Wenzel Mike, Hoeh Benedikt, Humke Clara, Cano Garcia Cristina, Siech Carolin, Steuber Thomas, Graefen Markus, Traumann Miriam, Kluth Luis, Chun Felix K H, Mandel Philipp
Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
World J Urol. 2024 Dec 28;43(1):51. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05388-1.
No currently available phase III trial compared docetaxel vs. androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) regarding cancer-control outcomes in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Moreover, few is known about the effect of sequential therapies in mHSPC and subsequent metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
We relied on the FRAMCAP database and compared docetaxel vs. ARPI in mHSPC patients regarding time to mCRPC (ttCRPC) and overall survival (OS). Sensitivity analyses addressed high volume mHSPC patients. Finally, sequential therapies were compared regarding progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in first-line mCRPC.
Of 419 included mHSPC patients, 25% received docetaxel vs. 75% ARPI. ARPI patients were significantly older (71 vs. 66 years), and harbored lower baseline PSA (38 vs. 183 ng/ml, both p ≤ 0.002). Median ttCRPC was significantly longer for ARPI than for docetaxel-treated patients (30 vs. 17 months, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.49, p < 0.001). In OS analyses, ARPI patients also exhibited significantly longer OS, relative to docetaxel patients (96 vs. 50 months, HR: 0.67, p = 0.03). After multivariable adjustment in Cox regression models, no difference between both treatments remained in both analyses (all p > 0.05). In sensitivity analyses of high volume mHSPC patients only, also no ttCRPC or OS differences were observed for ARPI vs. docetaxel (all p > 0.05). Regarding sequential therapies, no PFS and OS differences were observed for all and specifically high volume mHSPC patients, when ARPI-ARPI vs. ARPI-docetaxel vs. docetaxel-ARPI treatments were compared (all p > 0.05).
In real-world setting, ARPI treatment performs comparable to docetaxel chemotherapy in mHSPC. Therefore, docetaxel should only be used in triplet therapy. Moreover, no differences for sequential therapies of ARPI/docetaxel combinations in first-line mCRPC were observed.
目前尚无三期试验比较多西他赛与雄激素受体通路抑制剂(ARPI)在转移性激素敏感性前列腺癌(mHSPC)中的癌症控制效果。此外,对于mHSPC序贯治疗及其后转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌(mCRPC)的影响知之甚少。
我们依托FRAMCAP数据库,比较了mHSPC患者中多西他赛与ARPI在至mCRPC时间(ttCRPC)和总生存期(OS)方面的差异。敏感性分析针对高负荷mHSPC患者。最后,比较了一线mCRPC中序贯治疗的无进展生存期(PFS)和OS。
在纳入的419例mHSPC患者中,25%接受了多西他赛治疗,75%接受了ARPI治疗。接受ARPI治疗的患者年龄显著更大(71岁对66岁),基线前列腺特异抗原(PSA)更低(38 ng/ml对183 ng/ml,p均≤0.002)。ARPI组的中位ttCRPC显著长于多西他赛治疗组(30个月对17个月,风险比[HR]:0.49,p<0.001)。在OS分析中,与多西他赛治疗组相比,接受ARPI治疗的患者OS也显著更长(96个月对50个月,HR:0.67,p=0.03)。在Cox回归模型进行多变量调整后,两项分析中两种治疗之间均无差异(所有p>0.05)。仅在高负荷mHSPC患者的敏感性分析中,ARPI与多西他赛之间在ttCRPC或OS方面也未观察到差异(所有p>0.?5)。关于序贯治疗,在比较ARPI-ARPI、ARPI-多西他赛、多西他赛-ARPI治疗时,未观察到所有mHSPC患者尤其是高负荷mHSPC患者在PFS和OS方面的差异(所有p>0.05)。
在现实环境中,ARPI治疗在mHSPC中的表现与多西他赛化疗相当。因此,多西他赛仅应用于三联疗法。此外,未观察到一线mCRPC中ARPI/多西他赛联合序贯治疗的差异。