Initial management approach for localized/locally advanced disease is critical to guide metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Currently, several therapies are available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but no specific clinical factors to personalize treatment. We first sought the prognostic value of duration on androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) in patients receiving androgen-receptor-signaling inhibitors (ARSI) for mCRPC. METHODS: A multicenter cohort of mCRPC patients who started ARSI between July 2011 and October 2021 was identified. Based on their initial disease burden and duration on ADT for HSPC, primary progressive (PP) men were classified into four groups: low/intermediate-risk localized disease (LOC) and high-risk localized/locally advanced disease (LAD) and short-term (ST) < 24 vs. long-term (LT) ADT ≥ 24 months, whereas de novo (DN) mHSPC were subdivided into short-time vs. long-time to CRPC. RESULTS: We included 919 mCRPC patients with a median age of 77 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 71-82)]. Median ADT duration in HSPC was 24 months (IQR = 14-40). Median follow-up was 91 months (IQR = 62-138), median OS and PFS from ARSI start were 20 (IQR 10-32) and 10 months (IQR = 5-19), respectively. In PP developing metastatic disease (n = 655, 71.3%), LOC and LAD with ST ADT had a greater than almost double-risk of death compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.01; 95% CI 1.54-2.64; LAD/ST: HR = 1.73; 95% CI 1.34-2.24; p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis including age, prognostic cohort, Gleason, ECOG, radical radiotherapy and prostatectomy, groups with ST ADT were associated with worse OS compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: HR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.38-2.45; p < 0.001; LAD/ST: HR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.21-2.10; p < 0.001), along with ECOG > 2 (HR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.06-2.26; p = 0.03). There were also similar results of PFS. Moreover, long-time to CRPC in patients with history of DN mHSPC (n = 264, 28.7%) resulted in a better OS/PFS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02, p = 0.064 and HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99, p = 0.042, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that duration on ADT for mHSPC was significantly associated with survival in mCRPC undergoing ARSI. These findings suggest a possible connection between initial management of prostate tumour and a better prognostication in mCRPC. Prospective trials are warranted.

Niraparib with Abiraterone Acetate and Prednisone for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Phase II QUEST Study Results.

Niraparib (NIRA) is a highly selective inhibitor of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase, PARP1 and PARP2, which play a role in DNA repair. The phase II QUEST study evaluated NIRA combinations in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were positive for homologous recombination repair gene alterations and had progressed on 1 prior line of novel androgen receptor-targeted therapy. Results from the combination of NIRA with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone, which disrupts androgen axis signaling through inhibition of CYP17, showed promising efficacy and a manageable safety profile in this patient population.

First-line treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the real-world Italian cohort of the Prostate Cancer Registry.

BACKGROUND: With the availability of multiple treatment options for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), new real-world data on disease management and drugs' performance are needed. METHODS: We described characteristics, management and clinical outcomes of patients receiving first-line mCRPC treatment within the Italian cohort of the real-world, prospective, international Prostate Cancer Registry. Patients were enrolled consecutively (2013-2016) in 32 Italian sites and followed for 3 years. RESULTS: 238 patients were included: 157 received first-line abiraterone acetate plus prednisone ("abiraterone" thereafter) and 70 first-line docetaxel; 11 patients receiving other treatments were not considered. Compared with docetaxel-treated patients, those receiving abiraterone were significantly older (age ⩾75: 63.7% vs 38.6%), less frequently had a Gleason score >8 (48.2% vs 67.6%, p<0.005) at initial diagnosis, and more frequently an ECOG score ⩾1 (52.7% vs 36.2%, p<0.05) and comorbidities (76.4% vs 57.1%, p<0.05) at baseline; they reported a lower analgesic use (15.3% vs 30%, p<0.005). In the abiraterone group (median follow-up 22.1 months), median time to progression (TTP) and progression-free survival (PFS) were, respectively, 14.4 months (95% confidence interval, CI, 10.6-18.0) and 13.0 months (95% CI, 9.1-16.8); median overall survival (OS) was not reached, and 3-year OS was 59.1%. In the docetaxel treatment group (median follow-up 25.3 months), median TTP, PFS and OS were, respectively, 8.2 months (95% CI, 6.1-10.3), 8.2 months (95% CI, 5.8-10.3) and 33.2 months (95% CI, 19.2-not estimable). CONCLUSION: This investigation provided valuable information on the overall mCRPC treatment pattern and the effectiveness of first-line abiraterone and docetaxel in a population representative of everyday practice.

Patient-reported outcomes with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results of this double-blind, phase 2 trial showed patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer given olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone had significantly improved progression-free survival. Here, we present an exploratory analysis of pain and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial was conducted across 41 urological oncology sites in 11 countries in Europe and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and had previously received docetaxel and up to one additional line of previous chemotherapy. Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was defined as increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration or other signs of disease progression despite androgen-deprivation therapy and serum testosterone concentrations at castrate levels (≤50 ng/dL), and with at least one metastatic lesion on bone scan, CT, or MRI. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral olaparib (300 mg twice per day) plus oral abiraterone (1000 mg once a day) and oral prednisone or prednisolone (5 mg twice a day) or placebo plus abiraterone (1000 mg once a day) and prednisone or prednisolone (5 mg twice a day). Randomisation was done without stratification and by use of an interactive voice or web response system. A randomised treatment kit ID number was assigned sequentially to each patient as they became eligible. The primary endpoint (radiographic progression-free survival) has previously been reported. HRQOL was a prespecified exploratory patient-reported outcome. Patients were asked to complete the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), single-item worst bone pain, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire, and EuroQol-5 five-dimension five level (EQ-5D-5L) assessment at baseline, at weeks 4, 8, and 12, then every 12 weeks until treatment discontinuation. Prespecified outcomes were change from baseline in BPI-SF worst pain, single-item worst bone pain and FACT-P Total Outcome Index (TOI) scale scores, time to deterioration in BPI-SF worst pain and worst bone pain, and assessment of the EQ-5D-5L pain and discomfort domain. All analyses were exploratory and done in the full analysis set (all randomly assigned patients, including patients who were randomly assigned but did not subsequently go on to receive study treatment), with the exception of mean baseline and total change from baseline analyses, for which we used the population who had a valid baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01972217, and is no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Nov 25, 2014, and July 14, 2015, 171 patients were assessed for eligibility. 29 patients were excluded, and 142 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive olaparib and abiraterone (n=71) or placebo and abiraterone (n=71). Data cutoff was Sept 22, 2017. Median follow-up was 15·9 months (IQR 8·1-25·5) in the olaparib plus abiraterone group and 24·5 months (8·1-27·6) in the placebo plus abiraterone group. Questionnaire compliance was generally high (43-100%). Least-squares mean changes from baseline in BPI-SF worst pain, single-item worst bone pain, and FACT-P TOI remained stable across all visits for patients in both treatment groups. Adjusted mean change in FACT-P TOI from baseline across all visits was -0·10 (95% CI -2·50 to 2·71) in the olaparib plus abiraterone group and -1·20 (-4·15 to 1·74) in the placebo plus abiraterone group (difference 1·30, 95% CI -2·70 to 5·30; p=0·52). Time to deterioration in pain was similar in both groups (BPI-SF worst pain HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·62-1·32], p=0·30; worst bone pain HR 0·85 [0·59-1·22], p=0·18). Improvement rates in the pain and discomfort domain of the EQ-5D-5L were similar in both groups from baseline to week 48, beyond which a higher proportion of patients in the olaparib plus abiraterone arm reported an improvement compared to the placebo plus abiraterone group. INTERPRETATION: In these prespecified exploratory analyses, there was no significant difference in pain or HRQOL when olaparib was added to abiraterone. In this phase 2 trial, a statistically significant radiographic progression-free survival benefit was observed with the olaparib plus abiraterone combination. These results suggest that the improved survival benefits observed when combining olaparib with abiraterone does not result in different HRQOL compared with placebo plus abiraterone. Phase 3 studies are required to validate these results. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Effects of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone on bone turnover markers in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients after ADT failure: A prospective analysis of the italian real-world study ABITUDE.

BACKGROUND: Bone remodeling is disrupted in metastatic disease, which affects > 70% of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. As a result, abnormal levels of specific bone turnover biomarkers (BTMs) are released. In this prospective ancillary analysis of the Italian real-world study ABITUDE, four markers were measured during abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) treatment in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC men failing androgen-deprivation therapy. METHODS: Patients were enrolled if a blood sample was obtained before the first administration of abiraterone (baseline); ad-hoc blood samples were withdrawn during routine tests after 3, 6, and 12 months. A centralized lab measured bone alkaline phosphatase (BALP, osteoblast activity marker), type-I collagen-C-telopeptide (CTX-1, bone resorption marker), parathyroid hormone (PTH) and vitamin D (vitD). At each time point, intra-patient variations vs baseline were compared by the signed-rank test (statistical significance: P-value < 0.05). RESULTS: Of 481 patients enrolled in ABITUDE, 186 (median age: 76 [range: 53-93] years) met the substudy criteria: 74.7% had bone metastases, 11.8% were on bone-targeted therapies (BTT) and 14.0% on vitD supplementation. BALP decreased significantly at month 6 (P = 0.0010) and 12 (P < 0.0001) and CTX-1 at month 6 (P = 0.0028); PTH increased at month 3 (P < 0.0001); no significant difference in vitD levels was observed. Similar findings were observed in BTT-untreated patients. The reduction in BALP and CTX-1 levels was more pronounced in patients with than without bone metastases; in the latter group, no significant variation in BALP and CTX-1 levels was observed. CONCLUSIONS: AAP seems to exert an effect on the microenvironment of metastatic but not of normal bone, which likely contributes to its antitumoral activity.

Effectiveness of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in a large prospective real-world cohort: the ABItude study.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with abiraterone plus prednisone are limited, largely deriving from small retrospective studies. METHODS: ABitude is an Italian, observational, prospective, multicenter study of mCRPC patients receiving abiraterone plus prednisone in clinical practice. Chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients were consecutively enrolled at abiraterone start (February 2016 to June 2017) and are being followed for 3 years, with evaluation approximately every 6 months. Several clinical and patients reported outcomes were examined. RESULTS: In this second interim analysis, among 481 enrolled patients, 453 were evaluable for analyses. At baseline, the median age was 77 years and ~69% of patients had comorbidities (mainly cardiovascular diseases). Metastases were located mainly at bones and lymph nodes; 8.4% of patients had visceral metastases. During a median follow-up of 18 months, 1- and 2-year probability of radiographic progression-free survival were 73.9% and 56.2%, respectively; the corresponding rates for overall survival were 87.3% and 70.4%. In multivariable analyses, the number of bone metastases significantly affected radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. During abiraterone plus prednisone treatment, 65% of patients had a ⩾50% prostate-specific antigen decline, and quality of life remained appreciably high. Among symptomatic patients according to the Brief Pain Inventory) (32%), scores significantly declined after 6 months of treatment. Overall, eight patients (1.7%) had serious adverse reactions to abiraterone. CONCLUSIONS: Abiraterone plus prednisone is effective and safe for chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients in clinical practice.

Immune Modulation in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Androgen Receptor (AR)-Targeted Therapy.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a cornerstone of treatment for prostate cancer and, in recent years, androgen receptor (AR)-targeted therapies (abiraterone and enzalutamide) have both been used for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). In our study, we sought to investigate the association between ADT and immune disorders, considering a potential role of androgens in the immune modulation. We retrospectively evaluated CRPC patients treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide between July 2011 and December 2018. We assessed the risk of developing immune alterations and their impact on outcome. We included 844 CRPC patients receiving AR-directed therapies, of whom 36 (4.3%) had autoimmune diseases and 47 (5.6%) second tumors as comorbidities. Median age was 70 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 63-75)]. We showed higher significant incidence of autoimmune diseases during their hormone sensitive status (p = 0.021) and the presence of autoimmune comorbidities before starting treatment with abiraterone/enzalutamide was significantly associated with worse overall survival (OS) (10.1 vs. 13.7 months, HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.03-2.27, p = 0.038). In a multivariate analysis, the presence of autoimmune disorders was an independent predictor of OS (HR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.05-2.60, p = 0.031). In conclusion, CRPC patients with autoimmune alterations before starting AR-directed therapies may have worse prognosis. Further prospective studies are warranted to assess the role of immune modulation in the management of prostate cancer patients.

Sorafenib Versus Observation Following Radical Metastasectomy for Clear-cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the Phase 2 Randomized Open-label RESORT Study.

BACKGROUND: In selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients, radical metastasectomy followed by observation is a potential strategy. It is still to be defined whether systemic therapy should be administered following metastasectomy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential benefit of postoperative treatment with sorafenib compared with observation alone after radical metastasectomy in mRCC patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The RESORT trial was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 study conducted between November 2012 and November 2017 in Italy. Patients with clear-cell mRCC pretreated with nephrectomy and undergoing radical metastasectomy (three or fewer lesions) were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized (1:1) within 12 wk from metastasectomy to sorafenib (standard dose 400 mg twice daily) or observation for a maximum of 52 wk. Stratification factors were interval from nephrectomy, site, and number of lesions. Overall, 76 patients were screened and 69 were randomized: 33 were assigned to sorafenib and 36 to observation. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival and the safety profile. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: RFS curves were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to statistically compare the curves. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: At a median follow-up of 38 mo, median RFS was 37 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 20-not available [NA]) in the observation arm versus 21 mo (95% CI 11-NA) in the sorafenib arm (log-rank test p = 0.404), with 12-, 24-, and 36-mo RFS probability of 74% versus 63%, 59% versus 49%, and 50% versus 41%, respectively, in the observation versus the sorafenib arm. Any-grade adverse event (AE) rates were 84% in the sorafenib arm and 31% in the observation arm; grade ≥3 AE rates were 22% and 3% in the sorafenib and the observation arm, respectively, with a rate of treatment discontinuation for AEs of 19% in the sorafenib arm. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study showed that systemic treatment with sorafenib did not increase RFS as compared with observation in mRCC patients following radical metastasectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: This article reports the clinical outcome of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sorafenib or managed with an observation-alone strategy after the radical surgery of metastases. We found that sorafenib did not improve the patient outcome in terms of relapse-free survival in this selected population.

Metronomic chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide plus low dose of corticosteroids in advanced castration-resistant prostate cancer across the era of taxanes and new hormonal drugs.

The aim of our study is to investigate the efficacy of metronomic cyclophosphamide plus low dose of corticosteroids in advanced or metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) before, between, and after standard chemotherapy, such as docetaxel and cabazitaxel, and new hormonal treatments, such as abiraterone and enzalutamide. A retrospective analysis was performed on 37 patients. Cyclophosphamide was given orally 50 mg per day together with low dose of corticosteroids, namely dexametasone orally 1 mg per day or prednisone 10 mg per day. Seventeen patients (51%) showed a PSA decline≥ 50%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 11 and 28 months, respectively. Median PFS and OS in the subgroup of patients with a PSA decline ≥ 50% were 14 and 35 months, respectively. Treatment was very well tolerated. We suggest that oral metronomic cyclophosphamide plus low dose of oral dexamethasone or prednisone may be a good and safe therapeutic option not only in those CRPC patients unfit for standard treatments but also in those heavily pre-treated patients.

Activity and safety of metronomic cyclophosphamide in the modern era of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

AIM: To evaluate activity of metronomic cyclophosphamide (mCTX) in heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. PATIENTS & METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of 74 mCRPC patients treated with at least one new agent after docetaxel failure, who received once-daily oral mCTX treatment at a fixed dose of 50 mg. RESULTS: The treatment was well tolerated. Sixteen percent of the patients experienced a major biochemical response. Median progression-free survival was 4.0 months, and median overall survival was 8.1 months. CONCLUSIONS: In the modern context of mCRPC, mCTX may represent a valuable and inexpensive alternative to new agents, which have shown similar activity in heavily pretreated patients.

Olaparib combined with abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations have a better response to treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib than patients without HRR mutations. Preclinical data suggest synergy between olaparib and androgen pathway inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy of olaparib plus the androgen pathway inhibitor abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer regardless of HRR mutation status. METHODS: We carried out this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at 41 urological oncology sites in 11 countries across Europe and North America. Eligible male patients were aged 18 years or older with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had previously received docetaxel and were candidates for abiraterone treatment. Patients were excluded if they had received more than two previous lines of chemotherapy, or had previous exposure to second-generation antihormonal drugs. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice or web response system, without stratification, to receive oral olaparib 300 mg twice daily or placebo. All patients received oral abiraterone 1000 mg once daily and prednisone or prednisolone 5 mg twice daily. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS; based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 criteria). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly assigned patients, and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of olaparib or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01972217, and is no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Nov 25, 2014, and July 14, 2015, 171 patients were assessed for eligibility. Of those, 142 patients were randomly assigned to receive olaparib and abiraterone (n=71) or placebo and abiraterone (n=71). The clinical cutoff date for the final analysis was Sept 22, 2017. Median rPFS was 13·8 months (95% CI 10·8-20·4) with olaparib and abiraterone and 8·2 months (5·5-9·7) with placebo and abiraterone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·65, 95% CI 0·44-0·97, p=0·034). The most common grade 1-2 adverse events were nausea (26 [37%] patients in the olaparib group vs 13 [18%] patients in the placebo group), constipation (18 [25%] vs eight [11%]), and back pain (17 [24%] vs 13 [18%]). 38 (54%) of 71 patients in the olaparib and abiraterone group and 20 (28%) of 71 patients in the placebo and abiraterone group had grade 3 or worse adverse events, including anaemia (in 15 [21%] of 71 patients vs none of 71), pneumonia (four [6%] vs three [4%]), and myocardial infarction (four [6%] vs none). Serious adverse events were reported by 24 (34%) of 71 patients receiving olaparib and abiraterone (seven of which were related to treatment) and 13 (18%) of 71 patients receiving placebo and abiraterone (one of which was related to treatment). One treatment-related death (pneumonitis) occurred in the olaparib and abiraterone group. INTERPRETATION: Olaparib in combination with abiraterone provided clinical efficacy benefit for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer compared with abiraterone alone. More serious adverse events were observed in patients who received olaparib and abiraterone than abiraterone alone. Our data suggest that the combination of olaparib and abiraterone might provide an additional clinical benefit to a broad population of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Association among metabolic syndrome, inflammation, and survival in prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MS) and inflammation (INF) alterations are among the factors involved in cancer progression. The study aimed to assess the relationship between MS and INF and its effect on progression-free/overall survival (PFS/OS) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treaed with abiraterone or enzalutamide. METHODS: We, retrospectively, evaluated patients with mCRPC in 7 Italian Institutes between March 2011 and October 2016. MS was defined by modified adult treatment panel-III criteria. INF was characterized by at least one of these criteria: neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio ≥ 3, elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein. RESULTS: Eighty-three of 551 (15.1%) patients met MS criteria at baseline and 34 (6.2%) during treatment. MS patients (MS+) presented a greater INF profile compared to MS- (P<0.0001). Median PFS was 3.7 for MS+ vs. 8.7 months for MS- (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.77; 95% CI: 2.12-3.61; P<0.0001). Median OS was 6.9 and 19 months in MS+ and MS-, respectively (HR = 3.43; 95% CI: 2.56-4.58; P<0.0001). We also demonstrated INF led to shorter PFS and OS (4.5 vs. 8.5 months, HR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.15-1.90, P = 0.002, and 11.2 vs. 18.8 months, HR =1.66, 95% CI: 1.26-2.18, P = 0.0003, respectively). The combination of MS with INF provided the identification of high-risk prognostic group (MS+/INF+ vs. MS-/INF-) with worse PFS (3.7 vs. 9 months, HR = 2.7, 95% CI: 1.88-3.89, P<0.0001) and OS (6.3 vs. 20.4 months, HR = 4.04, 95% CI: 2.75-5.93, P<0.0001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that MS was independently associated with PFS (HR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.03-4.18; P = 0.041) and OS (HR = 4.87; 95% CI: 2.36-10.03; P<0.0001). The absence of INF as an independent predictor of survival underlined the correlation between MS/INF. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment identification of MS and INF alterations might represent an available and easy tool for better prognostication of patients with mCRPC. A prospective evaluation is warranted.

Impact of second-line cetuximab-containing therapy in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the ITACa randomized clinical trial.

The ITACa trial was designed to define the role of cetuximab (Cet) and bevacizumab (Bev) in combination with standard chemotherapy (CT, FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4) as first- and second-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer. All patients with WT KRAS tumors who had been enrolled in the first-line trial were randomized onto two independent second-line trials: CT or CT + Cet (study 2A) and CT + Bev or CT + Bev + Cet (study 2B). Patients with mutated KRAS were not eligible for randomization and were treated with CT alone (study 2A) or CT + Bev (study 2B). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). 48 and 56 KRAS WT patients were randomized while 31 and 40 KRAS mutated patients were treated without randomization. Study 2A: median PFS was 3.4 (95%CI 2.3-4.6) and 6.2 (95%CI 4.3-7.8) months for the CT and CT + Cet arms, respectively, with a hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64 (95%CI 0.35-1.16, p = 0.144). Study 2B: median PFS was 7.7 (95%CI 4.1-10.1) and 4.9 (95%CI 3.2-7.0) months for CT + Bev and CT + Cet + Bev arms, respectively, with a HR = 1.31 (95%CI 0.76-2.26, p = 0.330). Notwithstanding limitations due to the small sample size, among patients with WT KRAS the addition of Cet to second-line CT increased PFS, whereas the addition of Cet to CT + Bev was associated with worse PFS.

Dose intensity and efficacy of the combination of everolimus and exemestane (EVE/EXE) in a real-world population of hormone receptor-positive (ER+/PgR+), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients: a multicenter Italian experience.

AIM: This retrospective analysis focused on the effect of treatment with EVE/EXE in a real-world population outside of clinical trials. We examined the efficacy of this combination in terms of PFS and RR related to dose intensity (5 mg daily versus 10 mg daily) and tolerability. METHODS: 163 HER2-negative ER+/PgR+ ABC patients, treated with EVE/EXE from May 2011 to March 2016, were included in the analysis. The primary endpoints were the correlation between the daily dose and RR and PFS, as well as an evaluation of the tolerability of the combination. Secondary endpoints were RR, PFS, and OS according to the line of treatment. Patients were classified into three different groups, each with a different dose intensity of everolimus (A, B, C). RESULTS: RR was 29.8% (A), 27.8% (B) (p = 0.953), and not evaluable (C). PFS was 9 months (95% CI 7-11) (A), 10 months (95% CI 9-11) (B), and 5 months (95% CI 2-8) (C), p = 0.956. OS was 38 months (95% CI 24-38) (A), median not reached (B), and 13 months (95% CI 10-25) (C), p = 0.002. Adverse events were stomatitis 57.7% (11.0% grade 3-4), asthenia 46.0% (6.1% grade 3-4), hypercholesterolemia 46.0% (0.6% grade 3-4), and hyperglycemia 35.6% (5.5% grade 3-4). The main reason for discontinuation/interruption was grade 2-3 stomatitis. CONCLUSIONS: No correlation was found between dose intensity (5 vs. 10 mg labeled dose) and efficacy in terms of RR and PFS. The tolerability of the higher dose was poor in our experience, although this had no impact on efficacy.

Predictors of long-term response to abiraterone in patients with metastastic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

We aimed to identify clinical predictors of long-term response to abiraterone (defined as >12 months drug exposure) in a retrospective cohort of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated in post-docetaxel setting at 24 Italian centers. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the association between clinical features and the duration of drug exposure. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 143 patients met the inclusion criteria. Their median age was 73 years, median Gleason score 8 and median abiraterone exposure 20 months. At the univariate analysis, a significant correlation with the duration of abiraterone exposure was found for Gleason score (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.96; p=0.012), PSA (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.18; p=0.08) and lactic dehydrogenase levels (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.46; p=0.027), while the association between lower alkaline phosphatase levels and treatment duration was marginally significant (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99-1.16; p=0.074). Only PSA and Gleason score were predictive of long-term treatment duration in the multivariate analysis. No other clinical factors resulted to be predictive of sustained response to abiraterone, including metastatic disease at diagnosis and visceral disease, suggesting that all subgroups of patients may derive a substantial clinical benefit from abiraterone treatment. These findings need to be validated in prospective, larger studies.

Metabolic syndrome in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with abiraterone.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MS) has not yet been studied in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) men treated with novel hormonal therapies. The study aims to assess the impact of MS on outcome from time starting abiraterone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of metastatic CRPC patients treated with abiraterone after docetaxel failure. MS, as defined by modified Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III criteria, was assessed at the time of initiation of abiraterone, during treatment and follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-seven of 178 patients evaluated (37.6%) met MS criteria at baseline, before abiraterone initiation, whereas for 11 (9.9%) without MS before treatment with abiraterone this occurred during treatment. Median PFS was equal to 4.7 months for patients with MS versus 9 months for those without MS. Patients with MS had an increased risk of 71% of progression or death for all causes than patients without MS (HR = 1.7, 95% CI [1.2-2.4], P = 0.03). Median OS was 14.7 months and 22.3 months in patients with and without MS, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, MS resulted not significantly associated to OS (HR = 1.42, 95% CI [0.91-2.22], P = 0.073). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of MS is a significant risk factor for shorter PFS in CRPC patients treated with abiraterone, even if it does not show a significant impact on OS. A prospective evaluation is warranted.

Standard vs adapted sunitinib regimen in elderly patients with metastatic renal cell cancer: results from a large retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are no data on the patterns of care and outcome of elderly patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib. In a retrospective study, we assessed the routine use of first-line sunitinib in mRCC patients aged ≥ 70 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the clinical files of 185 patients aged ≥ 70 years with mRCC treated with first-line sunitinib in 17 Italian oncology units from February 2006 to September 2011. One hundred twenty-three patients (66.5%) received a standard 50 mg/d for a 4 weeks on/2 weeks off regimen (SR), and 62 patients (33.5%) received an AR consisting of 37.5 mg/d for a 4 weeks on/2 weeks off in 67.7% of cases. RESULTS: Median age was 74 years. Patients treated with an AR were older than those treated with the SR (P < .0001). In the overall population, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 25.5 months. Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 87 of 123 SR (70.7%) and 32 of 62 AR (51.6%), respectively; dose reductions were required in 82 SR (66.7%) and 26 AR (41.9%), respectively; discontinuations because of therapy-related adverse events occurred in 25 SR (20.3%) and 15 AR (24.2%), respectively. In multivariate analysis, only performance status and the Heng score were predictors of either PFS or OS. CONCLUSION: Sunitinib is active and feasible in elderly patients with mRCC. A sunitinib AR could be considered as an option in selected older mRCC patients. The optimal treatment of frail patients with mRCC remains to be established.

Which role for EGFR therapy in breast cancer?

EGFR and HER2 are highly expressed in 15-30% of breast cancer tissues. Therefore, EGFR and its downstream signaling pathways are promising anti-tumour targets. HER2 overexpression is often associated with estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) negativity, high histological grade, high rates of cell proliferation and lymph node involvement. Moreover, it is correlated with disease aggressiveness, increased rates of recurrence and poorer survival in node-positive breast cancer patients, whereas the prognostic significance in patients with node-negative tumors remains somewhat controversial. This paper focuses on the therapeutic strategy for treatment of HER2 overexpressing breast cancer in advanced stages of disease, as well as in the adjuvant and neo-adjuvant settings.

Hereditary ovarian cancers: from BRCA mutations to clinical management. A modern appraisal.

In the past few years, ovarian cancer research has focused increasingly on disease prevention; but an increasing number of women refer to gynecology and clinical genetics clinics with a family history of ovarian cancer and inherited familial mutations. The interest on the issue has increased also due to the identification of BReast CAncer1 (BRCA1) and BRCA2 genes mutations. The importance of recognizing the characteristics of hereditary ovarian cancer (HOC) and manage women at risk appropriately will provide more accurate care of the high-risk population. Women at risk can be identified by pedigree analysis and may receive counseling from interdisciplinary cancer genetics clinics, while those at high risk need to receive genetic testing. Risk calculation programs define risks and assist in decision-making in clinical options and genetic testing; they provide information on the risks of the disease, mutation status, and the use of genetic testing in the management of high-risk families. Furthermore, while a large number of surrogate preliminary markers have been identified, there are still limited studies on ovarian cancer genomics. Different options for risk management of HOC are available: surveillance, chemoprevention and prophylactic surgery. Surveillance in HOC high-risk patients is still not accurate. Chemoprevention is currently a controversial topic, because a number of major issues still need to be addressed in developing and testing agents for ovarian cancer chemoprevention. Prophylactic surgery has been shown to effectively decrease cancer risk, and it has the possibility to substantially reduce ovarian cancer mortality.

Efficacy and safety of the combination of docetaxel (Taxotere) with targeted therapies in the treatment of solid malignancies.

Docetaxel is a chemotherapeutic drug which has recently demonstrated high efficacy in the treatment of a wide variety of tumors. Numerous novel targeted drugs are being introduced in preclinical and clinical practice, aiming to directly inhibit pathways responsible for the maintenance of transformed and immortalized phenotypes of cancer cells. Herein we reported the efficacy and safety results of the most significant clinical trials evaluating different combinations and schedules of docetaxel plus biological therapeutics.