Clinical outcomes of volume of disease on patients receiving enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as first-line therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

TitleClinical outcomes of volume of disease on patients receiving enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as first-line therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2023
AuthorsNuzzo PVitale, Ravera F, Saieva C, Zanardi E, Fotia G, Malgeri A, Rossetti S, Valença LBueno, Oliveira TMartins, Vauchier C, Mestre RPereira, Modesti M, Patrikidou A, Pignata S, Procopio G, Fornarini G, De Giorgi U, Russo A, Francini E
JournalTher Adv Med Oncol
Volume15
Pagination17588359231156147
Date Published2023
ISSN1758-8340
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSis) abiraterone acetate (AA) plus prednisone and enzalutamide (Enza), are currently the most administered first-line treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). AA and Enza have shown similar overall survival (OS) benefits and there is no consensus upon the best option for mCRPC first-line treatment. Volume of disease may represent a useful biomarker to predict response to therapy in such patients.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, we seek to evaluate the impact of volume of disease on patients treated with first-line AA versus Enza for mCRPC.

DESIGN AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated a cohort of consecutive patients with mCRPC categorized by volume of disease [high volume (HV) or low volume (LV) per E3805 criteria] at ARSi onset and treatment type (AA or Enza), assessing OS and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), from therapy start, as co-primary endpoints.

RESULTS: Of the 420 patients selected, 170 (40.5%) had LV and received AA (LV/AA), 76 (18.1%) LV and had Enza (LV/Enza), 124 (29.5%) HV and were given AA (HV/AA), and 50 (11.9%) HV and received Enza (HV/Enza). Among patients with LV, OS was significantly longer when treated with Enza [57.2 months; 95% confidence interval (CI): 52.1-62.2 months] versus AA (51.6 months; 95% CI, 42.6-60.6 months; p = 0.003). Consistently, those with LV receiving Enza showed increased rPFS (40.3 months; 95 CI, 25.0-55.7 months) than those having AA (22.0 months; 95% CI, 18.1-26.0 months; p = 0.004). No significant difference in OS or rPFS was observed in those with HV treated with AA versus Enza (p = 0.51 and p = 0.73, respectively). In multivariate analysis of patients with LV, treatment with Enza was independently associated with better prognosis than AA.

CONCLUSION: Within the intrinsic limitations of a retrospective design and small population, our report suggests that volume of disease could be a useful predictive biomarker for patients starting first-line ARSi for mCRPC.

DOI10.1177/17588359231156147
Alternate JournalTher Adv Med Oncol
PubMed ID36895852
PubMed Central IDPMC9989439
Grant ListP50 CA211024 / CA / NCI NIH HHS / United States
Related Faculty: 
Pier Nuzzo, Ph.D.

Pathology & Laboratory Medicine 1300 York Avenue New York, NY 10065 Phone: (212) 746-6464
Surgical Pathology: (212) 746-2700