,512 included patients had an RB1 alteration detected. The median age at diagnosis in the RB1-altered group was 71 (IQR, 65-76) years, and 68 (IQR, 62-73) years in the RB1 wild-type group. The median overall survival from diagnosis of mCRPC was 1.31 years (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.84) in those with an RB1 alteration compared with 2.99 years (95% CI, 2.79 to 3.23). RB1 alteration alone conferred similar poor prognosis when compared with patients who had combined PTEN and TP53 alterations. A dose effect was seen with increasing numbers of tumor suppressor genes (TSGs-RB1, TP53, and PTEN) conferring poorer outcomes. The median survival of patients from diagnosis of mCRPC with zero, one, two, and three TSGs was 3.74, 2.61, 1.61, and 0.87 years, respectively. BRCA2 alterations were not associated with significantly worse outcomes unless accompanied by RB1 alteration. In this large, real-world cohort of men with mCRPC, RB1 alterations emerged as a strong indicator of poor prognosis and can be used to stratify studies alone or in conjunction with other TSG alterations.

Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline PART II.

PL03-02: Current status of recombinant pox-viral vaccines

Nursing and Residential CareVol. 17, No. 3 EditorialCancer treatment: at what cost?Beverley AndersonBeverley AndersonSearch for more papers by this authorBeverley AndersonPublished Online:18 Feb 2015https://doi.org/10.12968/nrec.2015.17.3.173AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Aapro MS (2012) Management of advanced prostate cancer in senior adults: the new landscape. Oncologist 17(Suppl 1): 16–22 Crossref, Google ScholarAttard G, Reid AHM, Yap TA et al. (2008) Phase I clinical trial of a selective inhibitor of CYP17, abiraterone acetate, confirms that castration-resistant prostate cancer commonly remains hormone driven. J Clin Oncol 26(28): 4563–71. doi: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.9749 Crossref, Google ScholarCancer Research UK (2011) Where did abiraterone come from? http://tinyurl.com/mg39ml9 (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarCancer Research UK (2014) Prostate cancer. http://tinyurl.com/l7aru6y (accessed 27 January 2015) Google Scholarde Bono JS, Logothetis CJ, Molina A, Fizazi K et al. (2011) Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 364(21): 1995–2005. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1014618 Crossref, Google ScholarFizazi K, Scher HI, Molina A, Logothetis CJ et al. (2012) Abiraterone acetate for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: final overall survival analysis of the COU-AA-301 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 13(10): 983–92. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70379-0 Crossref, Google ScholarGravanis I, Lopez AS, Hemmings RJ, Jiménez JC et al. (2013) The European medicines agency review of abiraterone for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in adult men after docetaxel chemotherapy and in chemotherapy-naive disease: summary of the scientific assessment of the committee for medicinal products for human use. Oncologist 18(9): 1032–42. doi: https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0092 Crossref, Google ScholarLogothetis CJ, Basch E, Molina A, Fizazi K et al. (2012) Effect of abiraterone acetate and prednisone compared with placebo and prednisone on pain control and skeletal-related events in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: exploratory analysis of data from the COU-AA-301 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 13(12): 1210–7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70473-4 Crossref, Google ScholarMacmillan Cancer Support (2014) Abiraterone acetate (Zytiga). http://tinyurl.com/p6b5apk (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarMulders PFA, Molina A, Marberger M, Saad F et al. (2014) Efficacy and safety of abiraterone acetate in an elderly patient subgroup (aged 75 and older) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after docetaxel-based chemotherapy. Eur Urol 65(1): 875–83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.005 Crossref, Google ScholarNational Cancer Institute (2012) Abiraterone Improves Survival in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. http://tinyurl.com/3m4orwt (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarNational Institute of Health and Care Excellence (2011) Prostate cancer (metastatic, hormone relapsed, not treated with chemotherapy) – abiraterone acetate (with prednisolone) [ID503]: appraisal consultation document. http://tinyurl.com/nvx4tgv (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarNational Institute of Health and Care Excellence (2014a) Prostate Cancer: diagnosis and treatment, NICE Clinical Guideline 175. http://tinyurl.com/pu6ccrm (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarNational Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (2014b) NICE appraisal of earlier treatment with abiraterone for prostate cancer. http://tinyurl.com/kmhrnz7 (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarParker C, Sartor O (2011) Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 365(8): 767. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1107198#SA3 Google ScholarPezaro CJ, Mukherji D, De Bono JS (2012) Abiraterone acetate: redefining hormone treatment for advanced prostate cancer. Drug Discov Today 17(5–6): 221–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2011.12.012 Crossref, Google ScholarProstate Cancer UK (2014) Abiraterone should definitely be an option for men who haven't had chemotherapy. http://tinyurl.com/k7b9dy9 (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarRathkopf DE, Smith MR, De Bono JS et al. (2013) Updated interim analysis of COU-AA-302, a randomized phase III study of abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) without prior chemotherapy. http://tinyurl.com/pr5ocav (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarScher, HI., Logothetis, C., Molina, A., Goodman, OB., Sternberg, CN., Chi, KN., Kheoh, TS., Itagg, CM., Fizazi, de Bono, JS. et al. (2010) Improved Survival outcomes in clinically relevant patient subgroups from COU-AA-301, a phase III study of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after docetaxel-based chemotherapy, http://tinyurl.com/oph44n5 (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarSmith R (2014) Prostate cancer patients ‘unjustly’ denied drug, The Telegraph. http://tinyurl.com/pvchebo (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarThe Institute of Cancer Research (2014a) Abiraterone: a story of scientific innovation and commercial partnership. http://tinyurl.com/m2ehlpy (accessed 27 January 2015) Google ScholarThe Institute of Cancer Research (2014b) NICE pauses abiraterone decision for further price discussions. http://tinyurl.com/oeg3s5c (accessed 27 January 2015) Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byA Perspective on Uro-Oncology Management and the Macmillan Uro-Oncology CNS (MUCNS) Role in this Management23 March 2022 2 March 2015Volume 17Issue 3ISSN (print): 1465-9301ISSN (online): 2052-2932 Metrics History Published online 18 February 2015 Published in print 2 March 2015 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

BackgroundMetastatic prostate cancer has a 30% 5-year survival rate despite recent therapeutic advances. There is a need to improve the clinical understanding and treatment of this disease, particularly in the real-world setting and among patients who are under-represented in clinical trials.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients who received their first treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in routine clinical practice, independent of treatment used, including subgroups with baseline cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, or visceral metastases.Patients and methodsProspective, noninterventional analysis of patient record data in the multicenter Prostate Cancer Registry (PCR) of men with mCRPC. The data were collected in 16 countries with the aim of recruiting more than 3000 patients between 2013 and 2016. The study end date was 9 July 2018. Data evaluated included baseline characteristics, treatment exposure, and efficacy outcomes [overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP)] of patients treated with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or prednisolone (collectively, “abiraterone”), enzalutamide, or docetaxel. Descriptive outcomes are reported from the overall patient population and subgroups of patients with baseline cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or visceral metastases. The treatment effects for time to progression were compared for the overall patient population.ResultsThe study enrollment period lasted 2.5 years, and each patient was followed for a maximum of 3 years. A total of 1874 patients in the PCR had not received previous mCRPC treatment at baseline, although they had received androgen-deprivation therapy. Prevalent co-morbidities included cardiovascular disease in 65.4% and diabetes mellitus in 17.4% of patients. Baseline characteristics suggested that patients with more advanced disease received docetaxel treatment. In the overall patient population, the median time to progression with abiraterone, enzalutamide, and docetaxel as first-line mCRPC therapy was 9.6, 10.3, and 7.6 months, respectively, and median OS was 27.1, 27.1, and 27.9 months, respectively. Outcomes in the subgroups of patients with cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus were similar to those of the whole population in the analysis. As expected, patients with visceral metastases had shorter TTP and OS than patients in the overall population.ConclusionsThis analysis shows, for the first time, the effectiveness in parallel of first-line abiraterone, enzalutamide, and docetaxel in mCRPC, including in patients with co-morbidities such as cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus or in patients with visceral metastases. These real-world findings from the PCR provide meaningful information to help manage mCRPC, particularly in patients under-represented in clinical studies.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02236637; registered September 2014.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11523-020-00720-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

80 Background: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib was granted accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for patients with BRCA+ mCRPC based on results from the phase 2 TRITON2 study (NCT02952534). The TP53 tumor suppressor gene is among the most frequently mutated genes in human cancers, including mCRPC, and alterations in TP53, PTEN, and RB1 are associated with poor prognosis in patients with prostate cancer and other tumor types. We present data on co-occurring alterations in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC treated with rucaparib in TRITON2. Methods: Patients had progressed on 1–2 lines of androgen receptor-directed therapy and 1 taxane-based chemotherapy and were treated with rucaparib 600 mg BID. Tissue and/or cell-free DNA extracted from plasma samples were profiled comprehensively for genomic alterations using Foundation Medicine, Inc., next-generation sequencing assays. Objective response rate (ORR) was assessed per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria by independent radiologic review of patients with measurable disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline) was assessed in all patients. Results: Tissue and/or plasma samples were available for 114/115 patients with BRCA+ mCRPC (visit cutoff date: Dec. 23, 2019). Among patients with BRCA+ mCRPC who had samples available for comprehensive genomic profiling, 36.8% (42/114) had a co-occurring alteration in TP53. Deleterious alterations in PTEN were observed in 34.2% (39/114) of patients, 44% (17/39) of which were homozygous deletions of PTEN. RB1 loss was observed in 12.3% (14/114) of patients and was seen more frequently in patients with measurable disease (18.0%, 11/61) than in patients with non-measurable disease (5.7%, 3/53). Although patients with and without TP53 mutations had generally similar baseline demographics and disease characteristics, visceral disease was more prevalent in patients with TP53 mutations (54.8%; 23/42) than in those without them (29.2%; 21/72). Similar ORR and PSA response rates were seen in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC with or without TP53 mutation, with a non-significant trend towards lower response rates in patients with co-occurring TP53 alterations. Conclusions: Results from TRITON2 showed antitumor activity for rucaparib in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC associated with or without co-occurring alterations in TP53. Demographics and additional efficacy analyses in genomic subgroups with co-occurring alterations in TP53, PTEN, and RB1 will be reported. Clinical trial information: NCT02952534. [Table: see text]

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II—2020 Update: Treatment of Relapsing and Metastatic Prostate Cancer

BackgroundAs potent systemic therapies transition earlier in the prostate cancer disease course, molecular biomarkers are needed to guide optimal treatment selection for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). The value of whole blood RNA to detect candidate biomarkers in mHSPC remains largely undefined.MethodsIn this cohort study, we used a previously optimised whole blood reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assay to assess the prognostic utility [measured by seven-month undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and time to castration-resistance (TTCR)] of eight prostate cancer-associated gene transcripts in 43 mHSPC patients. Transcripts with statistically significant associations (P<0.05) were further investigated in a metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) cohort (n=119) receiving contemporary systemic therapy, exploring associations with PSA >50% response (PSA50), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Clinical outcomes were prospectively collected in a protected digital database. Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models assessed associations between gene transcripts and clinical outcomes (mHSPC covariates: disease volume, docetaxel use and haemoglobin level; mCRPC covariates: prior exposure to chemotherapy or ARPIs, haemoglobin, performance status and presence of visceral disease). Follow-up was performed monthly during ARPI treatment, three-weekly during taxane chemotherapy, and three-monthly during androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) monotherapy. Serial PSA measurements were performed before each follow-up visit and repeat imaging was at the discretion of the investigator.ResultsDetection of circulating Grainyhead-like 2 (GRHL2) transcript was associated with poor outcomes in mHSPC and mCRPC patients. Detectable GRHL2 expression in mHSPC was associated with a lower rate of seven-month undetectable PSA levels (25% vs. 65%, P=0.059), and independently associated with shorter TTCR (HR 7.3, 95% CI: 1.5–36, P=0.01). In the mCRPC cohort, GRHL2 expression predicted significantly lower PSA50 response rates (46% vs. 69%, P=0.01), and was independently associated with shorter PFS (HR 3.1, 95% CI: 1.8–5.2, P<0.001) and OS (HR 2.9, 95% CI: 1.6–5.1, P<0.001). Associations were most apparent in patients receiving ARPIs.ConclusionsDetectable circulating GRHL2 was a negative prognostic biomarker in our mHSPC and mCRPC cohorts. These data support further investigation of GRHL2 as a candidate prognostic biomarker in metastatic prostate cancer, in addition to expanding efforts to better understand a putative role in therapeutic resistance to AR targeted therapies.

e597 Background: The standard treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (MCRPC) is Docetaxel (DTX); however, it has serious adverse effects. It is necessary to know the prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) of patients with MCRPC treated with DTX. The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic factors for OS in patients with MCRPC treated with DTX. Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of the control arms of the clinical trials NTC00273338, NCT00519285 and NCT00988208. 1600 patients aged 18 years or older with MCPRC that received DTX and prednisone were included. Survival curves were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and comparison was done by log-rank test. Multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS) was performed with the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Results: The median OS time was 14.64 months. The 1-yr-OS and 2-yrs-OS were 86.2% and 28.6%, respectively. Patients with an ECOG score greater than 0 lived significantly less than the rest of patients (p = 0.00). The patients with an alkaline phosphate level (ALP) &gt; 200 had significantly lower OS (p = 0.00). In the multivariate analysis, the factors that influenced OS were ECOG, ALP, HB, LDH and number of metastases. Conclusions: Poor performance status, high alkaline phosphatase level, low hemoglobin level, high LDH and more than 2 metastases were the main prognostic factors in patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer. [Table: see text]

62 Background: Current treatments of metastatic prostate cancer are mainly hormone therapy and chemotherapy. The anticancer potential of metformin on metastatic prostate cancer remains obscure. In this study, we aim to investigate the significance of patients with prostate cancer taking metformin in addition to their current treatment. Methods: An IRB approved retrospective review of metastatic prostate cancer patients was conducted. Patients were categorized into metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Patients were further stratified to those who received metformin vs. those who did not. Progression free survival (PFS) was evaluated based on PCWG3 and RECIST criteria. 6-month (6MO) PSA response and overall survival (OS) were also evaluated in this study. Results: A total of 281 subjects were included for analysis with a mean age of 70±10. Patients were known to have either mHSPC (n = 205) or mCRPC (n = 75), and taking metformin (n = 66) or not (n = 215). There was no significant difference between metformin groups with respect to PSA response at 6MO (p &lt; 0.73). Among those with a recorded 6MO PSA response, 70.4% (38/54) had a response in the metformin group and 72.9% (140/192) had a response in the non-metformin group. Overall median PFS was estimated to be 17 months, with no significant difference in PFS between metformin groups (16.6 vs 17.3; p &lt; 0.88). Within the mHSPC group, metformin users had a lower risk of progression relative to non-users (HR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.29). Within the mCRPC group, metformin users had a significantly higher risk of progression relative to non-users (HR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.4 to 5.0). Median overall survival was estimated to be 81.5 months. There was a significant difference in survival time between metformin groups (148.5 vs 69.4; p &lt; 0.02). Conclusions: No significant differences were found in 6MO PSA response or PFS. There was a significant difference in OS amongst patients who were in the metformin group and those who were not.

351 Background: Alterations in androgen receptor signaling are well-established mechanisms of resistance to medical castration. Pre-clinical studies suggest that alterations to key tumor suppressor genes, such as TP53 or PTEN, may also be associated with development of androgen independence as an alternate mechanism of castration-resistance. Previous studies have shown that TP53 inactivation and PTEN loss are predictive of response to novel androgen axis inhibitors. Here, we independently assess whether TP53 and PTEN genomic alterations are predictive of response to ENZ and AA in men with mCRPC. Methods: Clinical data and samples were analyzed from a prospective prostate cancer registry at the University of Utah (Salt Lake City, UT). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed on predominantly primary tumor tissue for 343 somatic and germline genetic alterations using FoundationOne. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients with mCRPC who were treated with any line AA or enzalutamide were included. We performed a univariate analysis to assess the predictive value of TP53 and PTEN. Only patients treated with single-agent therapy were included. Results: Of 141 men with prostate cancer and NGS available, 56 were included. Most patients were treated with abiraterone (n = 50), and only 6 with enzalutamide. 28.6% had PTEN loss and 35.7% had a TP53 mutation. OS and PFS did not differ significantly according to PTEN or TP53 status. Median OS was 40.9 months and not reached for men with and without TP53 mutation (HR 1.85, p = 0.31). Median PFS was 7.5 months and 9.5 months for men with and without TP53 mutation (HR 1.18, p = 0.60). Median PFS was 7.2 months and 9.5 months for men with and without PTEN loss (HR 1.15, p = 0.66). Median OS for PTEN was not mature enough to analyze. Conclusions: In our independent cohort, neither TP53 mutation nor PTEN loss is predictive of response to androgen-directed therapy in men with mCRPC patients. However, this is a relatively small retrospective sample with few events. These results should be considered exploratory only.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Every 2 Weeks Docetaxel Regimen in Comparison With Weekly or Every 3 Weeks in Metastatic Prostate Cancer

Identification of high-risk human papillomavirus and Rb/E2F pathway genomic alterations in mutually exclusive subsets of colorectal neuroendocrine carcinoma

[177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (ENZA-p): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial