Kendi, A. Tuba

175 Background: It is well-known that patients with liver metastases from metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have poorer or transient responses to many forms of systemic therapy. Data on outcomes following treatment with Lutetium-177–PSMA-617 is scarce. The VISION trial reports hazard ratios for overall survival in the subgroup of patients with liver metastases without disclosing the absolute duration of survival. Using real-world clinical data, we examine this important subgroup of patients, describing their PSA response rates and survival. Methods: A single institution database was assembled to include all patients receiving 177-Lu-PSMA-617 at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN, and starting treatment in the interval of March 2022 to March 2023. Baseline clinicopathologic and imaging characteristics were abstracted. Patients were categorized based on the presence or absence of measurable liver metastases on their baseline PSMA PET scan. Best PSA response while on treatment was annotated and reported as percent decline from baseline. Survival was calculated from date of first cycle of 177-Lu-PSMA-617. PSA50 response and overall survival (OS) outcomes for the two groups (liver metastases versus no liver metastases) were compared using Chi square test and Kaplan-Meier method, respectively. Those with available pre-treatment circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) genomic profiling, performed by Guardant (83 gene panel), were assessed for the presence of pathogenic and likely pathogenic alterations. Findings are summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: The overall cohort consisted of 212 patients, including 29 (14%) with liver metastases on pre-treatment PSMA PET/CT. The median number of cycles received was 4 (range, 1-6) for patients with liver metastases and 6 (range, 1-6) for those without hepatic involvement. The observed PSA50 response trended lower for those with liver metastases (34.5% [10/29] versus 51% [94/183], p= 0.091). At median (IQR) follow-up of 10 (8-12) months, there was a numerical but not statistically significant difference in median OS (11.28 months versus NR, p=0.066). In the exploratory analysis of baseline ctDNA, BRCA2 copy number loss was relatively enriched among patients with liver metastases (4 of 19, 21%) versus patients without liver disease (5.7%, 9/158). Conclusions: Our data suggest that the presence of liver metastases predict poorer outcomes in patients receiving Lutetium-177–PSMA-617 treatment, which is similar to data reported with other forms of systemic therapy for mCRPC. To maximize the anti-tumor activity of radioligand therapy in the liver, combination approaches should be explored.

592 Background: The introduction of peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) using Lutetium-177 (177Lu) DOTATATE has led to a paradigm shift in the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Hematological toxicity is a well-recognized adverse effect (AE) of 177Lu DOTATATE. Most cytopenias are transient, with an estimated incidence of 10-25%, typically mild to moderate in severity (grade G1-2). The most dreaded AE of PRRT is therapy-related myeloid neoplasm (t-MN), with an estimated 2-8% incidence and a higher incidence reported in patients who also received prior chemotherapy. We sought to evaluate the hematological safety of 177Lu PRRT in the setting of NETs with extensive (i.e., innumerable) bone metastases. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all Mayo Clinic patients (pts) with extensive/innumerable osseous metastases, defined as >50% skeletal involvement by positron emission tomography (PET) DOTATATE, who were treated with 177Lu DOTATATE. Pts characteristics and laboratory results were collected before, during, and after 177Lu DOTATATE treatment. Hematotoxicity was graded according to the NCI-CTCAE v5. Results: Out of 27 pts, 13(48%) developed cytopenia(s) of any grade after treatment with one or more cycles of 177Lu DOTATATE. In total, there were 13(48%) pts with anemia, 13(48%) with thrombocytopenia, and 6(22%) with neutropenia. Six (22%) pts had severe hematological toxicity (G3-4). Twelve months post-PRRT, 7(26%) pts continued to experience cytopenia(s) of any grade, of whom 4(15%) had G3-4 hematotoxicity. One pt developed t-MN, and two pts had myelophthisis on bone marrow biopsy from infiltrating NET. 16(59%) pts received cytotoxic chemotherapy before PRRT, and 7(25.9%) developed subsequent cytopenia(s). Overall, 15(55%) pts completed four cycles, while 3 pts didn’t complete four cycles of 177Lu DOTATATE due to hematotoxicity. Conclusions: Pts with advanced NETs and extensive/innumerable bone metastases treated with PRRT could be at higher risk for myelosuppression than historical controls. Our study highlights the importance of carefully monitoring and assessing hematological parameters in pts being considered for 177Lu DOTATATE with extensive/innumerable bone metastasis. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Many patients use artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots as a rapid source of health information. This raises important questions about the reliability and effectiveness of AI chatbots in delivering accurate and understandable information. Purpose: To evaluate and compare the accuracy, conciseness, and readability of responses from OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard to patient inquiries concerning the novel 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Two experts listed the 12 most commonly asked questions by patients on 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy. These twelve questions were prompted to OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard. AI-generated responses were distributed using an online survey platform (Qualtrics) and blindly rated by eight experts. The performances of the AI chatbots were evaluated and compared across three domains: accuracy, conciseness, and readability. Additionally, potential safety concerns associated with AI-generated answers were also examined. The Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests were utilized to compare the performances of AI chatbots. Results: Eight experts participated in the survey, evaluating 12 AI-generated responses across the three domains of accuracy, conciseness, and readability, resulting in 96 assessments (12 responses x 8 experts) for each domain per chatbot. ChatGPT-4 provided more accurate answers than Bard (2.95 ± 0.671 vs 2.73 ± 0.732, p=0.027). Bard's responses had better readability than ChatGPT-4 (2.79 ± 0.408 vs 2.94 ± 0.243, p=0.003). Both ChatGPT-4 and Bard achieved comparable conciseness scores (3.14 ± 0.659 vs 3.11 ± 0.679, p=0.798). Experts categorized the AI-generated responses as incorrect or partially correct at a rate of 16.6% for ChatGPT-4 and 29.1% for Bard. Bard's answers contained significantly more misleading information than those of ChatGPT-4 (p = 0.039). Conclusion: AI chatbots have gained significant attention, and their performance is continuously improving. Nonetheless, these technologies still need further improvements to be considered reliable and credible sources for patients seeking medical information on 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy.

Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in prostate cancer has advanced significantly in the past decade with prostate cancer targeted radiopharmaceuticals now playing a growing role in diagnosis, staging, and treatment. This narrative review focuses on the most commonly used PET radiopharmaceuticals in the USA: prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), fluciclovine, and choline. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) is used in many other malignancies, but rarely in prostate cancer. Previous literature is discussed regarding each radiopharmaceutical’s utility in the settings of screening/diagnosis, initial staging, biochemical recurrence, advanced disease, and evaluation prior to targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy and radiation therapy. PET imaging has demonstrated utility over traditional imaging in various scenarios; however, there are few head-to-head studies comparing PET radiopharmaceuticals. PSMA radiopharmaceuticals are the newest tracers developed and have unique properties and uses, especially at low prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. However, each PET radiopharmaceutical has different properties which can affect image interpretation. Choline and fluciclovine have minimal urinary activity, whereas PSMA agents can have high urinary activity which may affect locoregional disease evaluation. Of the three radiopharmaceuticals, only PSMA is approved for both diagnostic and therapeutic indications with 177 Lu-PSMA. A variety of diagnostic PET radiotracers for prostate cancer allows for increased flexibility, especially in the setting of supply chain and medication shortages. For the time being, keeping a diverse group of PET radiopharmaceuticals for prostate cancer is justifiable.

AbstractBackgroundProstate cancer (PCa) parenchymal brain metastases are uncommon and troubling observations in the course of the disease. Our study aims to evaluate the prevalence of brain metastases among PCa patients while reporting various therapeutic modalities, clinical features, and oncological outcomes.MethodsWe retrospectively identified 34 patients with parenchymal brain metastasis out of 4575 patients using a prospectively maintained database that contains clinicopathologic characteristics of PCa patients between January 2012 and December 2021. Based on the three treatment modalities used, the patients were divided into three groups: stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), and systemic therapy alone. The Kaplan–Meier curve was used to calculate overall survival [OS] probability and the Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to compare between groups.ResultsAt the time of brain metastasis diagnosis, the median age was 66 years, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) was 2.2 (0.1–26.6) ng/ml and the median (IQR) months from initial PCa diagnosis to brain metastasis development was 70.8 (27.6–100.9). The median (IQR) primary Gleason score was 8 (7–9) and over a median (IQR) follow‐up time of 2.2 (1.2–16.5) months, 76.5% (n = 26) of the patients died. Thirteen (38.2%) patients had solitary lesion, whereas 21 (61.8%) had ≥2 lesions. The lesions were supratentorial in 19 (55.9%) patients, infratentorial in six (17.6%), and both sides in nine (26.5%). Among all 34 patients, 10 (29.4%) were treated with SRS, seven (20.6%) with WBRT, and 17 (50%) with systemic therapy alone. OS varied greatly between the three treatment modalities (log‐rank test, p = 0.049). Those who were treated with SRS and WBRT had better OS compared with patients who were treated with systemic therapy alone (hazard ratio: 0.37, 95% confidence interval: 0.16–0.86, p = 0.022).ConclusionsIn our single‐institutional study, we confirmed that PCa brain metastasis is associated with poor survival outcomes and more advanced metastatic disease. Furthermore, we found that SRS and WBRT for brain metastasis in patients with recurrent PCa appear to be associated with improved OS as compared with systemic therapy alone and are likely secondary to selection bias.

AbstractBackgroundFor men with prostate cancer, radiographic progression may occur without a concordant rise in prostate‐specific antigen (PSA). Our study aimed to assess the prevalence of radiographic progression using C‐11 choline positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in patients achieving ultra‐low PSA values and to evaluate clinical outcomes in this patient population.MethodsIn a single institution study, we reviewed the prospectively maintained Mayo Clinic C‐11 Choline PET metastatic prostate cancer registry to identify patients experiencing radiographic disease progression (rDP) on C‐11 choline PET scan while the PSA value was less than 0.5 ng/mL. Disease progression was confirmed by tissue biopsy or response to subsequent therapy. Clinicopathologic variables were abstracted by trained research personnel. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Intergroup differences were assessed using the log‐rank test. A univariate and multivariate Cox regression model was performed to investigate variables associated with poor survival after rDP.ResultsA total of 1323 patients within the registry experienced rDP between 2011 and 2021, including 220 (16.6%) men with rDP occurring at low PSA level. A median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 54.7 (19.7–106.9) months elapsed between the time of prostate cancer diagnosis and low PSA rDP, during which 173 patients (78%) developed castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Sites of low PSA rDP included local recurrence (n = 17, 8%), lymph node (n = 90, 41%), bone (n = 94, 43%) and visceral metastases (n = 19, 9%). Biopsy at the time of rDP demonstrated small‐cell or neuroendocrine features in 21% of patients with available tissue. Over a median (IQR) follow‐up of 49.4 (21.3–95.1) months from the time of low PSA rDP, 46% (n = 102) of patients died. Factors associated with poorer survival outcomes include advanced age at rDP, CRPC status, bone and visceral metastasis (p value <0.05). Visceral metastases were associated with decreased overall survival (p = 0.009 by log‐rank) as compared with other sites of rDP.ConclusionsMen with prostate cancer commonly experience metastatic progression at very low or even undetectable PSA levels. Periodic imaging, even at low absolute PSA values, may result in more timely identification of disease progression.

Radioligand therapy (RLT) with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE is a standard of care for adult patients with somatostatin-receptor (SSTR)-positive gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). Taking advantage of this precision nuclear medicine approach requires diligent monitoring and surveillance, from the use of diagnostic SSTR-targeted radioligand imaging for the selection of patients through treatment and assessments of response. Published evidence-based guidelines assist the multidisciplinary healthcare team by providing acceptable approaches to care; however, the sheer heterogeneity of GEP-NETs can make these frameworks difficult to apply in individual clinical circumstances. There are also contradictions in the literature regarding the utility of novel approaches in monitoring and surveilling patients with GEP-NETs receiving RLT. This article discusses the emerging evidence on imaging, clinical biochemistry, and tumor assessment criteria in the management of patients receiving RLT for GEP-NETs; additionally, it documents our own best practices. This allows us to offer practical guidance on how to effectively implement monitoring and surveillance measures to aid patient-tailored clinical decision-making.

Radiopharmaceuticals are rapidly developing as a field, with the successful use of targeted beta emitters in neuroendocrine tumors and prostate cancer serving as catalysts. Targeted alpha emitters are in current development for several potential oncologic indications. Herein, we review the three most prevalently studied conjugated/chelated alpha emitters (225actinium, 212lead, and 211astatine) and focus on contemporary clinical trials in an effort to more fully appreciate the breadth of the current evaluation. Phase I trials targeting multiple diseases are now underway, and at least one phase III trial (in selected neuroendocrine cancers) is currently in the initial stages of recruitment. Combination trials are now also emerging as alpha emitters are integrated with other therapies in an effort to create solutions for those with advanced cancers. Despite the promise of targeted alpha therapies, many challenges remain. These challenges include the development of reliable supply chains, the need for a better understanding of the relationships between administered dose and absorbed dose in both tissue and tumor and how that predicts outcomes, and the incomplete understanding of potential long-term deleterious effects of the alpha emitters. Progress on multiple fronts is necessary to bring the potential of targeted alpha therapies into the clinic.

e17057 Background: Results from the VISION trial (NCT03511664) led to the approval of lutetium-177 (177Lu)–PSMA-617 for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This trial excluded patients with baseline cytopenias, thus safety in this frequently encountered patient population is unknown. We aimed to use real-world data to describe the tolerability of radioligand therapy in those with poorer bone marrow reserve. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients, who received a first dose of 177Lu–PSMA-617 at Mayo Clinic in the interval of April 26, 2022, to December 1, 2022. Patients were categorized as having poor marrow reserve on the basis of pre-treatment hematologic parameters, including: (1) an anemia cohort with hemoglobin (Hg) less than 9 g/dL, (2) a thrombocytopenia cohort with platelets (Plt) less than 100 x 109/L, (3) a leukopenia cohort with white blood cell count (WBC) less than 2.5 x 109/L, and (4) a multiple cytopenia cohort. These were exclusionary parameters from the VISION trial. Longitudinal laboratory data and clinical outcomes were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: At data cutoff, 185 patients had received one or more doses of 177Lu, including 26 (14%) with at least one baseline cytopenia prior to their first cycle of treatment. In total, there were 19 (73%) patients with anemia, 3 (12%) with thrombocytopenia, 2 (8%) with leukopenia, and 2 (8%) with multiple cytopenias at baseline. The median number of cycles received thus far is 3, including 14 (54%) who are still receiving therapy and 12 (46%) who have permanently discontinued treatment. Median longitudinal changes in blood counts for the anemia cohort are presented in Table 1. Reasons for treatment discontinuation include: toxicity (n = 2), disease progression (n = 5), death (n = 4), or other (n = 1). Dose reductions or treatment delays for worsening myelosuppression were utilized in 3 (12%) and 5 (19%) patients, respectively. Transfusions of packed red blood cells or platelets were required for 16 (62%) patients. A total of 6 (23%) received care in the emergency department or were hospitalized. Conclusions: Treatment discontinuation for toxicity was rare among men with mCRPC and baseline cytopenias, while receiving 177Lu; however, these patients have an overall poor prognosis. [Table: see text]