Real-world Outcomes of Sequential Androgen-receptor Targeting Therapies with or Without Interposed Life-prolonging Drugs in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer:Results from the Dutch Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Registry

BACKGROUND: Cross resistance between androgen-receptor targeting therapies (ARTs) (abiraterone acetate plus prednisone [ABI+P] or enzalutamide [ENZ]) for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) may affect responses to second ART (ART2). OBJECTIVE: To establish treatment duration and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response of ART2 in real-world mCRPC patients treated with or without other life-prolonging drugs (LPDs; ie, docetaxel, cabazitaxel, or radium-223) between ART1 and ART2. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Castration-resistant prostate cancer patients, diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively registered in Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Registry (CAPRI). Patients treated with both ARTs were clustered into two subgroups: ART1>ART2 or ART1>LPD>ART2. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Outcomes were ≥50% PSA response and treatment duration of ART2. Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression after multiple imputations were performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 273 patients were included with a median follow-up of 8.4 mo from ART2. Patients with ART1>ART2 were older and had favourable prognostic characteristics at ART2 baseline compared with patients with ART1>LPD>ART2. No differences between ART1>ART2 and ART1>LPD>ART2 were found in PSA response and treatment duration. Multivariate analysis suggested that PSA response of ART2 was less likely in patients with visceral metastases (odds ratio [OR] 0.143, p=0.04) and more likely in patients with a relatively longer duration of androgen-deprivation treatment (OR 1.028, p=0.01) and with ABI + P before ENZ (OR 3.192, p=0.02). A major limitation of this study was missing data, a common problem in retrospective observational research. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of ART2 seems to be low, with a low PSA response rate and a short treatment duration irrespective of interposed chemotherapy or radium-223, especially in patients with short time on castration, visceral disease, and ENZ before ABI+P. PATIENT SUMMARY: We observed no differences in outcomes of patients treated with sequential abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (ABI+P) and enzalutamide (ENZ) with or without interposed chemotherapy or radium-223. In general, outcomes were lower than those in randomised trials, questioning the additional effect of second treatment with ABI+P or ENZ in daily practice

A randomised phase II trial of docetaxel versus docetaxel plus carboplatin in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who have progressed after response to prior docetaxel chemotherapy: The RECARDO trial

Background Docetaxel is standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic castration–resistant prostate carcinoma (mCRPC). Docetaxel re-challenge has never been tested in a prospective randomised controlled study. As some studies support the addition of carboplatin to docetaxel, we performed a phase II trial investigating the combination of docetaxel plus carboplatin versus docetaxel re-treatment in docetaxel pre-treated mCRPC patients. Methods Patients with mCRPC with a progression-free interval of ≥3 months after initial docetaxel treatment were randomised between docetaxel 75 mg/m2 or docetaxel 60 mg/m2 plus carboplatin AUC4. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS; PSA/RECIST). Results Owing to insufficient recruitment, the study was discontinued early after inclusion of 75 patients (targeted 150) PFS and overall survival (OS) were comparable between both groups (median PFS 12.7 months (95% CI 9.9–17.5 months) with docetaxel monotherapy and 11.7 months (95% CI 8.5–21.0 months) with combination therapy (p = 0.98); OS 18.5 months (95% CI 11.8–24.5 months) versus 18.9 months (95% CI 16.0–23.7 months) (p = 0.79). An interim analysis (SEQTEST) showed that the null hypothesis could already be excepted, and no significant difference between both study arms was expected if inclusion would be completed. The incidence of grade 3–4 infections and gastrointestinal side-effects was numerical higher in the carboplatin arm (p = 0.056). Conclusion This early terminated study suggests no benefit from the addition of carboplatin to docetaxel re-treatment in patients with mCRPC, whereas the combination resulted in more toxicity. Re-treatment with docetaxel monotherapy appears to be feasible, save and effective for patients with mCRPC and an initial good response to docetaxel. Trial registration NTR3070

Real-world Outcomes of Sequential Androgen-receptor Targeting Therapies with or Without Interposed Life-prolonging Drugs in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from the Dutch Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Registry

Item does not contain fulltex

Short versus extended treatment with a carbapenem in patients with high-risk fever of unknown origin during neutropenia: a non-inferiority, open-label, multicentre, randomised trial

Background: Early antibiotic discontinuation has been advocated in haematology patients with fever of unknown origin during chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, but its safety is unknown. We aimed to assess if short treatment with carbapenems is non-inferior to extended treatment. Methods: This non-inferiority, open-label, multicentre, randomised trial was done in six hospitals in the Netherlands. Adult patients (≥18 years) who were treated with intensive chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) for a haematological malignancy, and had fever of unknown origin during high-risk neutropenia (<0·5 × 10 9/L expected for ≥7 days) were eligible. After onset of fever, patients received either 500 mg intravenous imipenem-cilastatin four times a day or 1000 mg intravenous meropenem three times a day. Between 48 h and 72 h of treatment, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated sequence to receive a short-term (72 h [60–84]; short treatment group) or extended (≥9 days until being afebrile for 5 days or neutrophil recovery; extended treatment group) carbapenem regimen. The composite primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as recurrent fever or a carbapenem-sensitive infection between day 4 and day 9 and septic shock or respiratory failure or death from day 4 until neutrophil recovery. The study was designed to assess the non-inferiority of the short treatment compared with the extended treatment regimen, with a non-inferiority margin of 10%. The primary outcome was adjudicated by an independent outcome committee, who were masked to treatment allocation, and was analysed in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. The trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02149329. Findings: Between Dec 1, 2014, and July 1, 2019, 281 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis: 144 (51%) patients were assigned to the short treatment group and 137 (49%) to the extended treatment group. Median age was 59 years (IQR 52–65); 109 (39%) patients were women and 172 (61%) were men; 205 (73%) patients received HSCT. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 28 (19%) of 144 patients in the short treatment group versus 21 (15%) of 137 patients in the extended treatment group had treatment failure (adjusted risk difference [ARD] 4·0% [90% CI –1·7% to 9·7%]; p=0·25). In the per-protocol analysis (n=225), 24 (23%) of 104 patients in the short treatment group and 19 (16%) of 121 patients in the extended treatment group had treatment failure (ARD 7·3% [0·3% to 14·9%]; p=0·11). The most common grade 3–5 infection-related adverse events were mucositis (23 [20%] of 114 adverse events in the short treatment group vs 28 [29%] of 98 adverse events in the extended treatment group), fever of unknown origin (20 [18%] vs 16 [16%] events), and bacteraemia (15 [13%] vs 13 [13%] events). The number of serious adverse events were higher in the short treatment group (23 [16%] of 144 patients) than in the extended treatment group (14 [10%] of 137 patients), due to an increased rate of readmission (17 [12%] patients in the short treatment group vs ten [7%] in the extended treatment group). Death before 30 days after neutrophil recovery occurred in five (3%) participants in the short treatment group: two due to progressive leukaemia, two due to candidaemia, and one due to Enterococcus faecium bacteraemia and drug-induced pneumonitis. One (1%) patient died in the extended treatment group due to candidaemia. None of the deaths were related to carbapenem-sensitive infections. Interpretation: Early discontinuation of carbapenem treatment in patients with febrile neutropenia of unknown origin does not result in increased treatment failure. Our study supports short treatment if patients are afebrile after 3 days of carbapenem treatment. However, because secondary analyses suggested that serious adverse events and all-cause mortality occurred more often in patients who are persistantly febrile the short treatment group, we recommend vigilance for non-susceptible pathogens and early resumption of empirical therapy in patients who are deteriorating. Funding: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development and Fonds NutsOhra

Second-Line Cabazitaxel Treatment in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Compared to Standard of Care in CAPRI:Observational Study in the Netherlands

In the Dutch CAPRI registry, cabazitaxel treatment as the standard of care and in trials was analyzed. Patients treated with cabazitaxel in trials were fitter and showed outcomes comparable to registration trials. Conversely, those treated in daily practice showed features of more aggressive disease and worse outcome. This may be explained by a worse prognosis at cabazitaxel initiation

Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide versus melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide in untreated multiple myeloma

The combination of melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. Long term treatment with thalidomide is hampered by neurotoxicity. Melphalan, prednisone and lenalidomide, followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy showed promising results, without severe neuropathy emerging. We randomly assigned 668 NDMM patients, ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, between nine 4-weekly cycles of MPT followed by thalidomide maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (MPT-T) and the same MP regimen with thalidomide being replaced by lenalidomide (MPR-R). This multicenter, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was undertaken by HOVON and the NMSG. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The accrual for the study was completed in October 19, 2012. 318 patients were randomly assigned to receive MPT-T and 319 MPR-R. After a median follow up of 36 months PFS with MPT-T was 20 months (95% CI 18-23 months) versus 23 months (95% CI 19-27 months) with MPR-R (HR 0.87 [0.72-1.04], p=0.12). Response rates were similar, with ≥VGPR 47% and 45% respectively. Hematological toxicity was more pronounced with MPR-R, especially grade 3 and 4 neutropenia: 64 versus 27%. Neuropathy ≥ grade 3 was significantly higher in the MPT-T arm; 16% versus 2% in MPR-R, resulting in a significant shorter duration of maintenance therapy (5 versus 17 months in MPR-R), irrespective of age. MPR-R has no advantage over MPT-T concerning efficacy. The toxicity profile differed with clinically significant neuropathy during thalidomide maintenance versus myelosuppression with MPR