Back to Authors

Chay, Christopher H.

Mayo Clinic

SCOR—Messino Cancer Centers, Ashville, NC

Citations 5

Alliance A222001: Oxybutynin Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Hot Flashes in Patients Receiving Androgen-Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer
Stish, Bradley J. , Mazza, Gina L. , Nauseef, Jones T. , Humeniuk, Michael, Smith, Thomas J. , Tofthagen, Cindy, Pardo, D.A. Diaz, Chay, Christopher H., Huang, Andrew Jonathan, Naha, Kushal , Tagawa, Scott T., Chow, Selina , Ruddy, Kathryn, Lustberg, Maryam B. , Adams-Campbell, Lucile L., Novotny, Paul J. , Loprinzi, Charles L. , Tofthagen, Cindy , Diaz, Dayssy A. , Tofthagen, Cindy S , Sebastian, Nikhil T , Huang, Andrew J , Tagawa, Scott T , Ruddy, Kathryn J , Smith, Thomas J , Mazza, Gina L , Nauseef, Jones T , Lustberg, Maryam , Tagawa, Scott T. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Adams-Campbell, Lucile L.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 26, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 13 | Pages: 1198-1205

10.1200/jco-25-01486 Get It

PURPOSE Hot flashes are a common side effect reported by men receiving androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. We sought to determine whether oxybutynin could improve hot flash symptoms in men with prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with prostate cancer receiving a stable regimen of ADT with at least 28 hot flashes per week were randomly assigned to receive either oxybutynin 2.5 mg twice daily, oxybutynin 5 mg twice daily, or matching placebo for 6 weeks. The primary end point was the change in patient-reported hot flash scores since baseline at 6 weeks. Additional outcomes included incidence of adverse events (AEs), changes since baseline in Hot Flash–Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS) scores, and patient-reported symptoms. RESULTS Eighty-eight patients were enrolled, with the 81 participants eligible for final analysis reporting an average of 10.1 (standard deviation [SD], 5.55) hot flashes per day and an average daily hot flash score of 18.2 (SD, 13.5) included in final analysis. On average, patients on the placebo arm, 2.5 mg oxybutynin arm, and 5 mg oxybutynin arm had reductions in hot flashes/day of 2.15, 4.77 ( P = .02), and 6.89 ( P < .001), respectively. Daily hot flash scores for placebo, 2.5 mg oxybutynin, and 5 mg oxybutynin reduced by an average of 4.85, 9.94 ( P = .07), and 13.95 ( P = .002) points, respectively. No treatment-related grade 3+ AEs occurred. HFRDIS total scores improved by 14.2 and 20.7 points in the 2.5 mg ( P = .042) and 5 mg ( P < .01) oxybutynin arms, respectively, compared with a 3.1-point improvement with placebo. CONCLUSION Oxybutynin is superior to a placebo for the management of ADT-associated hot flashes in men with prostate cancer.
Alliance A222001: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled phase II study of oxybutynin versus placebo for the treatment of hot flashes in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy.
Stish, B.J., Mazza, Gina L. , Nauseef, Jones T. , Humeniuk, Michael, Tofthagen, Cindy , Pardo, D.A. Diaz, Chay, Christopher H., Huang, Andrew Jonathan, Naha, Kushal , Chow, Selina , Adams‐Campbell, Lucile L. , Novotny, Paul J. , Loprinzi, Charles L. , Tofthagen, Cindy S , Mazza, Gina L , Smith, Thomas J. , Tagawa, Scott T.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 5, 2024 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 17_suppl | Pages: LBA12004-LBA12004

10.1200/jco.2024.42.17_suppl.lba12004 Get It

LBA12004 Background: Hot flashes are among the most common adverse events impacting quality of life reported by patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. Oxybutynin is an effective therapy for reducing frequency and severity of hot flashes in women. Pilot information supports that this drug may also benefit men with hot flashes related to ADT. Methods: Patients with prostate cancer receiving a stable regimen of ADT with at least 28 hot flashes per week were randomized to receive either oral oxybutynin 2.5 mg twice a day, oxybutynin 5 mg twice a day, or matching placebo doses for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in patient-reported hot flash scores (determined by multiplying the number of hot flashes by the mean hot flash severity [grade 0: none, 1: mild, 2: moderate, 3: severe, and 4: very severe]) from baseline to 6 weeks, as measured by a daily hot flash diary. A total of 87 patients provided 76% power to reject the null hypothesis of no between-arm mean difference in hot flash score reduction from baseline to 6 weeks, when comparing each oxybutynin arm to the combined placebo arms. This was based on a two-sided contrast estimated from a generalized linear mixed model, α= 0.10, intraclass correlation of 0.50, population standardized mean difference of 0.50, and 10% missing data rate. Results: 88 patients were accrued between 10/28/21 and 12/02/23. Six patients cancelled before starting treatment and one was ineligible, leaving 81 analyzed patients with a median age of 68. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms with patients reporting an average of 10.15 (SD = 5.55) hot flashes per day and an average daily hot flash score of 18.23 (SD = 13.48) at enrollment. On average, patients on the placebo arm, low dose oxybutynin arm, and high dose oxybutynin arm had reductions of 2.15, 4.77, and 6.89 hot flashes/day, respectively. Compared to placebo arm patients, high dose oxybutynin arm patients had a greater reduction in hot flashes/day (p < 0.001), as did low dose oxybutynin arm patients (p = 0.02). Daily hot flash scores for the same three protocol arms reduced by an average of 4.85, 9.94, and 13.95 points, respectively. Compared to placebo arm patients, high dose oxybutynin arm patients had a greater reduction in daily hot flash scores (p = 0.002), as did low dose oxybutynin arm patients (p = 0.07). No treatment-related grade 3+ adverse events occurred. The most commonly reported oxybutynin-related grade 2 adverse event was dry mouth. Conclusions: Oxybutynin is superior to a placebo for the management of hot flashes in men associated with androgen deprivation therapy and appears to be well tolerated. Support: UG1CA189823; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT04600336 .
BRUIN MCL-321: A phase 3, open-label, randomized study of pirtobrutinib versus investigator choice of BTK inhibitor in patients with previously treated, BTK inhibitor naïve mantle cell lymphoma.
Wang, Michael , Eyre, Toby A. , Shah, Nirav N. , Dreyling, Martin , Gandhi, Mitul, Chay, Christopher H., Sharman, Jeff P. , Andorsky, David , Ruppert, Amy S. , Duann, Chi-Wei, Muthig, Valerie A., Ito, Rodrigo, Gouill, Steven Le , Vandenberghe, Elisabeth , Wang, Yucai , Cheah, Chan Y. , Song, Yuqin , Muthig, Valerie, Jurczak, Wojciech

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: TPS7587-TPS7587

10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.tps7587 Get It

TPS7587 Background: Covalent (c) Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) have transformed the management of MCL, but these agents are not curative. cBTKi share pharmacologic liabilities (e.g., low oral bioavailability, short half-life), which collectively may lead to suboptimal BTK target coverage especially in rapidly proliferating tumors with high BTK protein turnover such as MCL, which can manifest as acquired resistance to BTKi. Pirtobrutinib, a highly selective, non-covalent (reversible) BTKi, has favorable oral pharmacology that enables continuous BTK inhibition throughout the dosing interval regardless of intrinsic rate of BTK turnover. In the phase 1/2 BRUIN study, pirtobrutinib demonstrated promising durable overall response rates and was well tolerated in patients (pts) with MCL regardless of prior therapy (including cBTKi), number of prior lines of therapy, or reason for prior cBTKi discontinuation. Pirtobrutinib was approved by the FDA in January 2023 for R/R MCL after 2 prior lines of therapy including a BTKi. The objective of this study is to establish whether pirtobrutinib is superior to investigator’s choice of cBTKi in pts with previously treated, BTKi naïve MCL. Methods: BRUIN MCL-321 (NCT04662255) is a randomized, open-label, global phase 3 study comparing pirtobrutinib monotherapy versus investigator’s choice of cBTKi monotherapy (ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, or zanubrutinib) in pts with previously treated, BTKi naïve MCL. Approximately 500 pts will be randomized 1:1 and stratified by sMIPI risk (low/intermediate vs high), comparator BTKi (ibrutinib vs acalabrutinib/zanubrutinib), and number of prior lines of therapy (1 vs ≥ 2). Enrollment for this study is ongoing. Adults with a diagnosis of MCL who have received ≥ 1 prior line of systemic therapy for MCL and are BTKi naïve are eligible. Pts must have measurable disease by imaging per Lugano criteria and have progressed on or relapsed following the most recent line of therapy. A history of current or prior CNS involvement, significant cardiovascular disease, stroke or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months of randomization, and autologous stem cell transplant (SCT), allogeneic SCT or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy within 60 days of randomization are key exclusion criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) per Lugano criteria assessed by an independent review committee is the primary endpoint. Overall response rate, duration of response, investigator-assessed PFS per Lugano criteria, overall survival, event-free survival, time to treatment failure, time to next treatment, PFS2 (time from randomization to disease progression on next line of treatment or death from any cause), safety and tolerability, and pt reported outcomes are secondary endpoints. Clinical trial information: NCT04662255 .
BRUIN MCL-321: Phase III Study of Pirtobrutinib Versus Investigator Choice of BTK Inhibitor in BTK Inhibitor Naive Mantle Cell Lymphoma
Eyre, Toby A. , Shah, Nirav N. , Dreyling, Martin , Jurczak, Wojciech , Gandhi, Mitul, Chay, Christopher H., Sharman, Jeff P. , Andorsky, David , Messersmith, Hannah M, Ruppert, Amy S. , Muthig, Valerie A., Ito, Rodrigo, Wang, Michael , Jurczak, Wojciech , Wang, Yucai , Cheah, Chan Y. , Song, Yuqin , Muthig, Valerie

Future Oncology | November 15, 2022 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 36 | Pages: 3961-3969

10.2217/fon-2022-0976 Get It

BRUIN MCL-321: A Phase 3 Open-Label, Randomized Study of Pirtobrutinib Versus Investigator Choice of BTK Inhibitor in Patients with Previously Treated, BTK Inhibitor Naïve Mantle Cell Lymphoma (Trial in Progress)
Eyre, Toby A. , Shah, Nirav N. , Dreyling, Martin , Gandhi, Mitul, Chay, Christopher H., Sharman, Jeff P. , Andorsky, David , Yin, Ming , Balbas, Minna, Kherani, Jennifer , Wang, Michael , Gouill, Steven Le , Vandenberghe, Elisabeth , Jurczak, Wojciech , Wang, Yucai , Cheah, Chan Y. , Yin, Ming

Blood | November 24, 2021 | Volume: 138 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2422-2422

10.1182/blood-2021-145920 Get It

Abstract Background: Covalent Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitors (BTKi) have transformed the management of relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), but these treatments are not curative and the majority of patients will require additional treatment. Covalent BTKi share pharmacologic liabilities (e.g. low oral bioavailability, short half-life) that collectively may lead to suboptimal BTK target coverage especially in rapidly proliferating tumors with high BTK protein turnover such as MCL. To address these limitations, pirtobrutinib, a highly selective, non-covalent BTKi that inhibits both wild type (WT) and C481-mutated BTK with equal low nM potency was developed. In the phase 1/2 BRUIN study, pirtobrutinib achieved pharmacokinetic exposures that exceeded its BTK IC96 at trough, was well tolerated, and demonstrated promising efficacy in heavily pretreated, poor-prognosis MCL patients, most of whom had prior treatment with a covalent BTKi (Mato et al. Lancet 2021;397,10277:892-901). The purpose of this randomized study is to demonstrate the superiority of pirtobrutinib compared to investigator's choice of covalent BTKi in patients with previously treated MCL. Study Design and Methods: BRUIN MCL-321 is a randomized, open-label, global phase 3 study comparing pirtobrutinib monotherapy versus investigator's choice of covalent BTKi monotherapy (ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, or zanubrutinib) in patients with previously treated, BTKi naïve MCL. Approximately 500 patients will be randomized 1:1. Randomization will be stratified by sMIPI risk (low/intermediate vs high), comparator BTKi (ibrutinib vs acalabrutinib/ zanubrutinib), and number of prior lines of therapy (1 vs ≥ 2). Eligible patients are adults aged ≥18 years with a confirmed diagnosis of MCL (cyclin D1 overexpression, and ≥ 1 B-cell marker) who have received ≥ 1 prior line of systemic therapy for MCL that did not include a prior BTKi. Patients must have measurable disease per Lugano criteria and must have progressed on or relapsed following the most recent line of therapy prior to study enrollment. Key exclusion criteria include a history of current or prior CNS involvement, significant cardiovascular disease, stroke, or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months of randomization, and allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT), autologous SCT or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy within 60 days of randomization. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) per Lugano criteria assessed by an independent review committee (IRC), with the goal of demonstrating superiority of pirtobrutinib over investigator's choice of covalent BTKi. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), investigator-assessed PFS per Lugano criteria, overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), time to next treatment (TTNT), time from randomization to disease progression on next line of treatment or death from any cause (PFS2), safety and tolerability, and patient reported outcomes. This global study is currently enrolling patients (NCT04662255). Disclosures Eyre: Gilead/KITE: Honoraria, Other: Travel support for conferences, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel to conferences; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Secura Bio: Consultancy, Honoraria. Shah: Miltenyi Biotec: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Umoja: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Lily: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dreyling: Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Genmab: Consultancy; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Vandenberghe: Jansnens: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Jurczak: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Celtrion, Celgene, Debbiopharm, Epizyme, Incyte, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Merck, Mei Pharma, Morphosys, Novo Nordisk, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Sandoz, Roche,: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wang: Genentech: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Research Funding; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; InnoCare: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cheah: Loxo/Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory and travel expenses, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Celgene: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Ascentage pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory, Research Funding. Gandhi: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria. Sharman: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; Centessa: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Andorsky: Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Epizyme: Research Funding. Yin: Loxo Oncology at Lilly: Current Employment; AstraZeneca: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Balbas: Nektar Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months; Loxo Oncology at Lilly: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kherani: Loxo Oncology at Lilly: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Wang: AstraZeneca, Bayer Healthcare, BeiGene, CSTone, DTRM Biopharma (Cayman) Limited, Epizyme, Genentech, InnoCare, Janssen, Juno, Kite Pharma, Loxo Oncology, Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbH, Oncternal, Pharmacyclics, VelosBio: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BioInvent, Celgene, Innocare, Janssen, Juno, Kite, Pharma, Lilly, Loxo Oncology, Molecular Templates, Oncternal, Pharmacyclics, VelosBio: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma, Anticancer Association, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, CAHON, Chinese Medical Association, Clinical Care Options, Dava Oncology, Epizyme, Hebei Cancer Prevention Federation, Imbruvica, Imedex, Janssen, Kite Pharma, Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbH, Moffit : Honoraria.