Multicenter randomized phase II study of two schedules of docetaxel, estramustine, and prednisone versus mitoxantrone plus prednisone in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer

A B S T R A C T Purpose Mitoxantrone-corticosteroid is currently the standard palliative treatment in hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients. Recent clinical trials documented the high activity of the docetaxel-estramustine combination. We conducted a randomized phase II study to evaluate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (primary end point) and safety of two docetaxelestramustine-prednisone (DEP) regimens and mitoxantrone-prednisone (MP). Patients and Methods One hundred thirty metastatic HRPC patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel (70 mg/m 2 on day 2 or 35 mg/m 2 on days 2 and 9 of each 21-day cycle) and estramustine (280 mg PO tid on days 1 through 5 and 8 through 12) or mitoxantrone 12 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks; all patients received prednisone (10 mg daily). Results One hundred twenty-seven patients were assessable for PSA response and safety. A Ն 50% PSA decline was found in a greater percentage of patients in the docetaxel arms (67% and 63%) compared with MP (18%; P ϭ .0001). Median time to PSA progression was five times longer with DEP than with MP (8.8 and 9.3 v 1.7 months, respectively; P ϭ .000001). Overall survival was better in the docetaxel arms (18.6 and 18.4 months) compared with the MP arm (13.4 months), but not significantly so (P ϭ .3). Crossover rates differed significantly among treatment arms (16%, 10%, and 48% in arms A, B, and C, respectively; P ϭ .00001). Treatment-related toxicities were mild and mainly hematologic. Conclusion The results of this randomized phase II study showed significantly higher PSA decline Յ 50% and longer times to progression in HRPC patients receiving DEP-based chemotherapy than MP, and that DEP could be proposed in this setting

SOCRATE-PRODIGE 55 trial: A randomized phase II study to evaluate second-line ramucirumab alone or with paclitaxel in older patients with advanced gastric cancer

International audienceINTRODUCTION: Patients ≥ 70 years old constitute 40% of patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). Ramucirumab plus Paclitaxel is a therapeutic option validated in the second-line treatment of advanced GC, but as older patients are at higher risk of severe toxicity, due to comorbidities and/or frailty, we aimed to evaluate second-line Ramucirumab alone or combined with Paclitaxel in terms of overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL) in patients ≥ 70 years-old with advanced GC. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-comparative, prospective phase II clinical trial, the main inclusion criteria are: patients ≥ 70 years old, with advanced GC having progressed after first-line chemotherapy or in the six months following the last administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, with WHO performance status <2. They are randomized to receive either ramucirumab alone (arm A) or ramucirumab plus Paclitaxel (arm B). The primary endpoint is 6-month OS and QoL evaluated with the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 questionnaire. The secondary endpoints include other parameters of QoL, time to definitive deterioration (TTDD) in QoL and TTDD in autonomy, treatment toxicities, other parameters of survival and disease control, identification of geriatric and nutritional prognostic scores and predictive factors of treatment safety and efficacy. OS of 60% is expected at 6 months (H0:40%). Using a Simon-minimax design, with one-sided α risk of 2% and 80% power for OS, and considering 5% lost to follow-up, it is necessary to randomize 56 patients in each arm. PERSPECTIVES: As older patients are at higher risk of chemotherapy toxicity, ramucirumab alone could be an interesting alternative to Paclitaxel plus ramucirumab, as a second-line therapy for patients ≥ 70 years old with advanced GC, and needs to be evaluated

Impact of Abiraterone Acetate plus Prednisone or Enzalutamide on Patient-reported Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Final 12-mo Analysis from the Observational AQUARiUS Study

International audienceBackground: Few studies have examined patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (abiraterone) versus enzalutamide in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).Objective: To determine the impact of abiraterone and enzalutamide on PROs.Design, setting, and participants: AQUARiUS (NCT02813408) was a prospective, 12-mo, observational study in patients with mCRPC from Denmark, France, and the UK.Intervention: Abiraterone or enzalutamide treatment according to routine practise.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: PROs were collected over 12 mo using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function (FACT-Cog), Brief Fatigue Inventory-Short Form (BFI-SF), Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) at baseline and routine visits. Outcomes included mean change in PROs, patients with clinically meaningful worsening (CMW) in PROs, and safety. Data were analysed using repeated measures linear and logistic models adjusted for baseline characteristics.Results and limitations: Abiraterone-treated (N = 105) and enzalutamide-treated (N = 106) patients were included. Key PRO items (cognitive impairments and fatigue) were significantly (p < 0.05) in favour of abiraterone versus enzalutamide during the study. "Perceived cognitive impairment" and "comments from others" (FACT-Cog); "fatigue right now", "usual level of fatigue", and "worst level of fatigue" (BFI-SF); and "cognitive functioning" and "fatigue" (QLQ-C30) were significantly in favour of abiraterone over enzalutamide for three or more consecutive periods up to month 12. From study initiation, significantly fewer patients receiving abiraterone experienced one or more CMW episode in cognition and fatigue. Fatigue and asthenia (adverse events) were lower with abiraterone than with enzalutamide (5% vs 15% and 10% vs 11%, respectively). There were no treatment-related deaths. Limitations included lack of randomisation.Conclusions: In a real-world setting, this 12-mo analysis suggests an advantage of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone over enzalutamide on fatigue and cognitive function; this finding occurred early after treatment initiation. This difference should be considered when choosing treatment.Patient summary: This study looked at the effect of two treatments (abiraterone acetate plus prednisone and enzalutamide) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer on patient quality of life over 12 mo. Using established questionnaires, patients reported that they experienced less fatigue and cognitive impairments (including memory loss and reduced thinking abilities) with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone than with enzalutamide

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone for the Management of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) without prior use of chemotherapy : report from a large, international, real-world retrospective cohort study

Background: With the recent introduction of novel treatment options, real-world data from patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are required to better understand the impact on routine clinical practice. This study primarily aimed to describe the time to treatment failure (TTF) of mCRPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or the corticosteroid of choice (AAP) in the pre-chemotherapy setting. Other relevant outcomes, clinical and treatment characteristics of these patients were also evaluated. Methods: This retrospective, observational study collected data from chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients treated with AAP from four European countries. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate TTF, progression-free survival (PFS), and time to first skeletal-related event. The impact of baseline characteristics on TTF and PFS was explored using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models. Log-rank test was used to assess the potential role of duration of response to ADT in predicting response to AAP treatment. Results: Data from 481 eligible patients (Belgium: 68; France: 61; Germany: 150; UK: 202) were analysed. At AAP initiation, the median age of patients was 75.0 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 69.0–81.0), and the median PSA was 56.2 ng/mL (IQR: 22.2–133.1), with over 50% of patients presenting an ECOG score of 0 or 1. Visceral metastases were present in 7.5% of patients; an exclusion criterion in the COU-AA-302 clinical trial. The median TTF with AAP was 10.0 months (95%CI: 9.2–11.1) and the median PFS was 10.8 months (95%CI: 9.6–11.8). Shorter TTF was significantly associated with higher ALP (> 119 units/L), higher PSA (> 56.2 ng/mL), or poorer ECOG PS scores at AAP initiation (p < 0.05). Patients with longer duration of response to ADT (≥12 months) presented longer TTF and longer time to progression (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: This European real-world study provides valuable insights into the characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC who received AAP in routine clinical practice. Treatment effectiveness of AAP in the real-world is maintained despite patients having poorer clinical features at initiation than those observed in the COU-AA-302 trial population