Tag: Prostate Cancer

Stockholm3 Blood Test Identifies Aggressive Prostate Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 8 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 299,010 new cases of prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2024 and 35,250 men will die of the disease.

PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) is one of the most widely used prostate cancer biomarkers, and the widespread use of PSA testing in the recent years has resulted in a dramatic increase in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. The management of clinically localized prostate cancer that is detected based on PSA levels remains controversial, and management strategies for these patients have included Surgery, Radiotherapy or Active Monitoring. However, it has been proposed that given the indolent nature of prostate cancer in general, majority of the patients do not benefit from treatment intervention and many patients die of competing causes. PSA test CANNOT distinguish between aggressive and benign cancer. As a result, many men have to undergo unnecessary follow-ups with a biopsy of the prostate. Further, treatment intervention can result in adverse effects on sexual, urinary, or bowel function. PSA test is also difficult to interpret, and PSA elevation can be associated with several non-malignant conditions such as older age, infection, inflammation and Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has recommended that population screening for prostate cancer with PSA should not be adopted as a public health policy, because the risks appeared to outweigh benefits, from detecting and treating PSA-detected prostate cancer.

Stockholm3 is a blood test that combines 5 protein biomarkers, 101 genetic markers, and clinical data with an advanced algorithm, in order to detect almost 100% of aggressive prostate cancers at an early stage. The Stockholm3 test has been validated in over 75, 000 men and has been used in health systems in Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany, Switzerland, UK and Turkey, and results have been published in international peer-reviewed journals. Evidence suggests that Stockholm3 is more effective at predicting risk than PSA testing alone, for men aged 45-74 with PSA of at least 1.5ng/ml. Several studies have shown that the application of this test can reduce the number of biopsies by 32%, without compromising the diagnostic capacity of intermediate grade prostate cancers (Gleason 7 or higher), in comparison with the use of the PSA value 3 ng/ mL as cut-off value for biopsy recommendation. However, none of the validation studies included ethnically diverse population.

SEPTA is a prospective trial conducted to validate Stockholm3 in an ethnically diverse population, for prostate cancer risk stratification, and determine whether it could achieve noninferior sensitivity and superior specificity in this diverse population. This trial included men who were referred for prostate biopsy at North American sites from 2019 to 2023. Study participants had no previous diagnosis of prostate cancer. This study also used bio-banked specimens from 2008 to 2020. The cohort comprised 912 enrolled men and 1,217 with bio-banked blood. The median age was 63 years, 46% were White, 24% Black, 16% Asian and 14% were Hispanic.

This trial had 2 prespecified Primary goals: 1) Demonstrate noninferiority of the test in detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (defined as Gleason Grade group 2 or more), compared to PSA testing. 2) Prove superior specificity of the test versus PSA testing, thereby reducing the number of biopsies in men with benign or Gleason Grade group 1 biopsies. A Secondary goal was to evaluate Stockholm3 and PSA across ethnic subgroups. The study assessed Stockholm3 performance using prespecified thresholds and compared it to PSA across different ethnic subgroups. Statistical analysis plans were established before data analysis.

It was noted that the median PSA and Stockholm3 values among the participants were 6.1 ng/mL and 17, respectively. A total of 16% underwent MRI-targeted biopsies, and 20% had a prior benign biopsy. On biopsy, 29% were diagnosed with Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer, 14% with Gleason Grade group 1 cancer, and 57% with benign findings. The detection rate for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer varied across ethnic groups: African American/Black (37%), White/Caucasian (28%), Hispanic/Latino (29%), and Asian (21%).

Overall, Stockholm3 value 15 or higher demonstrated noninferiority to a PSA value of 4 ng/mL or higher and nearly three times superior specificity. These results were consistent across ethnic subgroups. The researchers noted that using a Stockholm3 value of 15 or higher would have reduced benign and Gleason Grade group 1 biopsies by 45% overall and between 42-52% across ethnic subgroups, compared to PSA of 4 ng/ml or higher.

The study concluded that in an ethnically diverse population, Stockholm3 could significantly reduce unnecessary biopsies and diagnoses of low-grade tumors, while maintaining similar sensitivity to PSA, for detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. The results suggest that
Stockholm3 could improve risk stratification and reduce harms associated with prostate cancer screening in diverse populations.

Stockholm3 validation in a multi-ethnic cohort for prostate cancer (SEPTA) detection: A multicentered, prospective trial. Vigneswaran HT, Eklund M, Discacciati A, et al. J Clin Oncol 42, 2024 (suppl 4; abstr 262). DOI 10.1200/JCO.2024.42.4_suppl.262. Abstract#262.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Prostate Cancer in Black Men in the United States

RR

SUMMARY: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 8 men will be diagnosed with Prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 299,010 new cases of Prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2024 and 32,250 men will die of the disease. There are however significant racial disparities, and for Black men, 1 in 6 will develop prostate cancer and are more than twice likely, to die from the disease. Black men are more likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer at a younger age and with more aggressive disease. Nonetheless, there are very few guidelines that have outlined specific recommendations for Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer screening among Black men.

A multidisciplinary panel of experts in Primary Care, Urology, Medical and Radiation Oncology conducted a comprehensive literature search in PubMed and Embase and after reviewing 265 relevant studies, developed six new guideline statements addressing screening for Black men, reaching a consensus, with 80% or higher agreement rate among these experts.

Prostate Cancer Foundation (PCF) Statements of Recommendations

Question 1. Should Black men be screened for prostate cancer?
Yes. Since Black men are at a high risk for prostate cancer, the benefits of screening generally outweigh the risks.

Question 2. What should Black men know about how screening for prostate cancer is conducted?
Prostate-Specific-Antigen (PSA) is a blood test that should be considered first-line for prostate cancer screening. Some providers may recommend an optional Digital Rectal Exam (DRE) in addition to the PSA test.

Question 3. What information should Black men obtain to make an informed decision about PSA screening and early detection of prostate cancer?
Decisions about PSA testing depend on individual preferences. Black men should engage in shared decision-making with their health care providers and other trusted sources of information to learn about the pros and cons of screening.

Question 4. When should Black men obtain their first PSA test and how often should they be screened for prostate cancer?
For Black men who elect screening, a baseline PSA test should be done between ages 40 and 45. Depending on the PSA value and the individuals health status, annual PSA screening should be strongly considered.

Question 5. At what age should Black men consider stopping PSA screening?
Black men over the age of 70 who have been undergoing prostate cancer screening should talk with their health care provider about whether to continue PSA testing and make an informed decision based on their age, life expectancy, health status, family history, and prior PSA levels.

Question 6. How should family history and genetic risk be taken into consideration when screening Black men for prostate cancer?
Black men who are at even higher risk due to a strong family history and/or known carriers of high-risk genetic variants should consider initiating annual PSA screening as early as age 40.

The PCF expert panel concluded that based on the best available evidence, risk-adapted PSA screening in US Black men can reduce the rate of metastasis and death from prostate cancer. They added that although additional studies can elucidate the impact of PSA screening on Black men, based on the current evidence, other national guideline groups should consider revising current recommendations for early prostate cancer detection in Black men.

Prostate Cancer Foundation (PCF) screening guidelines for prostate cancer in Black men in the United States. Garraway I, Carlsson SV, Nyame YA, et al. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2024.42.4_suppl.264

FDA Approves XTANDI® for Non-Metastatic Castrate-Sensitive Prostate Cancer with Biochemical Recurrence

RR

SUMMARY: The FDA on November 16, 2023, approved Enzalutamide (XTANDI®) for non-metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (nmCSPC) with biochemical recurrence, at high risk for metastasis. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 9 men will be diagnosed with Prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 288,300 new cases of Prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2023 and 34,700 men will die of the disease. The development and progression of Prostate cancer is driven by androgens. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) or testosterone suppression has therefore been the cornerstone of treatment of advanced Prostate cancer, and is the first treatment intervention.

The major source of PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) is the prostate gland, and the PSA levels are therefore undetectable within 6 weeks after Radical Prostatectomy. Similarly, following Radiation Therapy there is a gradual decline in PSA, before reaching a post treatment nadir. A detectable PSA level after Radical Prostatectomy, or a rising PSA level following Radiation Therapy, is considered PSA failure or biochemical recurrence. Approximately 35% of the patients with prostate cancer will experience PSA only relapse within 10 years of their primary treatment, and a third of these patients will develop documented metastatic disease within 8 years following PSA only relapse. Rising PSA is therefore a sign of recurrent disease. Patients with biochemically relapsed prostate cancer following local therapy, and a short PSA doubling time, are at risk for distant metastases.

Enzalutamide is a potent oral Androgen Receptor signaling inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in patients with both localized and advanced prostate cancer. The present FDA approval is based on results from the EMBARK trial.

EMBARK is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-national, Phase III trial, conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Enzalutamide plus Leuprolide and Enzalutamide monotherapy, as compared with Leuprolide alone, in patients with non-metastatic Hormone/Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (nmHSPC or nmCSPC) prostate cancer, who have had high-risk biochemical recurrence. In this study, a total of 1068 eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive Enzalutamide at 160 mg orally once daily plus Leuprolide every 12 weeks (N=355), single agent Enzalutamide at 160 mg orally once daily (N=355) or Leuprolide alone (N=358). All patients had received prior definitive therapy with radical prostatectomy and/or radiotherapy with curative intent. High risk disease was defined as a PSA doubling time of 9 months or less and a PSA level of 2 ng/ml above nadir after radiation therapy, or 1 ng/ml or more after radical prostatectomy with or without postoperative radiation therapy. The baseline characteristics were well balanced among the treatment groups. The median age was 69 years, the median PSA doubling time was 4.9 months and the median PSA level was 5.2 ng/ml. The Primary end point was Metastasis-Free Survival (MFS), as assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) in the combination group, as compared with the Leuprolide-alone group. MFS is defined as the duration of time in months between randomization and the earliest objective evidence of radiographic progression by central imaging or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. A key Secondary end point was Metastasis-Free Survival in the Enzalutamide monotherapy group, as compared with the Leuprolide-alone group. Other Secondary end points were Patient-Reported Outcomes and Safety.

At a median follow up 60.7 months, the 5 year MFS was 87.3% in the Enzalutamide combination group and 71.4% in the Leuprolide-alone group (HR for metastasis or death 0.42; P<0.001). This represented a 58% lower risk of metastasis or death in the combination group than in the leuprolide-alone group. The 5 year MFS with Enzalutamide monotherapy versus Leuprolide alone was 80% versus 71.4% respectively (HR=0.63; P=0.005), suggesting a 37% lower risk of metastasis or death in the Enzalutamide monotherapy group than in the Leuprolide-alone group. At the time of this analysis, Overall Survival data were immature. No new safety signals were reported, and there was no substantial difference in Quality of Life measures between the treatment groups.

It was concluded that in patients with prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence, both Enzalutamide plus Leuprolide and Enzalutamide monotherapy resulted in significantly longer Metastasis-Free Survival and a longer time to PSA progression and receipt of next antineoplastic therapy, compared to Leuprolide alone, while maintaining overall Quality of Life.

Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Freedland SJ, de Almeida Luz M, De Giorgi U, et al. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:1453-1465.

LYNPARZA® (Olaparib)

RR

The FDA on May 31, 2023, approved LYNPARZA® (Olaparib) along with Abiraterone and Prednisone (or Prednisolone) for adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC), as determined by an FDA-approved companion diagnostic test. LYNPARZA® is a product of AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP.

Germline Testing to Identify 11 Genes Linked to Aggressive Prostate Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 9 men will be diagnosed with Prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 288,300 new cases of Prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2023 and 34,700 men will die of the disease. The development and progression of Prostate cancer is driven by androgens. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) or testosterone suppression has therefore been the cornerstone of treatment of advanced Prostate cancer, and is the first treatment intervention. Approximately 10-20% of patients with advanced Prostate cancer will progress to Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC) within five years during ADT, and over 80% of these patients will have metastatic disease at the time of CRPC diagnosis. The malignant transformation of prostatic epithelial cell as well as the development of CRPC has been attributed to deleterious alterations in a variety of genes including loss-of-function alterations in Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) genes.

DNA damage is a common occurrence in daily life by UV light, ionizing radiation, replication errors, chemical agents, etc. This can result in single and double strand breaks in the DNA structure which must be repaired for cell survival. The two vital pathways for DNA repair in a normal cell are BRCA1/BRCA2 and PARP. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumor suppressor genes that recognize and repair double strand DNA breaks via Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) pathway. Homologous Recombination is a type of genetic recombination, and is a DNA repair pathway utilized by cells to accurately repair DNA double-stranded breaks during the S and G2 phases of the cell cycle, and thereby maintain genomic integrity. Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) is noted following mutation of genes involved in HR repair pathway. At least 15 genes are involved in the Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) pathway including BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM genes. Mutations in these genes predispose an individual to develop malignant tumors. Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for about 20-25% of hereditary breast cancers and about 5-10% of all breast cancers. They also account for 15% of ovarian cancers, in addition to other cancers such as Colon and Prostate. BRCA mutations can either be inherited (Germline) and present in all individual cells or can be acquired and occur exclusively in the tumor cells (Somatic). Somatic mutations account for a significant portion of overall BRCA1 and BRCA2 aberrations. Loss of BRCA function due to frequent somatic aberrations likely deregulates HR pathway, and other pathways then come in to play, which are less precise and error prone, resulting in the accumulation of additional mutations and chromosomal instability in the cell, with subsequent malignant transformation. Homologous Recombination Deficiency therefore indicates an important loss of DNA repair function.

The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for prostate cancer (version 1.2022) recommend germline testing for the subsets of patients with prostate cancer who are more likely to have germline DNA repair mutations. They include men with node positive, high-risk or very high-risk localized prostate cancer, men with metastatic prostate cancer, and men meeting family history criteria. NCCN recommends considering germline testing for men with personal history of prostate cancer and intermediate risk prostate cancer and intraductal/cribriform histology and personal history of exocrine pancreatic, colorectal, gastric, melanoma, pancreatic, upper tract urothelial, glioblastoma, biliary tract or small intestinal cancers. Germline testing panel sizes vary from dedicated BRCA1/2 testing to extended 91 plus-gene panels

The goal of this study was to investigate the association between rare deleterious variants and Variants of Unknown Significance (VUS) across the genome and in candidate genes, particularly DNA repair genes, and identify genes associated with aggressive prostate cancer.

The researchers conducted a two-stage exome-sequencing genetic association study, to identify rare genetic variants associated with aggressive prostate cancer. This analysis included 17,546 patients of European ancestry with prostate cancer from 18 epidemiological studies across the US, Europe and Australia. The study population included 9185 men with aggressive prostate cancer and 8361 men with nonaggressive prostate cancer. Aggressive prostate cancer was defined as at least one of the following: T4 disease, T3 plus a Gleason score of 8 or more, metastatic disease, or death from prostate cancer, while nonaggressive prostate cancer was defined as localized T1/T2 disease and a Gleason score of 6 or less. The researchers focused their study on 29 DNA repair pathway and cancer susceptibility genes previously linked with prostate cancer, in addition to a group of 167 genes thought to be related to DNA damage repair. They then looked for associations between deleterious genetic variants or Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS) and aggressive versus nonaggressive prostate cancer, using a relatively modest threshold for significance.

The strongest evidence of association with aggressive or metastatic prostate cancer was noted for rare deleterious variants in known prostate cancer risk genes BRCA2 and ATM (P<0.0000019), followed by NBN (P=0.00017). This study found nominal evidence (P <0.05) of association with rare deleterious variants in MSH2, XRCC2, and MRE11A. Five other genes analyzed, TP53, RAD51D, BARD1, GEN1, and SLX4, had evidence of greater risk with an Odds Ratio (OR) of 2 or more, but carrier frequency differences between aggressive and nonaggressive prostate cancer were not statistically significant. Deleterious variants of the 11 candidate genes identified in the study were carried by 2.3% of patients with nonaggressive prostate cancer, 5.6% with aggressive prostate cancer, and 7.0% with metastatic prostate cancer.

In conclusion, the researchers from this analysis of the largest cohort of prostate cancer patients were able to identify DNA repair pathway gene variants, associated with aggressive prostate cancer. Testing should be extended to men without aggressive prostate cancer, as men carrying deleterious variants in these genes are likely to develop advanced disease.

Germline Sequencing Analysis to Inform Clinical Gene Panel Testing for Aggressive Prostate Cancer. Darst BF, Saunders E, Dadaev T, et al. JAMA Oncol. Published online September 21, 2023. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.3482

FDA Approves AKEEGA® for Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer with BRCA1/2 Mutations

RR

SUMMARY: The FDA on August 11, 2023, approved the fixed dose combination of Niraparib and Abiraterone acetate (AKEEGA®) with prednisone, for adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious BRCA-mutated Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC), as determined by an FDA-approved test. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 9 men will be diagnosed with Prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 288,300 new cases of Prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2023 and 34,700 men will die of the disease.

The development and progression of Prostate cancer is driven by androgens. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) or testosterone suppression has therefore been the cornerstone of treatment of advanced Prostate cancer and is the first treatment intervention. Androgen Deprivation Therapies have included bilateral orchiectomy or Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) analogues, with or without first generation Androgen Receptor (AR) inhibitors such as CASODEX® (Bicalutamide), NILANDRON® (Nilutamide) and EULEXIN® (Flutamide) or with second-generation Androgen-Receptor Pathway Inhibitors (ARPI), which include ZYTIGA® (Abiraterone), XTANDI® (Enzalutamide) and ERLEADA® (Apalutamide). Approximately 10-20% of patients with advanced Prostate cancer will progress to Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC) within five years during ADT, and over 80% of these patients will have metastatic disease at the time of CRPC diagnosis. The estimated mean survival of patients with CRPC is 9-36 months, and there is therefore an unmet need for new effective therapies.

DNA damage is a common occurrence in daily life by UV light, ionizing radiation, replication errors, chemical agents, etc. This can result in single and double strand breaks in the DNA structure which must be repaired for cell survival. The two vital pathways for DNA repair in a normal cell are BRCA1/BRCA2 and PARP. BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes recognize and repair double strand DNA breaks via Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) pathway. Homologous Recombination is a type of genetic recombination and is a DNA repair pathway utilized by cells to accurately repair DNA double-stranded breaks during the S and G2 phases of the cell cycle, and thereby maintain genomic integrity. Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) is noted following mutation of genes involved in HRR pathway. At least 15 genes are involved in the HRR pathway including BRCA1, BRCA2 and ATM genes. The BRCA1 gene is located on the long (q) arm of chromosome 17 whereas BRCA2 is located on the long arm of chromosome 13. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumor suppressor genes and functional BRCA proteins repair damaged DNA, and play an important role in maintaining cellular genetic integrity. They regulate cell growth and prevent abnormal cell division and development of malignancy. Recently published data has shown that deleterious Germline and/or Somatic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, or other Homologous Recombination DNA-repair genes, are present in about 30% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including metastatic CRPC. Patients with metastatic CRPC harboring BRCA alterations and other HRR gene alterations have poor outcomes and earlier resistance to commonly used systemic therapies.

The PARP (Poly ADP Ribose Polymerase), family of enzymes include, PARP1and PARP2, and is a related enzymatic pathway that repairs single strand breaks in DNA. In a BRCA mutant, the cancer cell relies solely on PARP pathway for DNA repair to survive. PARP inhibitors trap PARP onto DNA at sites of single-strand breaks, preventing their repair and generating double-strand breaks that cannot be repaired accurately in tumors harboring defects in HRR genes, such as BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, and this leads to cumulative DNA damage and tumor cell death. PARP inhibitors have demonstrated significant activity in patients with prostate cancer and HRR gene alterations, with the greatest clinical benefit noted in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Niraparib (ZEJULA®) is a highly selective PARP-1 and PARP-2 inhibitor approved for several indications, including ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancers. When given along with Abiraterone and Prednisone, the combination targets two oncogenic drivers in patients with metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), which include alterations in the Androgen Receptor axis and BRCA1/2 in the HRR pathway.

MAGNITUDE is a multicenter, multicohort, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, Phase III study, prospectively designed as a precision medicine study to identify the specific population of patients who would most benefit from Niraparib with Abiraterone Acetate plus Prednisone, and potentially increase the likelihood of treatment success. This study involved 3 cohorts of patients: Cohort 1: Participants with mCRPC and HRR Gene Alteration. Cohort 2: Participants with mCRPC and No HRR Gene Alteration. Cohort 3 (Open-label): Participants with mCRPC

The present FDA approval was based on the safety and efficacy data from Cohort 1 group of patients with metastatic CRPC with HRR gene mutation. In this cohort, 423 patients (N=423) with HRR gene-mutated mCRPC were randomized (1:1) to receive Niraparib 200 mg orally once daily along with Abiraterone acetate 1,000 mg plus Prednisone 10mg daily, or placebo and Abiraterone acetate plus Prednisone daily. Patients with HRR positive biomarker included those with ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDK12, CHEK2, FANCA, HDAC2, PALB2 gene alterations. Approximately 53% had BRCA gene mutations. Patients were required to have a prior orchiectomy or be receiving GnRH analogues. Patients with mCRPC were eligible if they had not received prior systemic therapy in the mCRPC setting except for a short duration of prior Abiraterone acetate plus Prednisone (up to four months) and ongoing ADT. Patients could have received prior chemotherapy with Docetaxel or Androgen-Receptor (AR) targeted therapies in earlier disease settings. Randomization was stratified by prior Docetaxel, prior AR targeted therapy, prior Abiraterone acetate plus Prednisone, and BRCA status. The Primary endpoint of this trial was radiographic Progression Free Survival (rPFS) assessed by blinded Independent Central Review. Secondary endpoints included time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy, time to symptomatic progression and Overall Survival.

The combination of Niraparib and Abiraterone with Prednisone significantly improved rPFS in all HRR-positive patients (HR=0.73; P=0.022). This improvement was most pronounced in patients with BRCA1/2 gene mutations and the median rPFS was 16.6 months versus 10.9 months (HR=0.53; P=0.0014), with a 47% reduction in the risk of disease progression. With additional median follow up at 24.8 months in the BRCA subgroup, rPFS by Independent Central Review demonstrated a consistent and clinically meaningful treatment benefit favoring Niraparib plus Abiraterone, with a median rPFS of 19.5 months, compared with 10.9 months for placebo plus Abiraterone and Prednisone. Additionally, in the BRCA gene mutated patients, an exploratory OS analysis demonstrated a median of 30.4 versus 28.6 months favoring the Niraparib combination (HR=0.79). Further there was a strong improvement in time to symptomatic progression and clinically meaningful improvement in time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy in the Niraparib combination group. The most common Grade 3 Adverse Events were anemia and hypertension, and the Niraparib combination also maintained overall quality of life, compared to placebo plus Abiraterone and Prednisone.

It was concluded from this study that Niraparib in combination with Abiraterone and Prednisone significantly improved radiographic Progression Free Survival and other clinically relevant end points compared to placebo plus Abiraterone and Prednisone, in patients with BRCA1/2 gene altered metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer. The authors added that MAGNITUDE study enrolled the largest cohort of BRCA1/2-positive patients for the first line treatment of metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer to date, emphasizing the importance of identifying patients with these molecular alterations.

Niraparib plus abiraterone acetate with prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair gene alterations: second interim analysis of the randomized phase III MAGNITUDE trial. Chi KN, Sandhu S, Smith MR, et al. Annals of Oncology 2023;34:772-782.

Rucaparib or Physicians Choice of Therapy in Metastatic Prostate Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 9 men will be diagnosed with Prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 288,300 new cases of Prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2023 and 34,700 men will die of the disease.

The development and progression of Prostate cancer is driven by androgens. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) or testosterone suppression has therefore been the cornerstone of treatment of advanced Prostate cancer and is the first treatment intervention. Androgen Deprivation Therapies have included bilateral orchiectomy or Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) analogues, with or without first generation Androgen Receptor (AR) inhibitors such as CASODEX® (Bicalutamide), NILANDRON® (Nilutamide) and EULEXIN® (Flutamide) or with second-generation Androgen-Receptor Pathway Inhibitors (ARPI), which include, ZYTIGA® (Abiraterone), XTANDI® (Enzalutamide) and ERLEADA® (Apalutamide). Approximately 10-20% of patients with advanced Prostate cancer will progress to Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC) within five years during ADT, and over 80% of these patients will have metastatic disease at the time of CRPC diagnosis. The estimated mean survival of patients with CRPC is 9-36 months, and there is therefore an unmet need for new effective therapies.

DNA damage is a common occurrence in daily life by UV light, ionizing radiation, replication errors, chemical agents, etc. This can result in single and double strand breaks in the DNA structure which must be repaired for cell survival. The two vital pathways for DNA repair in a normal cell are BRCA1/BRCA2 and PARP. BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes recognize and repair double strand DNA breaks via Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) pathway. Homologous Recombination is a type of genetic recombination and is a DNA repair pathway utilized by cells to accurately repair DNA double-stranded breaks during the S and G2 phases of the cell cycle, and thereby maintain genomic integrity. Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) is noted following mutation of genes involved in HR repair pathway. At least 15 genes are involved in the Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) pathway including BRCA1, BRCA2 and ATM genes. The BRCA1 gene is located on the long (q) arm of chromosome 17 whereas BRCA2 is located on the long arm of chromosome 13. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumor suppressor genes and functional BRCA proteins repair damaged DNA, and play an important role in maintaining cellular genetic integrity. They regulate cell growth and prevent abnormal cell division and development of malignancy. Recently published data has shown that deleterious Germline and/or Somatic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, or other Homologous Recombination DNA-repair genes, are present in about 25% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including metastatic CRPC. Approximately 12% of men with metastatic CRPC harbor a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (BRCA1, 2%; BRCA2, 10%). Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 also account for about 20-25% of hereditary breast cancers, about 5-10% of all breast cancers, and 15% of ovarian cancers.

The PARP (Poly ADP Ribose Polymerase), family of enzymes include, PARP1and PARP2, and is a related enzymatic pathway that repairs single strand breaks in DNA. In a BRCA mutant, the cancer cell relies solely on PARP pathway for DNA repair to survive. PARP inhibitors trap PARP onto DNA at sites of single-strand breaks, preventing their repair and generating double-strand breaks that cannot be repaired accurately in tumors harboring defects in Homologous Recombination Repair pathway genes, such as BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, and this leads to cumulative DNA damage and tumor cell death.

RUBRACA® (Rucaparib) is an oral, small molecule inhibitor of PARP inhibitor, and in the Phase II TRITON2 study, Rucaparib showed a high level of activity in metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC) associated with a deleterious BRCA alteration, in patients who had received previous treatment with a second-generation Androgen-Receptor Pathway Inhibitor (ARPI) and taxane-based chemotherapy.

TRITON3 is an open-label, controlled, randomized, Phase III trial, conducted to evaluate the benefit of Rucaparib in men with metastatic CRPC at an earlier stage of treatment, and to confirm and expand on data from the TRITON2 study. This study enrolled patients who had metastatic CRPC with a BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration, who had disease progression after treatment with a second-generation ARPI, and who had not received previous chemotherapy for metastatic CRPC. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive Rucaparib 600 mg orally twice daily or a physician’s choice of therapy (Docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI such as Abiraterone acetate or Enzalutamide). Abiraterone acetate or Enzalutamide could not be selected if the patient had received either drug before trial initiation. Approximately 56% received Docetaxel in the control group. The median age was 70 years and baseline genomic, demographic, and disease characteristics were well balanced in the two groups although men of African descent were underrepresented relative to the general population. Among the patients who had undergone randomization, 302 patients had a BRCA alteration and 103 patients had an ATM alteration. In this study, there were smaller numbers of patients with BRCA1 alterations than with BRCA2 alterations. The Primary end point was the median duration of imaging-based Progression Free Survival (PFS) according to Independent Review. Secondary outcomes included Overall Survival (OS) and Objective Response Rate (ORR), Duration of Response, Time to progression according to Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

At 62 months, the median duration of imaging-based PFS was significantly longer in the Rucaparib group than in the control group, both in the BRCA subgroup (11.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; HR=0.50) and in the intention-to-treat group (10.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; HR=0.61; P<0.001 for both comparisons). These findings demonstrating the benefit of Rucaparib compared to the Docetaxel control group are significant, as numerous previous studies either did not include Docetaxel in the control group, or did not show the superiority of PARP inhibition to Docetaxel. These study findings were consistent with the results of previous studies, suggesting that repeated use of second-generation ARPIs appeared to have only modest activity and inferior to PARP inhibition. Among patients with measurable disease at baseline, the confirmed Objective Response in the Rucaparib group and the control group was 45% and 17% respectively in the BRCA subgroup, 35% and 16% respectively, in the intention-to-treat population and no response and 14% respectively in the ATM subgroup. Because there were a smaller number of patients with BRCA1 alterations than with BRCA2 alterations in this study, the treatment benefit was not conclusive in those with BRCA1 alterations.

In an exploratory analysis in the ATM subgroup, the median duration of imaging-based PFS was 8.1 months in the Rucaparib group and 6.8 months in the control group (HR=0.95), suggesting limited efficacy of Rucaparib in the ATM subgroup, similar to the results of previous clinical trials involving PARP inhibitors. The most frequent adverse events with Rucaparib were fatigue and nausea.

It was concluded that in patients with metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in whom treatment with an Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibitor (ARPI) had failed, the use of Rucaparib resulted in a longer duration of imaging-based Progression Free Survival than a physician’s choice of Docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI.

Rucaparib or Physician’s Choice in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Fizazi K, Piulats JM, Reaume MN, et al., for the TRITON3 Investigators. N Engl J Med 2023; 388:719-732.

XTANDI® Monotherapy versus Active Surveillance in Patients with Low-risk or Intermediate-risk Localized Prostate Cancer

RR

SUMMARY: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men with the exclusion of skin cancer, and 1 in 9 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer during their lifetime. It is estimated that in the United States, about 268,490 new cases of prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2022, and 34,500 men will die of the disease.

Approximately 70% of patients with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer have localized disease. Active Surveillance (AS) is a recommended management option according to the NCCN treatment guidelines, for patients with clinically localized very low-risk, low-risk, or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Eligible Active Surveillance patients who opt for definitive therapy, such as radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or brachytherapy, may experience adverse effects, including sexual dysfunction and urinary incontinence. The addition of Dutasteride, a 5α-reductase inhibitor as an adjunct to Active Surveillance significantly reduced the risk of progression by 38% in the REDEEM trial, among men with low-risk prostate cancer. Additional systemic therapies are however needed to reduce the risk of disease progression in this patient group.

The development and progression of prostate cancer is driven by androgens. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) or testosterone suppression has therefore been the cornerstone of treatment of advanced Prostate cancer and is the first treatment intervention. Androgen Deprivation Therapies have included bilateral orchiectomy or Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) analogues, with or without first generation Androgen Receptor (AR) inhibitors such as CASODEX® (Bicalutamide), NILANDRON® (Nilutamide) and EULEXIN® (Flutamide) or with second-generation, anti-androgen agents, which include ZYTIGA® (Abiraterone), XTANDI® (Enzalutamide), ERLEADA® (Apalutamide) and NUBEQA® (Darolutamide). Enzalutamide is a potent oral androgen receptor inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in patients with both localized and advanced prostate cancer.

The ENACT study is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, Phase II exploratory clinical trial, conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of treatment with Enzalutamide monotherapy plus Active Surveillance, versus Active Surveillance alone, in patients with clinically localized low-risk or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. In this study a total of 227 eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive 1 year of treatment with Enzalutamide 160 mg orally daily plus Active Surveillance (N=114), or Active Surveillance alone (N=113). Enrolled patients had a diagnosis of histologically proven low-risk or intermediate-risk (defined per National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines) clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate (with 10 or more core biopsies) within 6 months of screening. Patients with very low-risk disease (T1c, PSA less than 10 ng/mL, Gleason score of 6 or less; less than 3 cancer-positive cores, 50% or less cancer in any core, and a PSA density of less than 0.15 ng/mL/g) were not eligible. The mean age was 66 years and baseline characteristics were similar in both treatment groups. Patients were monitored during 1 year of treatment and up to 2 years of follow up. The Primary end point was time to pathological or therapeutic prostate cancer progression. Pathological progression was defined as an increase in primary or secondary Gleason pattern by 1 or more, or a higher proportion of cancer-positive cores (15% or more increase). Therapeutic progression was defined as the earliest occurrence of primary therapy such as prostatectomy, radiation, focal therapy, or any systemic therapy for prostate cancer. Incidence of pathological or therapeutic prostate cancer progression at 1 and 2 years was also assessed. Secondary end points included incidence of negative biopsy results, percentage of cancer-positive cores and incidence of a secondary rise in serum PSA levels at 1 and 2 years, as well as time to PSA progression. Median follow up was 492 days for patients receiving Enzalutamide and 270 for patients undergoing Active Surveillance. The median Enzalutamide treatment duration was 352 days.

Treatment with Enzalutamide significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer progression by 46% versus Active Surveillance (HR=0.54; P=0.02). The odds of a negative biopsy result at 1 year were significantly increased and were 3.5 times higher with Enzalutamide treatment versus Active Surveillance (Odds Ratio=3.5; P<0.001). There was a significant reduction in the percentage of cancer-positive cores, and the odds of a secondary rise in serum PSA levels at 1 year with Enzalutamide treatment, although no significant difference was observed at 2 years. Treatment with Enzalutamide also significantly delayed PSA progression by 6 months vs Active Surveillance (HR=0.71; P=0.03). The most reported adverse events during Enzalutamide treatment were fatigue (55.4%) and gynecomastia (36.6%). Worsening of sexual and physical function resolved by month 24 after treatment cessation.

In a follow up analysis of the ENACT trial, the researchers were able to demonstrate that RNA biomarkers PAM50 (Luminal versus Basal subtypes), Androgen Receptor Activation, and Decipher score were of prognostic value. Higher Decipher signature scores were associated with greater risk of disease progression, thereby providing a better understanding of who would be a better candidate for Active Surveillance versus who would benefit from treatment intervention (Annals of Oncology (2022) 33 (suppl_7): S616-S652. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1070).

It was concluded that Enzalutamide monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated a significant treatment response in patients with low-risk or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer. The authors added that ENACT trial represents the first study to compare the effects of a novel Androgen Receptor antagonist as monotherapy vs Active Surveillance, in patients with low-risk or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer, and the results suggest that Enzalutamide may offer an alternative short-term treatment option for this patient population, potentially reducing the need for more aggressive treatment approaches.

Enzalutamide Monotherapy vs Active Surveillance in Patients with Low-risk or Intermediate-risk Localized Prostate Cancer. The ENACT Randomized Clinical Trial. Shore ND, Renzulli J, Fleshner NE, et al. JAMA Oncol. 2022;8(8):1128-1136. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.1641.