Childs, Daniel S

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.

Introduction: As interest in metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) for prostate cancer (PCa) grows, exploring indications and patient selection is increasingly more important. Thus far, few studies have described long-term outcomes after surgical MDT in those with disease recurrence involving the lung. The objective of our study was to compare the cumulative incidence of cancer-related death by treatment modality in men with metachronous pulmonary metastases from PCa. Methods: In a single-institution retrospective study, we identified 75 men from the prospectively maintained Mayo Clinic C-11 Positron Emission Tomography Choline PCa registry with recurrent prostate cancer involving the lung but no other visceral organs. Patients were categorized into 3 groups based on treatment modalities: wedge resection ± hormonal therapy, chemohormonal therapy, and hormonal therapy alone. The risk of cancer-related death after treatment at the time of lung metastases was reported as cumulative incidence estimates. Non–cancer-related deaths were treated as a competing risk of death. A univariate Cox regression model was conducted to assess the impact of treatment modality on the risk of cancer-related death. Results: At the time of lung metastasis, the median age was 69.5 years, and the median (IQR) prostate-specific antigen was 4 (1.3-8.6) ng/ml. Forty-seven patients (62.7%) had hormone-sensitive disease, and 28 patients (37.3%) had hormone-resistant disease. A total of 26 patients (34.7%) were treated with wedge resection ± hormonal therapy, 27 (36%) with chemohormonal therapy, and 22 (29.3%) with hormonal therapy alone. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 50.3 (31.1-78.4) months, and 21 patients (28%) died. Patients who were treated with wedge resection ± hormonal therapy had lower rated of cancer-related death compared with those who received chemohormonal therapy (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 4.14, 95% CI: 1.01-16.96, P = .048) or hormonal therapy alone (HR: 6.37, 95% CI: 1.72-23.54, P = .005). Conclusion: This exploratory analysis supports the safety and feasibility of surgical metastasis-directed therapy in select patients with recurrent prostate cancer involving the lung. Favorable long-term survival provides justification for further evaluation of this approach.

PURPOSE: For the past 5 years, most major antiemesis guidelines have included olanzapine-containing regimens among the recommended options for prophylaxis with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We analyzed the uptake of olanzapine in clinical practice and the changing composition of multidrug antiemetic regimens. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using an OptumLabs deidentified database of medical and pharmacy claims, which was filtered for patients starting HEC in the interval of 2006 to Q2 of 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patient characteristics and year-by-year antiemetic prescribing patterns, coinciding with cycles 1 and 2 of chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 63,154 distinct patients were included. The median age was 58 years (range, 18-88). Breast (45.2%) and hematologic (20.8%) cancers were the most common diagnoses. In 2016, olanzapine was prescribed to 1.4% of patients with cycle 1 of HEC. Prescriptions increased modestly each year, and by 2021, 13.9% of patients received olanzapine with their first cycle of chemotherapy. An additional 5.7% of patients received olanzapine for breakthrough symptoms or enhanced prophylaxis during cycle 2. In 2021, more than three-quarters of patients were prescribed antiemetics in a guideline-concordant manner, with an olanzapine-containing quadruplet (12.2%), an NK1-receptor antagonist triplet (64.5%), or an olanzapine triplet (suppressed for small sample size). CONCLUSION: Despite inclusion in major antiemesis guidelines, there has been relatively slow uptake of olanzapine for prophylaxis with HEC. This finding highlights the challenges of disseminating information and keeping prescribing systems updated with the newest evidence in supportive oncology.

Those with metastatic urothelial carcinoma generally respond more poorly to chemotherapy after they have progression on a checkpoint inhibitor (CPI). There is interest in combining CPIs with conventional cytotoxic chemotherapies as a strategy to exploit the efficacy and immunomodulatory effects of chemotherapy. We conducted a single institution, retrospective analysis including all patients treated between May 2018 and May 2020 with carboplatin and paclitaxel, concurrently or sequential with pembrolizumab, after having progression on a CPI alone. Clinical characteristics, response by RECIST 1.1, progression-free survival, and safety/tolerance of the treatment are reported. Median age was 80 years (64–85). Five patients (100%) had visceral metastases when starting carboplatin and paclitaxel. Chemotherapy was given with concurrent pembrolizumab (four patients) or following pembrolizumab (one patient) and continued until maximum response, significant toxicity, or progression. Two patients subsequently remained on maintenance pembrolizumab. There were four partial responses and one patient with stable disease. All patients on follow-up have progressed with median time to progression of 47 weeks (18–75). Two patients died from disease progression. This case series suggests that the combination of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and pembrolizumab leads to durable freedom from progression in some with metastatic urothelial cancer, who have progressed on a CPI alone. Larger studies of chemoimmunotherapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma are warranted.

Objective: A growing number of cancer antineoplastic agents can cause life-threatening acute infusion reactions. Because previous studies have not studied these reactions from the perspective of patients, this study was undertaken with that objective in mind. Methods: Patients who had an acute infusion reaction were interviewed based on the Leventhal model. Once saturation of content was achieved, interviews were transcribed and analyzed with qualitative methodology. Results: Twenty-one patients were enrolled. Most were women (n = 15); the median age was 58 years, and paclitaxel was the most common inciting agent. Three themes emerged. First, these reactions are frightening; patients made remarks such as “I was just thinking oh my God, I am dying.” Second, prior education about these reactions seemed to mitigate this fear, “Basically everything the nurses told me potentially could happen, like happened. So, I was prepared.” Third, when health-care providers were prompt and attentive during the reaction, patients described less fear with future chemotherapy, “So no, I’m really not fearful about going in tomorrow because I know they’ll be there and they’ll be watching me.” Conclusion: These reactions evoke fear which can be mitigated with education prior to and with prompt responsiveness during the acute infusion reaction.