Nguyen, Paul L.

Importance The ideal duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for treating localized prostate cancer is unknown due to variable adherence and treatment durations tested in clinical trials. Objective To determine the ideal duration of ADT for patients with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. Data Sources This individual patient data meta-analysis of 13 randomized phase 3 clinical trials evaluated the use of radiotherapy alone or with ADT. It included patients with a median follow-up of 11.3 (IQR, 9.5-14.5) years and ADT duration of 0 to 36 months. Most patients (7392 [72%]) included had National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk or very high-risk disease. Study Selection For this meta-analysis, a systematic literature search from 1980 to 2020 was performed in trial registries (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov), MEDLINE (1966-2020), Embase (1982-2020), Web of Science, and Scopus to identify trials. Data Extraction and Synthesis Intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses were performed. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 distant metastasis at 10 years was calculated based on prognostic risk group. The analyses were conducted from January 5 to August 15, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point for this study was overall survival, defined as time to death or last follow-up from randomization. Secondary end points included biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis (DM), prostate cancer–specific mortality, and other-cause mortality. Results The median (IQR) age among the 10 266 male patients was 70 (65-74) years. Longer durations of ADT were associated with nonlinear improvement in relative benefits of DM, prostate cancer–specific mortality, and overall survival, with reduced estimated benefits beyond 9 to 12 months of ADT based on the end point. There was a near-linear increase in other-cause mortality associated with long-term ADT use (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09-1.50; P = .002 for 28 vs 0 months of ADT). The optimal ADT duration based on 10-year DM was 0, 6, 12 months, and undefined for patients with 1 intermediate-risk factor, 2 or more intermediate-risk factors, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk and very high-risk disease, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance The results of this meta-analysis suggest that, for men with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy and ADT, there are relative and absolute benefits from increasing durations of ADT that help provide individualized risk estimates.

TPS5127 Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) ± androgen receptor pathway inhibitor therapy is a primary treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, but is noncurative and has significant toxicities when used long-term. In patients with OMPC for whom delaying ADT is appropriate, metastasis-directed therapy such as stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been shown to provide local disease control. However, many patients do not experience a complete prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and develop poly-metastatic disease. [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 ( 177 Lu-PSMA-617) is a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radioligand therapy with demonstrated efficacy and a manageable safety profile in patients with PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the VISION and PSMAfore trials. PSMA-DC (NCT05939414) is an ongoing, international, randomized phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy of 177 Lu-PSMA-617 versus observation after SBRT in delaying castration and disease progression in patients with PSMA-positive OMPC. Methods: Eligible patients have histologically confirmed prostate cancer, biochemical recurrence post-definitive treatment, OMPC with ≤ 5 PSMA-positive metastatic lesions including ≥ 1 distant metastasis on PSMA PET/CT scans (all must be amenable to SBRT), PSA doubling time < 10 months and non-castration testosterone levels (> 100 ng/dL). Exclusion criteria include distant metastasis by conventional imaging (CI; CT/MRI and bone scans) at screening, prior ADT (except adjuvant ADT completed > 12 months before randomization), or other systemic therapy for metastatic prostate cancer. Patients (N = ~450) will be randomized 2:1 to 177 Lu-PSMA-617 or observation and will receive SBRT to all metastatic lesions within 14 days, completed within 3 weeks. Patients will then receive either intravenous 177 Lu-PSMA-617 (7.4 GBq/6 weeks; 4 cycles), starting 7–21 days after SBRT, or undergo observation only. Additional SBRT for new lesions is allowed. ADT is allowed after a metastasis-free survival (MFS) event by CI confirmed by blinded independent review committee (BIRC). Safety follow-up will occur 42 days after the last 177 Lu-PSMA-617 dose and at the week 24 visit for the observational arm. Long-term follow-up for the 177 Lu-PSMA-617 arm will include safety assessments every ~32 weeks. The primary endpoint is MFS by CI as assessed by BIRC using RECIST v1.1, or death. To provide 90% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.6, 187 MFS events are required. The key secondary endpoint is time to next hormonal therapy. Additional secondary endpoints include time to PSA progression, radiographic progression-free survival, symptomatic progression, patient-reported health-related quality of life, overall survival and safety. Shore et al. PSMA-delay castration (DC): an open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 3 study of [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus observation in patients with metachronous PSMA-positive oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC). J Urol 2025;213 (5S2_suppl):e28. https://www.auajournals.org/doi/10.1097/01.JU.0001110444.53548.eb . Reused with permission; ©American Urological Association, 2025. This abstract previously presented at 2025 AUA Annual Meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT05939414 .

5013 Background: There is no established role for the use of docetaxel with ADT and RT for HRLPC, with mixed results seen in prior RCTs. Prior work from ICECaP (Ravi et al, Eur Urol 2024) has shown that patients (pts) with very high-risk disease (i.e. 2 or 3 risk factors [RFs]: Gleason ≥8, PSA >20, ≥cT3 and/or cN1) have the poorest outcomes with RT+ADT for HRLPC, with 5-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) of ≤80%. We aimed to perform an IPD meta-analysis of the role of docetaxel with ADT+RT for HRLPC and specifically evaluate whether patients with very high-risk disease benefit from the addition of docetaxel. Methods: IPD from RCTs involving pts with HRLPC treated with RT+ADT +/- docetaxel collated by ICECaP were analyzed. “High-risk” disease was defined as presence of 1 RF and “very high-risk” disease as 2-3 RFs and/or cN1 disease. The primary outcomes of interest were MFS and overall survival (OS). Hazard ratios (HR) for MFS and OS were estimated using Cox regression, stratified by year of randomization and adjusted for age at randomization and ECOG performance status. 5-year MFS and OS rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the severity of disease (high- and very high-risk), and p-values for interaction were tested using the likelihood ratio test. Results: 1690 pts treated on 4 RCTs (GETUG-12, DFCI 05-043, STAMPEDE, RTOG-0521) between 2002-2015 were eligible. Median age was 65, median PSA was 23 (IQR 10-48); 154 (9%) pts had cN1 disease and 1444 (85%) received long-term ADT with RT. Median follow-up was 10 years (range: <1-15). Overall, the addition of docetaxel to RT+ADT was not associated with a significant benefit in MFS (HR=0.89 [0.76-1.05], p=0.160) or OS (HR=0.88 [0.74-1.05], p=0.167). Though there was some evidence for favoring docetaxel in pts with very high-risk disease (n=1054; MFS HR=0.86 [0.71-1.05]; OS HR=0.85 [0.68-1.07]) compared to high-risk disease (n=636; MFS HR=0.97 [0.74-1.27]; OS HR=0.95 [0.71-1.28]), there was no evidence of a significant difference in treatment effect by risk group (p-interaction >0.1). 5- and 10-yr MFS and OS in pts with high- and very high-risk disease, stratified by receipt of docetaxel, are shown in the Table. Conclusions: Some HRLPC pts with very high-risk disease may benefit from the addition of docetaxel to RT+ADT. Biomarker evaluation within this group may identify those who are candidates for treatment intensification with docetaxel with RT+ADT (+/- androgen receptor pathway inhibitors) in HRLPC. % (95% CI) High risk Very high-risk RT+ADT RT+ADT+docetaxel RT+ADT RT+ADT+docetaxel 5yr MFS 87 (82-90) 90 (86-93) 74 (71-78) 80 (76-83) 5yr OS 90 (86-93) 93 (90-96) 84 (80-86) 89 (86-92) 10yr MFS 67 (61-72) 71 (65-76) 51 (46-55) 55 (49-60) 10yr OS 74 (69-79) 77 (72-82) 62 (57-67) 67 (62-72)

PURPOSE Long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves survival in men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) receiving radiotherapy (RT). Predictive biomarkers are needed to guide ADT duration. METHODS A multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI)–derived predictive biomarker was trained for long-term (LT) versus short-term (ST) ADT using pretreatment digital prostate biopsy images and clinical data (age, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason, and T stage) from six NRG Oncology phase III randomized radiotherapy trials. The novel MMAI-derived biomarker was developed to predict the differential benefit of LT-ADT on the primary end point, distant metastasis (DM). MMAI predictive utility was validated on a seventh randomized trial, RTOG 9202 (N = 1,192), which randomly assigned men to RT + ST-ADT (4 months) versus RT + LT-ADT (28 months). Fine-Gray and cumulative incidence analyses for DM, and secondarily, death with DM, were performed. Deaths without DM were treated as competing risks. RESULTS In the validation cohort (median follow-up, 17.2 years), LT-ADT significantly improved DM from 26% to 17% (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.82], P < .001). A significant biomarker-treatment predictive interaction was observed ( P = .04) for DM, whereby MMAI biomarker–positive men (n = 785, 66%) had reduced DM with LT-ADT versus ST-ADT (sHR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.73], P < .001), whereas no treatment benefit was observed for MMAI biomarker–negative men (n = 407; sHR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.61 to 1.84], P = .84). The estimated 15-year DM risk difference between RT + LT-ADT and RT + ST-ADT was 14% in MMAI biomarker–positive men and 0% in MMAI biomarker–negative men. The MMAI biomarker was also prognostic for DM, irrespective of treatment (sHR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.72 to 3.19], P < .001). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, the MMAI model is the first validated predictive biomarker to guide ADT duration with RT in localized/locally advanced PCa. Approximately one third of men with high-risk PCa could safely be spared the additional 24 months of ADT and the associated morbidity.

309 Background: Standard of care (SOC) treatment options for HR-PCa include RT with long-term androgen deprivation (LT-ADT) or RP with selective use of post-operative RT +/- androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The optimal treatment approach has been assessed in retrospective population-based and multi-center comparisons, which have yielded mixed results with substantial bias. Therefore, we conducted an emulated randomized comparison of RT vs RP in HR-PCa leveraging patients enrolled in RCTs. Methods: We searched Medline for RCTs in HR-PCa with a SOC arm of an RT- or RP-based regimen. Inclusion required similar experimental treatment and contemporaneous enrollment in the same country to reduce bias. This identified 2 trials, NRG/RTOG 0521 (RT+LT-ADT +/- 6 cycles docetaxel [doce]), and CALGB 90203 (RP +/- neoadjuvant 6 cycles doce and ADT). Due to inherent difference in the biochemical recurrence criteria after RT vs RP, we chose inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (DM) as the primary endpoint, considering deaths as competing events. Death after DM was measured to create a harmonized metric of deaths likely attributed to PCa. To assess potential residual selection bias, death without DM to capture non-cancer associated deaths was analyzed. Results: Overall, 1290 patients (RT n=557, RP n=733) were included, with similar median follow-up of 6.4 years. Prior to IPTW, RP patients were significantly younger with lower baseline PSA compared to RT patients. Adjuvant (18%) and salvage therapy (44%) was used in RP cohort. Cumulative incidence of DM was significantly lower in patients who underwent RT compared to RP (8-year DM: 16% vs 23%; p=0.01; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.48 [95%CI 0.34-0.69], p<0.001). 8-year rates of death after DM were 10% vs 8% (p=0.72) in the RP and RT patients, respectively. RT patients had significantly greater risk of death without DM (HR 2.09 [1.01-4.34], p=0.048) with early differences measured. On a cross-arm comparison, 8-year cumulative incidence of DM when comparing SOC RT+LT-ADT group versus the doce+ADT+RP group was 18% vs 21%, respectively (sHR 0.75 [0.45-1.24], p=0.26). Conclusions: HR-PCa patients enrolled on RCTs had significantly lower incidence of DM with an RT-based strategy compared to an RP-based approach. Longer follow-up is needed to assess deaths attributed to PCa. Despite the strengths of the comparison (use of cooperative group RCT data, contemporaneous enrollment in the same country, patients fit enough for chemotherapy, and IPTW adjustments) there appears to be residual unmeasured bias, as expected, based on greater early deaths without DM in the RT arm. Utilization of post-operative radiotherapy and ADT+Doce may mitigate differences between RP and SOC RT+LT-ADT.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. NRG Oncology RTOG 0415 is a randomized phase III noninferiority (NI) clinical trial comparing conventional fractionation (73.8 Gy in 41 fractions) radiotherapy (C-RT) with hypofractionation (H-RT; 70 Gy in 28) in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. The study included 1,092 protocol-eligible patients initially reported in 2016 with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. Updated results with median follow-up of 12.8 years are now presented. The estimated 12-year disease-free survival (DFS) is 56.1% (95% CI, 51.5 to 60.5) for C-RT and 61.8% (95% CI, 57.2 to 66.0) for H-RT. The DFS hazard ratio (H-RT/C-RT) is 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.03), confirming NI ( P < .001). Twelve-year cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (BF) was 17.0% (95% CI, 13.8 to 20.5) for C-RT and 9.9% (95% CI, 7.5 to 12.6) for H-RT. The HR (H-RT/C-RT) comparing biochemical recurrence between the two arms was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.78). Late grade ≥3 GI adverse event (AE) incidence is 3.2% (C-RT) versus 4.4% (H-RT), with relative risk (RR) for H-RT versus C-RT 1.39 (95% CI, 0.75 to 2.55). Late grade ≥3 genitourinary (GU) AE incidence is 3.4% (C-RT) versus 4.2% (H-RT), RR 1.26 (95% CI, 0.69 to 2.30). Long-term DFS is noninferior with H-RT compared with C-RT. BF is less with H-RT. No significant differences in late grade ≥3 GI/GU AEs were observed between assignments (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00331773 ).

PURPOSE Pretreatment estimates of seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) are challenging and significantly influence the management of prostate cancer. We sought to improve current models to predict SVI through the development of an SVI prediction genomic signature. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 15,889 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) with available baseline clinical, pathology, and transcriptome data were retrieved from the GRID registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02609269 ) and other retrospective cohorts. These data were divided into a training (n = 6,766), test (n = 3,363), and two validation (n = 5,062 and 698) cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the predictive effect of the genomic SVI (gSVI) classifier in the presence of established nomograms (Partin Tables and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center [MSKCC]). RESULTS In the training cohort, univariable filtering identified 2,132 genes that were differentially expressed between RP tumors with and without SVI. Model parameters were tuned to maximize the area under the curve (AUC) in the testing cohort, resulting in a logistic generalized linear model with 581 genes. The gSVI model scores range from 0 to 1. In the first validation set, gSVI showed superior discrimination of patients with and without SVI at RP compared with other prognostic signatures trained to predict distant metastasis or clinical recurrence. Of the 698 patients in the second validation set, gSVI combined with the MSKCC nomogram had a superior AUC (0.86) compared with either nomogram individually (0.81). CONCLUSION The gSVI represents a novel and validated expression signature to predict the presence of SVI before treatment with surgery. This genomic tool adds discriminatory power to existing clinical predictive nomograms and may help with pretreatment counseling and decision making.