Tzou, Katherine

Abstract Background Radium (Ra)‐223 is an established treatment option for patients with metastatic castrate‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who have symptomatic bone metastases without soft tissue disease. Studies have indicated genetic aberrations that regulate DNA damage response (DDR) in prostate cancer can increase susceptibility to treatments such as poly ADP‐ribose polymerase inhibitors and platinum‐based therapies. This study aims to evaluate mCRPC response to Ra‐223 stratified by tumor genomics. Methods This is a retrospective study of mCRPC patients who received Ra‐223 and genetic testing within the Mayo Clinic database (Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota) and Tulane Cancer Center. Patient demographics, genetic aberrations, treatment responses in terms of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA), and survival were assessed. Primary end points were ALP and PSA response. Secondary end points were progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from time of first radium treatment. Results One hundred and twenty‐seven mCRPC patients treated with Ra‐223 had germline and/or somatic genetic sequencing. The median age at time of diagnosis and Ra‐223 treatment was 61.0 and 68.6 years, respectively. Seventy‐nine (62.2%) had Gleason score ≥ 8 at time of diagnosis. 50.4% received prior docetaxel, and 12.6% received prior cabazitaxel. Notable alterations include TP53 (51.7%), BRCA 1/2 (15.0%), PTEN (13.4%), ATM (11.7%), TMPRSS2‐ERG (8.2%), RB deletion (3.4%), and CDK12 (1.9%). There was no significant difference in ALP or PSA response among the different genetic aberrations. Patients with a TMPRSS2‐ERG mutation exhibited a trend toward lower OS 15.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.0−NR) versus 26.8 months (95% CI 20.9−35.1). Patients with an RB deletion had a lower PFS 6.0 months (95% CI 1.28−NR) versus 9.0 months (95% CI 7.3−11.1) and a lower OS 13.9 months (95% CI 5.2−NR) versus 26.5 months (95% CI 19.8−33.8). Conclusions Among mCRPC patients treated with Ra‐223 at Mayo Clinic and Tulane Cancer Center, we did not find any clear negative predictors of biochemical response or survival to treatment. TMPRSS2‐ERG and RB mutations were associated with a worse OS. Prospective studies and larger sample sizes are needed to determine the impact of genetic aberrations in response to Ra‐223.

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.