ABSTRACT
Background: The RECORD Study is a real world data, prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes in patients with nmCRPC treated with Darolutamide. This study will increase the understanding of treatment response and management and in particular informregarding use of next generation imaging in this setting. Method(s): Patient data from 9 UK centres was collected based on the recommendation of NICE for Darolutamide as an option for the treatment of non-metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) from November 2020. Data cut-off was 15 September 2022. The study is ongoing. Result(s): 87 patients were analysed with a median age of 78 (range 61-92). Median pre-treatment PSA and PSA doubling time (PSAdT) were 13 (range 1.99-110.6) mg/L and 5.05 (range 0.6 -10) months. 42 patients (49.4%) had pre-treatment PSAdT of <6 months and 43 (50.6%) patients had PSAdT of >=6 months (2 patients had no pre-treatment PSAdT data). 6 patients (6.90%) had next generation imaging prior to initiation of Darolutamide. Median duration of treatment on Darolutamide was 17 months for patients with pre-treatment PSAdT <6 months but median duration had not been reached for patients with pre-treatment PSAdT >=6 months after 24 months of treatment, a significant difference p=0.018 (HR=0.385, 95% CI 0.17-0.88). 30 patients have come off treatment so far (34.5%);21 (70%) for disease progression, 5 (16%) for a medical cause unrelated to the drug (e.g. COVID infection, reduced performance status secondary to pre-existing Parkinson's), 3 (10%) for unacceptable toxicity (rash, Grade3 fatigue, muscle aches, memory issues), and 1 patient died (unrelated). Conclusion(s): In the RECORD study, predominantly the diagnosis of nmCRPC is based on conventional imaging. The majority of patients respond and tolerate Darolutamide well, comparable with the ARAMIS trial. There is a significant difference between time on Darolutamide for those with pre-treatment PSAdT of<6 months compared with>=6 months. Further long-term toxicity, MFS and OS data will continue to be collected prospectively within the study.
ABSTRACT
Background: Paclitaxel is commonly used as first line chemotherapy for HER2 negative MBC. However, with response rates of 21.5-53.7% and a significant risk of peripheral neuropathy there is a need for more effective and better tolerated chemotherapy (CCT). Methods: This open label randomised (1:1) phase 2 trial compared 6 cycles of cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2 ) every 3 weeks, with weekly paclitaxel (80mg/m2 ) over 18 weeks as first line CCT. HER2 negative and performance status ≤1 patients were eligible. Patients on cabazitaxel received GCSF prophylaxis. Primary endpoint was Progression Free Survival (PFS) with 127 events required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 with 85% power. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR;RECIST 1.1), time to response (TTR), overall survival (OS), safety and tolerability and quality of life (QoL). Results: 158 patients were recruited from 14 UK hospitals (79 in each arm). Median age (range) was 56(34-81) in the cabazitaxel arm and 61(34-79) in the paclitaxel arm. 61% of patients were performance status 0. Median time on treatment was 15 weeks for both arms, but more patients on paclitaxel had a treatment delay (61% vs 39%) or dose reduction (37% vs 24%). Comparing cabazitaxel to paclitaxel after 146 PFS events, median PFS was 6.7 vs 5.8 months (HR 0.84;95%CI 0.60-1.18, P = 0.3). There was no difference in OS, median 19.3 vs 20.0 months (HR 0.94;95%CI 0.63-1.40, P = 0.7), ORR (42% vs 37%) or TTR (HR 1.09;95%CI 0.68- 1.74, P = 0.7). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 42% of patients on cabazitaxel and 48% on paclitaxel. Diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia and nausea were the most common grade ≥3 events in the cabazitaxel arm with rates of 11%, 11% and 10% respectively compared to 1%, 1% and 0% in the paclitaxel arm. In the paclitaxel arm the top grade ≥3 events were lung infection and peripheral neuropathy, 6% and 5% respectively compared to 2.5% and 0% in the cabazitaxel arm. Peripheral neuropathy of any grade was reported by 55% of patients treated with paclitaxel vs 17% on cabazitaxel. Alopecia occurred in 41% of patients on paclitaxel compared to 27% on cabazitaxel. Adverse events leading to discontinuation were more frequent with paclitaxel (22%) than cabazitaxel (14%). Over the course of treatment, mean EQ5D single index utility score (+0.05;95%CI 0.004-0.09, P = 0.03) and visual analogue scale score (+7.7;95%CI 3.1-12.3, P = 0.001) were higher in the cabazitaxel arm compared to paclitaxel suggestive of better QoL on Cabazitaxel. Conclusions: 3 weekly cabazitaxel as first line chemotherapy in HER2 negative MBC does not significantly improve PFS compared to weekly paclitaxel, though it has a lower risk of peripheral neuropathy with better patient reported overall health outcomes. Cabazitaxel is safe and well tolerated for MBC and requires fewer hospital visits, an important consideration in the COVID pandemic and beyond.