Creatine supplementation and resistance training to preserve muscle mass and attenuate cancer progression (CREATINE-52): a protocol for a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Muscle mass is important for metastatic prostate cancer survival and quality of life (QoL). The backbone of treatment for men with metastatic castration sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) is androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with an androgen signaling inhibitor. ADT is an effective cancer treatment, but it facilitates significant declines in muscle mass and adverse health outcomes important to mCSPC survivors, such as fatigue, and reductions in physical function, independence, insulin sensitivity, and QoL. In non-metastatic CSPC survivors, resistance training (RT) preserves muscle mass and improves these related health outcomes, but the biggest barrier to RT in CSPC survivors of all stages is fatigue. Creatine monohydrate supplementation coupled with RT (Cr + RT) may address this barrier since creatine plays a critical role in energy metabolism. Cr + RT in cancer-free older adults and other clinical populations improves muscle mass and related health outcomes. Evidence also suggests that creatine supplementation can complement cancer treatment. Thus, Cr + RT is a strategy that addresses gaps in survivorship needs of people with mCSPC. The purpose of this parallel, double-blind randomized controlled trial is to test the effects of 52-weeks of Cr + RT compared with placebo (PLA) and RT (PLA + RT) on muscle mass, other related health outcomes, and markers of cancer progression. METHODS: We will carry out this trial with our team's established, effective, home-based, telehealth RT program in 200 mCSPC survivors receiving ADT, and evaluate outcomes at baseline, 24-, and 52-weeks. RT will occur twice weekly with elastic resistance bands, and an established creatine supplementation protocol will be used for supplementation delivery. Our approach addresses a major facilitator to RT in mCSPC survivors, a home-based RT program, while utilizing a supervised model for safety. DISCUSSION: Findings will improve delivery of comprehensive survivorship care by providing a multicomponent, patient-centered lifestyle strategy to preserve muscle mass, improve health outcomes, and complement cancer treatment (NCT06112990).

Impact of androgen receptor alterations on cell-free DNA genomic profiling on survival outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen receptor (AR) gene alterations, as detected by circulating tumor cell-free DNA (cfDNA) genomic profiling, have been shown to emerge after a variable duration of androgen signaling inhibition. AR alterations were associated with inferior outcomes on treatment with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) in the first line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) setting in a phase 2 trial. Here in, we assessed the impact of these AR alterations on survival outcomes in a real-world patient population of mCRPC experiencing disease progression on an ARPI. METHODS: In this IRB-approved retrospective study, consecutively seen patients with a confirmed diagnosis of mCRPC, with disease progression on a treatment with ARPIs in the first line mCRPC setting, with no prior exposure to an ARPI in the castration sensitive setting, and with available cfDNA profiling from a CLIA certified laboratory were included. Patients were categorized based on AR status: wild-type (ARwt ) or alteration-positive (AR+ ). The objective was to correlate overall survival (OS) after disease progression on the first-line ARPI with the presence or absence of AR alterations. Kaplan-Meier and Cox Regression Tests were used as implemented in R-Studio (v.4.2). RESULTS: A total of 137 mCRPC patients were eligible: 69 with ARwt versus 68 with AR+ . The median OS posttreatment with the first ARPI was significantly higher for ARwt than AR+ patients (30.1 vs. 15.2 mos; p < 0.001). Of 108 patients who received a subsequent line of therapy, 63 received an alternate ARPI (AR+ 39 vs. 24 ARwt ), while 20 received a taxane-based therapy (11 AR+ vs. 9 ARwt ). Among patients receiving an alternate ARPI, AR+ had numerically shorter OS (16.8 vs. 30.4 mos, p = 0.1). Among patients receiving taxane-based regimens, the OS was not significantly different between AR+ and ARwt (14.5 vs. 10.1 mos, p = 0.18). CONCLUSION: In this real-world study, mCRPC patients with AR alterations on cfDNA had inferior OS after disease progression on the first ARPI, compared to those who did not, and may impact outcomes on a subsequent ARPI but not on subsequent taxane-based therapy received. By providing survival estimates for patients with or without AR alterations, our data may aid in patient counseling, prognostication, treatment decision, and for designing future clinical trials in this setting.

Survival outcomes of real world patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer who do not achieve optimal PSA response with intensified androgen deprivation therapy with docetaxel or androgen receptor pathway inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) undergoing intensified androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), not achieving an optimal PSA response, defined as PSA nadir >0.2 ng/ml (PSAsubOR) has been associated with worse survival outcomes in clinical trials (1)(10)(11). Here, we externally evaluate, the impact of optimal PSA response on survival outcomes in these patients and provide absolute PFS and OS measures in those with PSAsubOR in the context of ADT intensification in real world setting. METHODS: In this retrospective study, all consecutive patients with mHSPC who underwent intensified ADT treated at our institution, and whose outcomes data were available, were included. We classified patients based on their PSA nadir on treatment: those with a on treatment PSAOR (PSA nadir ≤0.2 ng/ml) versus PSAsubOR. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients were eligible: 136 (66.3%) patients achieved PSAOR versus 69 (33.7%) patients had PSAsubOR. Patients who experienced a PSAOR had significantly improved PFS and OS from the start of intensified ADT versus who did not: PFS was not reached (NR) versus 11 months (hazard ratio (HR) 0.20, P < 0.001) and OS was NR versus 38.9 months (HR 0.21, P < 0.001). Survival outcomes were poor with PSAsubOR regardless of intensification with docetaxel or an ARPI (absolute PFS and OS measures for each group are provided in the text). CONCLUSION: Our study is the first to explore the negative impact of PSAsubOR in patients with mHSPC undergoing intensified ADT in the real-world setting, and is the first to provide absolute PFS and OS in patients with PSAsubOR receiving ADT intensification with ARPIs or docetaxel outside of clinical trial setting. These data will aid with prognostication, patient counseling, and for designing future clinical trials for patients with PSAsubOR.

Survival of Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer After Disease Progression on an Androgen Receptor Axis-Targeted Therapy Given in the Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Versus Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Setting.

Androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies (ARATs; androgen receptor or androgen synthesis inhibitors) have been approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive and castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCSPC and mCRPC) on the basis of improved overall survival (OS) in randomized clinical trials. However, it is not clear whether the OS for patients after progression on first-line ARAT differs if the first ARAT was administered in the mCSPC versus mCRPC setting and what its estimates are. We assessed the OS after disease progression on ARAT given as first-line therapy in mCSPC versus mCRPC. Patient-level data were collected retrospectively, and only those treated with first-line ARAT for mCSPC or mCRPC were included. For patients receiving ARAT in the mCRPC setting, no prior ARAT was allowed in the mCSPC setting. The median OS and hazard ratio (HR) were determined via Kaplan-Meier analysis from the time of progression on ARAT. Of 382 patients treated with first-line ARAT, 172 (44 mCSPC and 128 mCRPC) had experienced disease progression and were included in the analysis. Median OS was similar in the mCSPC (23 mo) and mCRPC (17 mo) settings (HR 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.56; p = 0.95). A total of 138 patients received subsequent systemic therapy after progression. Our results suggest that median OS is similar after progression on one ARAT, whether given in the first-line mCSPC or first-line mCRPC setting, and is estimated to be <2 yr. These data have implications for patient prognostication and the design of clinical trials in the post-ARAT setting for further drug development. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated whether the survival benefit differs between metastatic castration-sensitive and castration-resistant prostate cancer for patients who have already experienced cancer progression after first-line treatment with one drug targeting the androgen receptor pathway  (called ARAT). We found that the median survival benefit was less than 2 years and was similar for the two groups.

A retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with advanced genitourinary cancers.

Background: COVID-19 vaccination is one of the pivotal key tools against the ongoing pandemic, but its acceptance relies on efficacy and safety data among various populations, including patients with cancers. However, there is limited data on seroconversion rates, efficacy, and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer. Breakthrough infections after vaccination have also been reported, which could further strengthen the refusal behavior of specific populations to be immunized. Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in real-world patients with advanced genitourinary cancers. Methods and results: A retrospective study of the 738 patients with advanced metastatic genitourinary malignancy was conducted at our genitourinary oncology clinic from October 2020 to September 2021, out of which 462 patients (62.6%) were vaccinated. During the study period, two vaccinated, and six unvaccinated patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (breakthrough infection rate: 0.4% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.027). Vaccine protection against infection was 81.8% (95% CI: 0.04-0.98). One vaccinated and 4 unvaccinated patients were hospitalized due to COVID-19 (0.2% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.048). Vaccine effectiveness in preventing hospitalization was 85.7% (95% CI: 0.02-1.33). Within one month of vaccination, 1.5% of patients (n = 7) had emergency visits, 0.8% (n = 4) were hospitalized for any reason, and of these, 3 (0.6%) experienced a delay in the receipt of their cancer therapy. Conclusion: In our hypothesis-generating data among patients with advanced genitourinary cancers, COVID-19 vaccination was efficacious and safe and was rarely associated with treatment disruptions. These data should help improve the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine in the general population and patients with cancer. The vaccine effectiveness in our patients is comparable with existing published data without cancer.

Off-label use of emicizumab in persons with acquired haemophilia A and von Willebrand disease: A scoping review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Since the approval of emicizumab, a bispecific, factor VIII-mimetic antibody, for use in persons with congenital haemophilia A in 2018, there have been increasing case reports and case series of off-label use of emicizumab in other bleeding disorders, including acquired haemophilia A (AHA) and von Willebrand disease (VWD). AIM: We conducted a scoping review on the use of emicizumab in AHA and VWD, focusing on the clinical presentation and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus up to July 15, 2021. The following criteria were applied to the studies identified in the initial search: patients had a diagnosis of AHA or VWD; and the study reported on the clinical outcome of emicizumab use. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in the final review for a total of 41 patients (33 AHA, eight type 3 VWD). The majority of AHA patients and all type 3 VWD patients were started on emicizumab for active/recurrent bleeds. The dosing regimen of emicizumab used varied significantly in AHA patients. All patients had a clinical response to emicizumab use. One AHA patient developed a stroke on emicizumab use in association with concomitant recombinant FVIIa use for surgery. Data on adverse events from emicizumab use were not specifically reported in 24.4% of patients (four AHA, six type 3 VWD). CONCLUSION: Based on published case reports and case series, emicizumab appears to be an effective haemostatic therapy for AHA and VWD. Larger confirmatory clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

An Uncommon Side Effect of a Commonly Used Antibiotic: Amoxicillin-Clavulanic Acid Induced Hepatitis.

Amoxicillin-Clavulanic acid continues to be one of the most commonly used antibiotic combinations. Hepatic injury due to this antibiotic is rare. We report a case of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid induced hepatitis causing painless jaundice to bring to attention this rare side effect of this commonly used antibiotic. This is a case of a 62-year-old Caucasian female, who presented with acute onset severe painless jaundice, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus of less than 1-week duration. She had completed a course of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid 3 weeks prior to presentation. A careful history pointed to this simple diagnosis. It may be easily missed without an in-depth history and the patient may be subjected to unnecessary expensive tests. This case is reported to highlight cost conscious care by keeping in mind a rare side effect of the commonly used antibiotic.