Paller, Channing J.

5001 Background: Tak is an oral selective nonsteroidal 17, 20-lyase inhibitor that blocks the synthesis of gonadal and adrenal androgens. We evaluated the clinical benefit of Tak with ADT in pts with newly diagnosed mHSPC. Methods: Pts with mHSPC with a Zubrod performance status (PS) of 0-2 and a PSA of ≥ 2 ng/ml were randomized 1:1 to ADT+Tak (300 mg twice daily) or ADT+Bic (50 mg daily). Stratification factors included PS (0-1 vs ≥2), extent of disease (minimal vs extensive), and receipt of ADT prior to registration (yes vs no). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS; based on PSA, imaging or clinical progression), PSA at 7 months (≤0.2 vs 0.2 < PSA; ≤-4 vs. > 4 ng/ml) and adverse event (AE) profile. With 2.75 yrs to accrue 1,186 eligible pts and 3 additional yrs of follow-up, we would have 90% power to determine a 33% improvement in OS from 54 to 72 mos (1-sided α = 0.025). A final analysis was pre-specified after 523 deaths using a 1-sided α = 0.022 to account for interim analyses. Results: Between 3/2013 and 7/2017, 1,313 pts were randomized and 1,279 were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (32 pts were ineligible and 2 pts withdrew consent). Median age was 68 yrs and 10% of subjects were Black. Median PSA was 30 ng/mL (range 2-6710) and 49% of pts had extensive disease. After a median follow-up of 4.9 yrs, PFS and PSA response were significantly improved with Tak over Bic but no significant improvement in OS was observed (Table). More grade 3/4 AEs occurred in Tak vs. Bic arms (43% vs. 14%), and included hypertension (20% vs. 5%) and fatigue (5% vs. 2%). Five pts in Tak and 1 pt in the Bic arm had grade 5 AE. Conclusions: Despite clinically meaningful improvement in various outcome measures with Tak+ADT over Bic+ADT in this representative population of mHSPC, the improvement in OS did not meet the pre-specified criteria for statistical significance. The median OS of 70 mos in the control arm (standard ADT) was higher than that reported in contemporary phase 3 trials in this setting, and 16 mos higher than originally estimated. This trial sets a new landmark for survival estimates when pts with mHSPC have access to multiple approved subsequent life-prolonging therapies. Funding: NIH/NCI/NCTN grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819, U10CA180820; U10CA180821; and in part by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Takeda Pharmaceutical Company LTD) Clinical trial information: NCT01809691. [Table: see text]

Abstract Anticancer drugs are combined in an effort to treat a heterogeneous tumor or to maximize the pharmacodynamic effect. The development of combination regimens, while desirable, poses unique challenges. These include the selection of agents for combination therapy that may lead to improved efficacy while maintaining acceptable toxicity, the design of clinical trials that provide informative results for individual agents and combinations, and logistic and regulatory challenges. The phase I trial is often the initial step in the clinical evaluation of a combination regimen. In view of the importance of combination regimens and the challenges associated with developing them, the Clinical Trial Design (CTD) Task Force of the National Cancer Institute Investigational Drug Steering Committee developed a set of recommendations for the phase I development of a combination regimen. The first two recommendations focus on the scientific rationale and development plans for the combination regimen; subsequent recommendations encompass clinical design aspects. The CTD Task Force recommends that selection of the proposed regimens be based on a biologic or pharmacologic rationale supported by clinical and/or robust and validated preclinical evidence, and accompanied by a plan for subsequent development of the combination. The design of the phase I clinical trial should take into consideration the potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions as well as overlapping toxicity. Depending on the specific hypothesized interaction, the primary endpoint may be dose optimization, pharmacokinetics, and/or pharmacodynamics (i.e., biomarker). Clin Cancer Res; 20(16); 4210–7. ©2014 AACR.