IMPORTANCE: We previously showed that detection of androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) was associated with primary resistance to enzalutamide and abiraterone therapy, but the relevance of AR-V7 status in the context of chemotherapy is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether AR-V7-positive patients would retain sensitivity to taxane chemotherapy and whether AR-V7 status would have a differential impact on taxane-treated men compared with enzalutamide- or abiraterone-treated men. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We examined CTCs for AR-V7 mRNA using a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assay. From January 2013 to July 2014, we prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic CRPC initiating taxane chemotherapy (docetaxel or cabazitaxel) at a single academic institution (Johns Hopkins). Our prespecified statistical plan required a sample size of 36 taxane-treated men. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We evaluated associations between AR-V7 status and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates, PSA progression-free survival (PSA PFS), and clinical and/or radiographic progression-free survival (PFS). After incorporating updated data from our prior study of 62 patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone, we also investigated the interaction between AR-V7 status (positive or negative) and treatment type (taxane vs enzalutamide or abiraterone). RESULTS: Of 37 taxane-treated patients enrolled, 17 (46%) had detectable AR-V7 in CTCs. Prostate-specific antigen responses were achieved in both AR-V7-positive and AR-V7-negative men (41% vs 65%; P = .19). Similarly, PSA PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7, 95% CI, 0.6-5.0; P = .32) and PFS (HR, 2.7, 95% CI, 0.8-8.8; P = .11) were comparable in AR-V7-positive and AR-V7-negative patients. A significant interaction was observed between AR-V7 status and treatment type (P < .001). Clinical outcomes were superior with taxanes compared with enzalutamide or abiraterone therapy in AR-V7-positive men, whereas outcomes did not differ by treatment type in AR-V7-negative men. In AR-V7-positive patients, PSA responses were higher in taxane-treated vs enzalutamide- or abiraterone-treated men (41% vs 0%; P < .001), and PSA PFS and PFS were significantly longer in taxane-treated men (HR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.07-0.52] for PSA PFS, P = .001; HR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.07-0.59] for PFS, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Detection of AR-V7 in CTCs from men with metastatic CRPC is not associated with primary resistance to taxane chemotherapy. In AR-V7-positive men, taxanes appear to be more efficacious than enzalutamide or abiraterone therapy, whereas in AR-V7-negative men, taxanes and enzalutamide or abiraterone may have comparable efficacy. Circulating tumor cell-based AR-V7 detection may serve as a treatment selection biomarker in CRPC.
IMPORTANCE: We previously showed that detection of androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) was associated with primary resistance to enzalutamide and abiraterone therapy, but the relevance of AR-V7 status in the context of chemotherapy is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether AR-V7-positive patients would retain sensitivity to taxane chemotherapy and whether AR-V7 status would have a differential impact on taxane-treated men compared with enzalutamide- or abiraterone-treated men. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We examined CTCs for AR-V7 mRNA using a reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assay. From January 2013 to July 2014, we prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic CRPC initiating taxane chemotherapy (docetaxel or cabazitaxel) at a single academic institution (Johns Hopkins). Our prespecified statistical plan required a sample size of 36 taxane-treated men. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We evaluated associations between AR-V7 status and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates, PSA progression-free survival (PSA PFS), and clinical and/or radiographic progression-free survival (PFS). After incorporating updated data from our prior study of 62 patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone, we also investigated the interaction between AR-V7 status (positive or negative) and treatment type (taxane vs enzalutamide or abiraterone). RESULTS: Of 37 taxane-treated patients enrolled, 17 (46%) had detectable AR-V7 in CTCs. Prostate-specific antigen responses were achieved in both AR-V7-positive and AR-V7-negative men (41% vs 65%; P = .19). Similarly, PSA PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7, 95% CI, 0.6-5.0; P = .32) and PFS (HR, 2.7, 95% CI, 0.8-8.8; P = .11) were comparable in AR-V7-positive and AR-V7-negative patients. A significant interaction was observed between AR-V7 status and treatment type (P < .001). Clinical outcomes were superior with taxanes compared with enzalutamide or abiraterone therapy in AR-V7-positive men, whereas outcomes did not differ by treatment type in AR-V7-negative men. In AR-V7-positive patients, PSA responses were higher in taxane-treated vs enzalutamide- or abiraterone-treated men (41% vs 0%; P < .001), and PSA PFS and PFS were significantly longer in taxane-treated men (HR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.07-0.52] for PSA PFS, P = .001; HR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.07-0.59] for PFS, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Detection of AR-V7 in CTCs from men with metastatic CRPC is not associated with primary resistance to taxane chemotherapy. In AR-V7-positive men, taxanes appear to be more efficacious than enzalutamide or abiraterone therapy, whereas in AR-V7-negative men, taxanes and enzalutamide or abiraterone may have comparable efficacy. Circulating tumor cell-based AR-V7 detection may serve as a treatment selection biomarker in CRPC.
Authors: Johann S de Bono; Christopher J Logothetis; Arturo Molina; Karim Fizazi; Scott North; Luis Chu; Kim N Chi; Robert J Jones; Oscar B Goodman; Fred Saad; John N Staffurth; Paul Mainwaring; Stephen Harland; Thomas W Flaig; Thomas E Hutson; Tina Cheng; Helen Patterson; John D Hainsworth; Charles J Ryan; Cora N Sternberg; Susan L Ellard; Aude Fléchon; Mansoor Saleh; Mark Scholz; Eleni Efstathiou; Andrea Zivi; Diletta Bianchini; Yohann Loriot; Nicole Chieffo; Thian Kheoh; Christopher M Haqq; Howard I Scher Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elahe A Mostaghel; Brett T Marck; Stephen R Plymate; Robert L Vessella; Stephen Balk; Alvin M Matsumoto; Peter S Nelson; R Bruce Montgomery Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-08-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Medha S Darshan; Matthew S Loftus; Maria Thadani-Mulero; Benjamin P Levy; Daniel Escuin; Xi Kathy Zhou; Ada Gjyrezi; Chantal Chanel-Vos; Ruoqian Shen; Scott T Tagawa; Neil H Bander; David M Nanus; Paraskevi Giannakakou Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2011-07-28 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Rong Hu; Changxue Lu; Elahe A Mostaghel; Srinivasan Yegnasubramanian; Meltem Gurel; Clare Tannahill; Joanne Edwards; William B Isaacs; Peter S Nelson; Eric Bluemn; Stephen R Plymate; Jun Luo Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Johann Sebastian de Bono; Stephane Oudard; Mustafa Ozguroglu; Steinbjørn Hansen; Jean-Pascal Machiels; Ivo Kocak; Gwenaëlle Gravis; Istvan Bodrogi; Mary J Mackenzie; Liji Shen; Martin Roessner; Sunil Gupta; A Oliver Sartor Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-10-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Andrew J Armstrong; Mario A Eisenberger; Susan Halabi; Stephane Oudard; David M Nanus; Daniel P Petrylak; A Oliver Sartor; Howard I Scher Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-11-12 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Howard I Scher; Susan Halabi; Ian Tannock; Michael Morris; Cora N Sternberg; Michael A Carducci; Mario A Eisenberger; Celestia Higano; Glenn J Bubley; Robert Dreicer; Daniel Petrylak; Philip Kantoff; Ethan Basch; William Kevin Kelly; William D Figg; Eric J Small; Tomasz M Beer; George Wilding; Alison Martin; Maha Hussain Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Brian J Kirby; Mona Jodari; Matthew S Loftus; Gunjan Gakhar; Erica D Pratt; Chantal Chanel-Vos; Jason P Gleghorn; Steven M Santana; He Liu; James P Smith; Vicente N Navarro; Scott T Tagawa; Neil H Bander; David M Nanus; Paraskevi Giannakakou Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrea K Miyahira; Joshua M Lang; Robert B Den; Isla P Garraway; Tamara L Lotan; Ashley E Ross; Tanya Stoyanova; Steve Y Cho; Jonathan W Simons; Kenneth J Pienta; Howard R Soule Journal: Prostate Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Yezi Zhu; Adam Sharp; Courtney M Anderson; John L Silberstein; Maritza Taylor; Changxue Lu; Pei Zhao; Angelo M De Marzo; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Mindy Wang; Xingyong Wu; Yuling Luo; Nan Su; Daniel Nava Rodrigues; Ines Figueiredo; Jonathan Welti; Emily Park; Xiao-Jun Ma; Ilsa Coleman; Colm Morrissey; Stephen R Plymate; Peter S Nelson; Johann S de Bono; Jun Luo Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Yusuke Imamura; Amy H Tien; Jinhe Pan; Jacky K Leung; Carmen A Banuelos; Kunzhong Jian; Jun Wang; Nasrin R Mawji; Javier Garcia Fernandez; Kuo-Shyan Lin; Raymond J Andersen; Marianne D Sadar Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2016-07-21
Authors: Emmanuelle Hodara; Gareth Morrison; Alexander Cunha; Daniel Zainfeld; Tong Xu; Yucheng Xu; Paul W Dempsey; Paul C Pagano; Farideh Bischoff; Aditi Khurana; Samuel Koo; Marc Ting; Philip D Cotter; Mathew W Moore; Shelly Gunn; Joshua Usher; Shahrooz Rabizadeh; Peter Danenberg; Kathleen Danenberg; John Carpten; Tanya Dorff; David Quinn; Amir Goldkorn Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2019-03-07
Authors: Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Jun Luo; Andrew J Armstrong; Landon C Brown; Changxue Lu Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 5.554