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

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). 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. 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. 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. AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Saad F ，Thiery-Vuillemin A ，Wiechno P ，Alekseev B ，Sala N ，Jones R ，Kocak I ，Chiuri VE ，Jassem J ，Fléchon A ，Redfern C ，Kang J ，Burgents J ，Gresty C ，Degboe A ，Clarke NW ... -  《-》

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

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. 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. 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. 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. AstraZeneca.

Clarke N ，Wiechno P ，Alekseev B ，Sala N ，Jones R ，Kocak I ，Chiuri VE ，Jassem J ，Fléchon A ，Redfern C ，Goessl C ，Burgents J ，Kozarski R ，Hodgson D ，Learoyd M ，Saad F ... -  《-》

Patient-reported outcomes following abiraterone acetate plus prednisone added to androgen deprivation therapy in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer (LATITUDE): an international, randomised phase 3 trial.

In the LATITUDE trial, addition of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved overall survival compared with placebos plus ADT in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk, metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer. Understanding the effects of treatments on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is important for treatment decisions; therefore we aimed to analyse the effects of ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone versus ADT plus placebos on PROs and HRQOL in patients in the LATITUDE study. In the multicentre, international, randomised, phase 3 LATITUDE trial, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had newly diagnosed, high-risk, metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer confirmed by bone scan (bone metastases) or by CT or MRI (visceral, soft tissue, or nodal metastases), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 2 or less. Patients from 235 clinical sites in 34 countries were randomly assigned (1:1) following a country-by-country scheme done by permuted block randomisation (with two blocks) and stratified by the presence of visceral metastasis and ECOG performance status to receive ADT plus 1000 mg oral abiraterone acetate and 5 mg oral prednisone once daily or ADT plus placebos. Selection of ADT, chemical or surgical, was at the investigator's discretion. The co-primary endpoints of the trial, overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival, have been published. PRO data were collected directly on electronic tablet devices at the clinical sites during screening and before any other visit procedure on day 1 of cycles 1-3, monthly during cycles 4-13, and then every 2 months until the end of treatment, by use of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate scale (FACT-P), and the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires. PRO analyses were an exploratory endpoint. Analyses were by intention-to-treat. Results from the first pre-planned interim analysis (Oct 31, 2016), are presented here. This ongoing study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01715285. Between Feb 12, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 1199 patients were randomly assigned: 597 to ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone and 602 to ADT plus placebos. Median follow-up was 30·9 months (IQR 21·2-33·2) in the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group versus 29·7 months (1·4-43·5; 16·1-31·3) in the ADT plus placebos group. Median time to worst pain intensity progression assessed by the BPI-SF score was not reached in either group (ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone, not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 11·07 months [95% CI 9·23-18·43]; ADT plus placebos group, not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 5·62 [95% CI 4·63-7·39]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·52-0·77]; p<0·0001). Median time to worst fatigue intensity was not reached in either the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group (not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 18·4 months [95% CI 12·9-27·7]) or the ADT plus placebos group (not reached [95% CI not reached to not reached]; 25th percentile 6·5 months [95% CI 5·6-9·2]; HR 0·65 [95% CI 0·53-0·81], p=0·0001). Median time to deterioration of functional status assessed by the FACT-P total score scale was 12·9 months (95% CI 9·0-16·6) in the ADT plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone group versus 8·3 months (7·4-11·1) in the ADT plus placebos group (HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74-0·99]; p=0·032). The addition of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to ADT in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer improved overall PROs by consistently showing a clinical benefit in the progression of pain, prostate cancer symptoms, fatigue, functional decline, and overall HRQOL. Janssen Research & Development.

Chi KN ，Protheroe A ，Rodríguez-Antolín A ，Facchini G ，Suttman H ，Matsubara N ，Ye Z ，Keam B ，Damião R ，Li T ，McQuarrie K ，Jia B ，De Porre P ，Martin J ，Todd MB ，Fizazi K ... -  《-》

Health-related quality of life after apalutamide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (TITAN): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

In the phase 3 TITAN study, the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved the primary endpoints of overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We aimed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in TITAN, including pain and fatigue. In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (defined as not receiving ADT at the time of metastatic disease progression) aged 18 years and older, receiving continuous ADT (selected at the investigator's discretion), and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive web response system, to receive oral apalutamide (four 60 mg tablets, once daily) or matching placebo. Previous localised disease treatment or previous docetaxel for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer were allowed. Randomisation was stratified by Gleason score at diagnosis, region, and previous docetaxel treatment. Randomisation was done using randomly permuted blocks (block size of four). Investigators, research staff, sponsor study team, and patients were masked to the identities of test and control treatments. Patient-reported outcomes were prespecified exploratory endpoints and were the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), and EuroQoL 5D questionnaire 5 level (EQ-5D-5L). BPI and BFI were completed for 7 consecutive days (days -6 to 1 inclusive of each cycle visit), then at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. FACT-P and EQ-5D-5L were completed during cycles 1-7, then every other cycle until the end of treatment, and at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Missing patient-reported outcome assessments were calculated as the expected number of assessments for a visit minus the actual number of assessments received for that visit. For time-to-event endpoints, when median values could not be calculated because less than 50% of patients had degradation, 25th percentiles were compared. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02489318, and is ongoing. Between Dec 9, 2015, and July 25, 2017, 1052 eligible patients were enrolled randomly assigned to apalutamide (n=525) or placebo (n=527). Data cutoff for this analysis of patient-reported outcomes was Nov 23, 2018. Median follow-up for time to pain-related endpoints ranged from 19·4 to 22·1 months. Patients were mostly asymptomatic at baseline: on the BPI-SF pain severity scale of 0-10, median pain scores (indicating worst pain in the past 24 h) were 1·14 (IQR 0-3·17) in the apalutamide group and 1·00 (0-2·86) in the placebo group, and median worst fatigue scores on the BFI were 1·29 (IQR 0-3·29) in the apalutamide group and 1·43 (0·14-3·14) in the placebo group. Patient experience of pain and fatigue (intensity and interference) did not differ between the groups for the duration of treatment. Median time to worst pain intensity progression was 19·09 months (95% CI 11·04-not reached) in the apalutamide group versus 11·99 months (8·28-18·46) in the placebo group (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·75-1·06]; p=0·20). Median time to pain interference progression was not reached in either group (95% CI 28·58-not reached in the apalutamide group; not reached-not reached in the placebo group). 25th percentiles for time to pain interference progression were 9·17 months (5·55-11·96) in the apalutamide group and 6·24 months (4·63-7·43) in the placebo group (HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·73-1·10]; p=0·29). FACT-P total scores and EQ-5D-5L data showed preservation of HRQOL in both groups. The median time to deterioration as determined by FACT-P total score was 8·87 months (95% CI 4·70-11·10) in the apalutamide group and 9·23 months (7·39-12·91) in the placebo group (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·85-1·22]; p=0·85). Apalutamide with ADT is a well-tolerated and effective option for men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. The combination significantly improves survival outcomes compared with ADT alone while maintaining HRQOL despite additive androgen blockade. Janssen Research & Development.

Agarwal N ，McQuarrie K ，Bjartell A ，Chowdhury S ，Pereira de Santana Gomes AJ ，Chung BH ，Özgüroğlu M ，Juárez Soto Á ，Merseburger AS ，Uemura H ，Ye D ，Given R ，Cella D ，Basch E ，Miladinovic B ，Dearden L ，Deprince K ，Naini V ，Lopez-Gitlitz A ，Chi KN ，TITAN investigators ... -  《-》

Quality of life in patients with metastatic prostate cancer following treatment with cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide (CARD): an analysis of a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study.

In the CARD study, cabazitaxel significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. Here, we report the quality-of-life outcomes from the CARD study. CARD was a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study involving 62 clinical sites across 13 European countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤2) with confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive voice-web response system to receive cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks, 10 mg daily prednisone, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus abiraterone (1000 mg orally once daily plus 5 mg prednisone twice daily) or enzalutamide (160 mg orally daily). Stratification factors were ECOG performance status, time to disease progression on the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor, and timing of the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival; here, we present more detailed analyses of pain (assessed using item 3 on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPI-SF]) and symptomatic skeletal events, alongside preplanned patient-reported outcomes, assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire and the EuroQoL-5 dimensions, 5 level scale (EQ-5D-5L). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Pain response was analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of BPI-SF item 3, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of either FACT-P or EQ-5D-5L (PRO population). Analyses of skeletal-related events were also done in the intention-to-treat population. The CARD study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02485691, and is no longer enrolling. Between Nov 17, 2015, and Nov 28, 2018, of 303 patients screened, 255 were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel (n=129) or abiraterone or enzalutamide (n=126). Median follow-up was 9·2 months (IQR 5·6-13·1). Pain response was observed in 51 (46%) of 111 patients with cabazitaxel and 21 (19%) of 109 patients with abiraterone or enzalutamide (p<0·0001). Median time to pain progression was not estimable (NE; 95% CI NE-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·5 months (4·9-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·55, 95% CI 0·32-0·97; log-rank p=0·035). Median time to symptomatic skeletal events was NE (95% CI 20·0-NE) with cabazitaxel and 16·7 months (10·8-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·35-1·01; log-rank p=0·050). Median time to FACT-P total score deterioration was 14·8 months (95% CI 6·3-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·9 months (6·3-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·72, 95% CI 0·44-1·20; log-rank p=0·21). There was a significant treatment effect seen in changes from baseline in EQ-5D-5L utility index score in favour of cabazitaxel over abiraterone or enzalutamide (p=0·030) but no difference between treatment groups for change from baseline in EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (p=0·060). Since cabazitaxel improved pain response, time to pain progression, time to symptomatic skeletal events, and EQ-5D-5L utility index, clinicians and patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer can be reassured that cabazitaxel will not reduce quality of life when compared with treatment with a second androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. Sanofi.

Fizazi K ，Kramer G ，Eymard JC ，Sternberg CN ，de Bono J ，Castellano D ，Tombal B ，Wülfing C ，Liontos M ，Carles J ，Iacovelli R ，Melichar B ，Sverrisdóttir Á ，Theodore C ，Feyerabend S ，Helissey C ，Oudard S ，Facchini G ，Poole EM ，Ozatilgan A ，Geffriaud-Ricouard C ，Bensfia S ，de Wit R ... -  《-》