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
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) ben...
Saved in:
Published in: | Therapeutic advances in medical oncology Vol. 15; p. 17588359231156147 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
London, England
SAGE Publications
01-01-2023
Sage Publications Ltd |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | 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. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1758-8359 1758-8340 1758-8359 |
DOI: | 10.1177/17588359231156147 |