Yohann Loriot1, Karim Fizazi1, Johann S de Bono2, David Forer3, Mohammad Hirmand3, Howard I Scher4. 1. Department of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Département de Médecine Oncologique, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France. 2. The Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom. 3. Medivation, Inc, San Francisco, California. 4. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and visceral metastases have a worse prognosis than those with nonvisceral metastases. Treatment with the androgen receptor inhibitor enzalutamide in the phase 3 AFFIRM trial led to significant improvements in outcomes for patients with mCRPC. For the current report, the authors analyzed the efficacy of enzalutamide among patients from the AFFIRM trial who had visceral disease. METHODS:Patients who had liver and/or lung metastases at baseline were selected for prespecified overall survival (OS) and exploratory post hoc analyses, including prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and the time to PSA and radiographic progression. RESULTS: In patients who had liver metastases (n = 92), enzalutamide was associated with a lower risk of radiographic progression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.645; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.413-1.008), improved 12-month OS (37.7% vs 20.6%) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) (11.6% vs 3.0%) rates, and higher PSA response rates (35.1% vs 4.8%) compared with placebo. Enzalutamide-treated patients who had lung metastases (n = 104) had improved median OS (HR, 0.848; 95% CI, 0.510-1.410), a substantially reduced risk of radiographic progression (HR, 0.386; 95% CI, 0.259-0.577), improved 12-month OS (65.1% vs 55.3%) and rPFS (30.9% vs 8.2%) rates, increased time to PSA progression (HR, 0.358; 95% CI, 0.204-0.627), and a better PSA response rate (52.1% vs 4.9%) compared with those who received placebo. No increase in treatment-related adverse events was observed for the visceral metastases cohort compared with the nonvisceral metastases cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Across multiple endpoints, patients who have visceral metastases have better outcomes with enzalutamide than with placebo. Cancer 2017;123:253-262.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and visceral metastases have a worse prognosis than those with nonvisceral metastases. Treatment with the androgen receptor inhibitor enzalutamide in the phase 3 AFFIRM trial led to significant improvements in outcomes for patients with mCRPC. For the current report, the authors analyzed the efficacy of enzalutamide among patients from the AFFIRM trial who had visceral disease. METHODS:Patients who had liver and/or lung metastases at baseline were selected for prespecified overall survival (OS) and exploratory post hoc analyses, including prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and the time to PSA and radiographic progression. RESULTS: In patients who had liver metastases (n = 92), enzalutamide was associated with a lower risk of radiographic progression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.645; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.413-1.008), improved 12-month OS (37.7% vs 20.6%) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) (11.6% vs 3.0%) rates, and higher PSA response rates (35.1% vs 4.8%) compared with placebo. Enzalutamide-treated patients who had lung metastases (n = 104) had improved median OS (HR, 0.848; 95% CI, 0.510-1.410), a substantially reduced risk of radiographic progression (HR, 0.386; 95% CI, 0.259-0.577), improved 12-month OS (65.1% vs 55.3%) and rPFS (30.9% vs 8.2%) rates, increased time to PSA progression (HR, 0.358; 95% CI, 0.204-0.627), and a better PSA response rate (52.1% vs 4.9%) compared with those who received placebo. No increase in treatment-related adverse events was observed for the visceral metastases cohort compared with the nonvisceral metastases cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Across multiple endpoints, patients who have visceral metastases have better outcomes with enzalutamide than with placebo. Cancer 2017;123:253-262.
Authors: Susan Halabi; Chen-Yen Lin; W Kevin Kelly; Karim S Fizazi; Judd W Moul; Ellen B Kaplan; Michael J Morris; Eric J Small Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Howard I Scher; Karim Fizazi; Fred Saad; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Cora N Sternberg; Kurt Miller; Ronald de Wit; Peter Mulders; Kim N Chi; Neal D Shore; Andrew J Armstrong; Thomas W Flaig; Aude Fléchon; Paul Mainwaring; Mark Fleming; John D Hainsworth; Mohammad Hirmand; Bryan Selby; Lynn Seely; Johann S de Bono Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-08-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ian F Tannock; Ronald de Wit; William R Berry; Jozsef Horti; Anna Pluzanska; Kim N Chi; Stephane Oudard; Christine Théodore; Nicholas D James; Ingela Turesson; Mark A Rosenthal; Mario A Eisenberger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-10-07 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Michael S Cookson; Bruce J Roth; Philipp Dahm; Christine Engstrom; Stephen J Freedland; Maha Hussain; Daniel W Lin; William T Lowrance; Mohammad Hassan Murad; William K Oh; David F Penson; Adam S Kibel Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: C Pezaro; A Omlin; D Lorente; D Nava Rodrigues; R Ferraldeschi; D Bianchini; D Mukherji; R Riisnaes; A Altavilla; M Crespo; N Tunariu; J de Bono; G Attard Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-11-22 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: O B Goodman; T W Flaig; A Molina; P F A Mulders; K Fizazi; H Suttmann; J Li; T Kheoh; J S de Bono; H I Scher Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Kathleen Ruchalski; Hyun J Kim; Michael Douek; Steven Raman; Maitraya Patel; Victor Sai; Antonio Gutierrez; Benjamin Levine; Cheryce Fischer; Martin Allen-Auerbach; Pawan Gupta; Heidi Coy; Bianca Villegas; Matthew Brown; Jonathan Goldin Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 5.605
Authors: Mark N Stein; Lawrence Fong; Ronald Tutrone; Anthony Mega; Elaine T Lam; Megan Parsi; Surya Vangala; Andres A Gutierrez; Naomi B Haas Journal: Oncologist Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 5.837
Authors: Katharina Kessel; Robert Seifert; Michael Schäfers; Matthias Weckesser; Katrin Schlack; Martin Boegemann; Kambiz Rahbar Journal: Theranostics Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Carlos M Roggero; Lianjin Jin; Subing Cao; Rajni Sonavane; Noa G Kopplin; Huy Q Ta; Dede N Ekoue; Michael Witwer; Shihong Ma; Hong Liu; Tianfang Ma; Daniel Gioeli; Ganesh V Raj; Yan Dong Journal: Oncogene Date: 2020-12-15 Impact factor: 8.756