Joshi, Vidhu

AbstractBackgroundThe clinical course in metastatic castrate‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can be complicated when patients have disease progression after prior treatment with second generation hormone therapy (second HT), such as enzalutamide or abiraterone. Currently, limited data exist regarding the optimal choice of chemotherapy for mCRPC after failing second generation hormone therapy. We sought to evaluate three common chemotherapy regimens in this setting.MethodsWe retrospectively identified 150 mCRPC patients with disease progression on enzalutamide or abiraterone. Of these 150 patients, 92 patients were chemo‐naïve while 58 patients had previously received docetaxel chemotherapy before being started on second HT. After failing second HT, 90 patients were assigned for docetaxel‐alone (group A), 33 patients received carboplatin plus docetaxel (group B), while 27 patients received cabazitaxel‐alone (Group C). A favorable response was defined by more than or equal to 50% reduction in prostate‐specific antigen from the baseline level after a complete course of chemotherapy. Survival outcomes were assessed for 30‐month overall survival.ResultsPatients in group (B) were 2.6 times as likely to have a favorable response compared to patients in group (A) (OR = 2.625, 95%CI: 1.15‐5.99) and almost three times compared to patients in group (C) (OR = 2.975, 95%CI: 1.04–8.54) (P = .0442). 30‐month overall survival was 70.7%, 38.9% and 30.3% for group (B), (A), and (C), respectively (P = .008). We report a Hazard Ratio of 3.1 (95% CI, 1.31‐7.35; P = .0037) between patients in group (A) versus those in group (B) and a Hazard Ratio of 4.18 (95% CI, 1.58‐11.06; P = .0037) between patients in group (C) compared to those in group (B)ConclusionThis data demonstrates improved response and overall survival in treatment‐refractory mCRPC with a chemotherapy regimen of docetaxel plus carboplatin when compared to docetaxel alone or cabazitaxel alone. Further investigations are required.

Objectives To investigate the impact of implementing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion technology on biopsy and prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates in men presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa in the clinical practice setting. Patients and Methods We performed a review of 1 808 consecutive men referred for elevated prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level between 2011 and 2014. The study population was divided into two groups based on whether MRI was used as a risk stratification tool. Univariable and multivariable analyses of biopsy rates and overall and clinically significant PCa detection rates between groups were performed. Results The MRI and PSA‐only groups consisted of 1 020 and 788 patients, respectively. A total of 465 patients (45.6%) in the MRI group and 442 (56.1%) in the PSA‐only group underwent biopsy, corresponding to an 18.7% decrease in the proportion of patients receiving biopsy in the MRI group ( P < 0.001). Overall PCa (56.8% vs 40.7%; P < 0.001) and clinically significant PCa detection (47.3% vs 31.0%; P < 0.001) was significantly higher in the MRI vs the PSA‐only group. In logistic regression analyses, the odds of overall PCa detection (odds ratio [OR] 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29–2.35; P < 0.001) and clinically significant PCa detection (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.48–2.80; P < 0.001) were higher in the MRI than in the PSA‐only group after adjusting for clinically relevant PCa variables. Conclusion Among men presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa, addition of MRI increases detection of clinically significant cancers while reducing prostate biopsy rates when implemented in a clinical practice setting.