Search

The landscape of treating metastatic prostate cancer has evolved with the addition of Androgen Receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) to Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT), significantly improving survival rates. However, prolonged use of these therapies introduces notable side effects, prompting a need to revisit intermittent treatment duration. The EORTC 2238 De-Escalate trial is a pragmatic trial seeking to reassess the role of intermittent therapy in patients undergoing maximal androgen blockade (MAB) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer (mHNPC), i.e., the combination of ADT with an ARPI, with the aims of reducing side effects, enhancing Quality of Life (QoL) and optimizing resource usage, while maintaining oncological benefits.

Abstract Background Upregulation of nuclear factor kappa B (NFκB) activity and neuroendocrine differentiation are two mechanisms known to be involved in prostate cancer (PC) progression to castration resistance. We have observed that major components of these pathways, including NFκB, proteasome, neutral endopeptidase (NEP) and endothelin 1 (ET-1), exhibit an inverse and mirror image pattern in androgen-dependent (AD) and -independent (AI) states in vitro. Methods We have now investigated for evidence of a direct mechanistic connection between these pathways with the use of immunocytochemistry (ICC), western blot analysis, electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) and proteasome activity assessment. Results Neuropeptide (NP) stimulation induced nuclear translocation of NFκB in a dose-dependent manner in AI cells, also evident as reduced total inhibitor κB (IκB) levels and increased DNA binding in EMSA. These effects were preceded by increased 20 S proteasome activity at lower doses and at earlier times and were at least partially reversed under conditions of NP deprivation induced by specific NP receptor inhibitors, as well as NFκB, IκB kinase (IKK) and proteasome inhibitors. AD cells showed no appreciable nuclear translocation upon NP stimulation, with less intense DNA binding signal on EMSA. Conclusions Our results support evidence for a direct mechanistic connection between the NPs and NFκB/proteasome signaling pathways, with a distinct NP-induced profile in the more aggressive AI cancer state.

Abstract Background Castration-resistance in prostate cancer (PC) is a critical event hallmarking a switch to a more aggressive phenotype. Neuroendocrine differentiation and upregulation of NFκB transcriptional activity are two mechanisms that have been independently linked to this process. Methods We investigated these two pathways together using in vitro models of androgen-dependent (AD) and androgen-independent (AI) PC. We measured cellular levels, activity and surface expression of Neutral Endopeptidase (NEP), levels of secreted Endothelin-1 (ET-1), levels, sub-cellular localisation and DNA binding ability of NFκB, and proteasomal activity in human native PC cell lines (LnCaP and PC-3) modelling AD and AI states. Results At baseline, AD cells were found to have high NEP expression and activity and low secreted ET-1. In contrast, they exhibited a low-level activation of the NFκB pathway associated with comparatively low 20S proteasome activity. The AI cells showed the exact mirror image, namely increased proteasomal activity resulting in a canonical pathway-mediated NFκB activation, and minimal NEP activity with increased levels of secreted ET-1. Conclusions Our results seem to support evidence for divergent patterns of expression of the NFκB/proteasome pathway with relation to components of the NEP/neuropeptide axis in PC cells of different level of androgen dependence. NEP and ET-1 are inversely and directly related to an activated state of the NFκB/proteasome pathway, respectively. A combination therapy targeting both pathways may ultimately prove to be of benefit in clinical practice.

Abstract Background Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer remains a challenging condition to treat. Among the available therapeutic options, the androgen receptor signaling inhibitors abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA) and enzalutamide (Enza), are currently the most used first-line therapies in clinical practice. However, validated clinical indicators of prognosis in this setting are still lacking. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a prognostic model based on the time of metastatic disease presentation (after prior local therapy [PLT] or de-novo [DN]) and disease burden (low volume [LV] or high-volume [HV]) at AA/Enza onset for mCRPC patients receiving either AA or Enza as first-line. Methods A cohort of consecutive patients who started AA or Enza as first-line treatment for mCRPC between January 1st, 2015, and April 1st, 2019 was identified from the clinical and electronic registries of the 9 American and European participating centers. Patients were classified into 4 cohorts by the time of metastatic disease presentation (PLT or DN) and volume of disease (LV or HV; per the E3805 trial, HV was defined as the presence of visceral metastases and/or at least 4 bone metastases of which at least 1 out the axial/pelvic skeleton) at AA/Enza onset. The endpoint was overall survival defined as the time from AA or Enza initiation, respectively, to death from any cause or censored at the last follow-up visit, whichever occurred first. Results Of the 417 eligible patients identified, 157 (37.6%) had LV/PLT, 87 (20.9%) LV/DN, 64 (15.3%) HV/PLT, and 109 (26.1%) HV/DN. LV cohorts showed improved median overall survival (59.0 months; 95% CI, 51.0–66.9 months) vs. HV cohorts (27.5 months; 95% CI, 22.8–32.2 months; P = 0.0001), regardless of the time of metastatic presentation. In multivariate analysis, HV cohorts were confirmed associated with worse prognosis compared to those with LV (HV/PLT, HR = 1.87; p = 0.029; HV/DN, HR = 2.19; P = 0.002). Conclusion Our analysis suggests that the volume of disease could be a prognostic factor for patients starting AA or Enza as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, pending prospective clinical trial validation.

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.

Simple Summary: Incidence of brain metastases from genito-urinary cancers has increased over the last years due to improved imaging techniques and better survival outcomes for patients even at an advanced metastatic stage thanks to therapeutic advances. However, no clear consensus exists on their management, and every case ought to be discussed in a multidisciplinary panel. We perform a single-centre retrospective study to report on incidence, patient demographics, clinicopathological characteristics, and treatment modalities. We also manage to identify predictive factors of outcome. Background: Incidence of brain metastases is precisely unknown and there is no clear consensus on their management. We aimed to determine the incidence of brain metastases among patients with genito-urinary primaries, present patients' characteristics and identify prognostic factors. Method: We identified 51 patients treated in Geneva University Hospitals between January 1992 and December 2019. We retrospectively correlated their overall survival with 23 variables. We repeated a multivariate analysis with significant variables. Results: Overall incidence of Brain Metastases (BMs) among Genito-Urinary (GU) patients is estimated to be 1.76% (range per primary GU tumour type: 0.00–6.65%). BMs originate from germ cell tumours in two cases (3.92%), from urothelial cell carcinoma in 15 cases (29.41%), from prostate cancer in 13 cases (25.49%), and from renal cell carcinoma in 21 cases (41.18%); there are no BMs from penile cancer in our cohort. The median age at BM diagnosis is 67 years old (range: 25–92). Most patients (54%) have a stage IV disease at initial diagnosis and 11 patients (22%) have BM at initial diagnosis. Only six patients (12%) are asymptomatic at BM diagnosis. The median Overall Survival (OS) from BM diagnosis is 3 months (range: 0–127). Five patients (10%) are long survivors (OS > 24 months). OS is significantly influenced by patient performance status and administration of systemic treatment. In the absence of meningeal carcinomatosis, OS is influenced by systemic treatment and stereotactic radiosurgery. We also apply the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) score to our cohort and note significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Brain metastases from solid tumours is not a uniform disease, with a prognosis varying a lot among patients. The optimal management for patients with genito-urinary malignancies with brain metastases remain unclear and further research is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Brain metastases from sarcomatous lesions pose a management challenge owing to their rarity and the histopathological heterogeneity. Prognostic indices such as the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) index have been developed for several primary tumour types presenting with brain metastases (e.g. lung, breast, melanoma), tailored to the specifics of different primary histologies and molecular profiles. Thus far, a prognostic index to direct treatment decisions is lacking for adult sarcoma patients with brain metastases. Methods We performed a multicentre analysis of a national group of expert sarcoma tertiary centres (French Sarcoma Group, GSF-GETO) with the participation of one Canadian and one Swiss centre. The study cohort included adult patients with a diagnosis of a bone or soft tissue sarcoma presenting parenchymal or meningeal brain metastases, managed between January 1992 and March 2012. We assessed the validity of the original GPA index in this patient population and developed a disease-specific Sarcoma-GPA index. Results The original GPA index is not prognostic for sarcoma brain metastasis patients. We have developed a dedicated Sarcoma-GPA index that identifies a sub-group of patients with particularly favourable prognosis based on histology, number of brain lesions and performance status. Conclusions The Sarcoma-GPA index provides a novel tool for sarcoma oncologists to guide clinical decision-making and outcomes research.

Abstract Background Metastatic germ cell tumor (mGCT) patients receiving chemotherapy have increased risk of life‐threatening venous thromboembolism (VTE). Identifying VTE risk factors may guide thromboprophylaxis in this highly curable population. Methods Data were collected from mGCT patients receiving first‐line platinum‐based chemotherapy at 22 centers. Predefined variables included International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) risk classification, long‐axis diameter of largest retroperitoneal lymph node (RPLN), Khorana score, and use of indwelling vascular access device (VAD). VTE occurring at baseline, during chemotherapy and within 90 days, was analyzed. Results Data from 1135 patients were collected. Median age was 31 years (range 10‐74). IGCCCG risk was 64% good, 20% intermediate, and 16% poor. VTE occurred in 150 (13%) patients. RPLN >3.5 cm demonstrated highest discriminatory accuracy for VTE (AUC 0.632, P

Biochemical recurrence is an evolving space in prostate cancer, with increasing multidisciplinary involvement. Androgen deprivation therapy has shown proof of its value in complementing salvage radiotherapy in high-risk biochemical relapsing patients; ongoing trials aim to further refine this treatment combination. As systemic treatments, and notably next-generation androgen receptor targeted agents, have moved towards early hormone-sensitive and non-metastatic stages, the prostate specific antigen (PSA)-relapse disease stage will be undoubtedly challenged by future evidence from such ongoing clinical trials. With the use of modern imaging and newer molecular technologies, including integration of tumoral genomic profiling and liquid biopsies in risk stratification, a path towards a precision oncology-focused approach will become a reality to guide in the future decisions for patients with a diagnosis of biochemical recurrence.

Objectives: The initial treatment decision for newly diagnosed non-metastatic prostate cancer is complex. Multiple valid approaches exist, without a clear and absolute consensus for every clinical scenario, and therefore specialist opinions may vary. Multidisciplinary consultations focusing on shared decision-making aim to provide an apposite tool for the initial treatment decision. We have evaluated the first two years of activity of the Gustave Roussy Prostate Cancer Multidisciplinary Clinic (PCMC), dedicated to the initial decision-making for non-metastatic prostate cancer. Methods: PCMC consists of two consecutive specialist consultations with a urological surgeon and a radiation oncologist, followed by a dedicated Tumor Board discussion. A study questionnaire was addressed to all PCMC patients via postal mail. Medical notes and questionnaire responses of 195 eligible patients were analyzed. Results: The questionnaire response rate was 69% (134 patients). Complete satisfaction rate was high (114 of 118 responders, 97%). Patients were offered new treatment options in 55% of cases, and felt better informed in 98% (122 of 125 responders). The double consultation was considered useful (124 of 129 responders, 96%). Reported feeling of active participation was significantly elevated (117 of 131 responders, 89%), while 46% of patients (57 of 125) modified their decision on the management of their prostate cancer following their PCMC consultation. Conclusions: The experience of a multidisciplinary consultation in the initial management of non-metastatic prostate cancer renders high patient satisfaction, improves their appreciation of feeling better informed, promotes active participation and shared decision-making and strongly influences their final decision. Keywords: Prostate cancer, Multidisciplinary, Radiotherapy, Surgery, Shared decision-making

As research focus in oncology has recently shifted to immunomodulation, the era of introduction of immunotherapeutic agents in the management of prostate cancer has just begun. With the success of checkpoint blockade drugs in certain advanced tumours, ongoing efforts are aimed at identification and validation of new actionable immune targets to consolidate and expand the initial success in other tumour types. In this paper, we review the immunotherapy research in the management of prostate cancer to date, as well as the various emerging immunotherapeutic agents and their possible use. Although monotherapy has thus far had disappointing results in prostate cancer, promising combination strategies are under evaluation.