Feng, Felix Y.

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 .

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.

Background: Management strategies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have rapidly shifted in recent years. As novel imaging and therapeutic approaches have made their way to the clinic, providers are encountering increasingly challenging clinical scenarios, with limited guidance from the current literature. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) is a multidisciplinary meeting of prostate cancer experts intended to address the many challenges of prostate cancer management. At the first annual USPCC meeting, areas of controversy and consensus were identified during a 2-day meeting that included expert presentations, full-panel discussions, and postdiscussion responses to questions developed by the USPCC cochairs and session moderators. Results: This narrative review covers the USPCC expert discussion and perspectives relevant to mCRPC, including neuroendocrine/aggressive-variant prostate cancer (NEPC/AVPC). Areas of broad agreement identified among USPCC experts include the benefits of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, the use of radioligand therapy in patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)–positive mCRPC, and the need for clinical trials that address real-world clinical questions, including the performance of novel therapies when compared with modern standard-of-care treatment. Ongoing areas of controversy and uncertainty included the appropriateness of PARP inhibitors in patients with non-BRCA1/2 mutations, the optimal definition of PSMA positivity, and systemic therapies for patients with NEPC/AVPC after progression on platinum-based therapies. Conclusions: The first annual USPCC meeting identified several areas of controversy in the management of mCRPC, highlighting the urgent need for clinical trials designed to facilitate treatment selection and sequencing in this heterogeneous disease state.

Purpose: Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy. Results: The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC. Conclusions: CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

320 Background: sRT is used in men with prostate cancer (PC) recurrence following radical prostatectomy (RP) signaled by a persistent or delayed elevation in PSA. It was previously reported that the use of AAT with RT improved cancer control and overall survival (OS). Long-term follow-up (FU) results are presented here. Methods: From 1998to 2003, 760 eligible post-RP patients with Stage pT3N0 or with pT2N0 and positive margins and PSA from 0.2 to 4.0 ng/mL were randomly assigned on a double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of RT + placebo vs. RT + anti-androgen therapy (AAT) (24 months of bicalutamide, 150mg daily) during and after RT (64.8 Gy in 36 fractions prostate bed). The primary endpoint was OS estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Time to PC death and metastatic PC (competing risk of death without an event) was estimated using cumulative incidence. The hazard ratio (HR) was obtained using Cox models (OS) and subdistribution HRs (sHRs) used the Fine-Gray model (time to PC death and metastatic PC). All tests are one-sided based on study design. Results: Median FU for surviving patients was 19 years. OS at 18 years was 53% [95% confidence interval (CI): 47-58%] for RT + AAT and 43% [95% CI: 38-48%] for RT + placebo (adjusted HR 0.82 [95% CI: 0.67-1.00], p = 0.025). The 18-year incidence of centrally reviewed PC deaths were 18% [95% CI: 14-22%] RT + AAT and 28% [95% CI: 23-32%] RT + placebo (adjusted sHR = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.42-0.78], p<0.001). The 18-year incidence of metastatic PC was 22% [95% CI: 18-26%] and 31% [95% CI: 26-35%] for AAT and placebo arms respectively with adjusted sHR = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.44-0.80, p<0.001]. Subgroup analyses is shown in the Table. Conclusions: Long term results of 24-month duration AAT during and after sRT are consistent with the primary report with significantly improved long-term OS, reduced incidence of metastatic PC and PC death for RT+AAT. Statistically significant metastatic PC was noted for Gleason score 8-10, study entry PSA>1.5 and margin positive patients and borderline significance was observed in patients with study entry PSA 0.7-1.5. Clinical trial information: NCT00002874 . [Table: see text]

5094 Background: In prior studies, basal vs. luminal differentiation portends differential response to a) androgen suppression (AS) duration for high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) (NRG-GU-TS006) and b) docetaxel chemotherapy (CT) and AS for metastatic hormone-sensitive disease (CHAARTED). In NRG-GU-TS006, basal tumors appeared to benefit the most from longer duration of AS while those with luminal subtype did not whereas, in CHAARTED, luminal subtype had greater benefit from addition of CT. Herein, we examined basal-luminal subtyping to predict differential response to the addition of CT in the setting of high-risk PCa treated with AS and definitive radiotherapy (AS + RT) in NRG/RTOG 0521. Methods: Per pre-specified and approved NCI analysis plan (Navigator #1061), we obtained available NRG biobank biopsy specimens from patients enrolled on the NRG/RTOG 0521 phase III trial, which randomized patients to AS + RT +/- CT. The highest-grade tumors were profiled on clinical-grade whole-transcriptome arrays (Veracyte, San Diego, CA). Basal-luminal subtypes were generated using a 215-gene PCa subtyping classifier (PSC), a second generation PAM50 basal-luminal model. Treatment effects in Luminal Proliferating (LP) and non-LP subtypes were examined with Cox (for overall survival, OS, and metastasis-free survival, MFS) and Fine & Gray (for distant metastasis, DM) multivariable (MVA) models adjusted for age and trial risk stratification, as well as with restricted mean survival times (RMST). Results: Of 183 samples available for analysis (91 from control and 92 from the CT arm), 52 (28%) were classified as LP subtype. Median follow-up for OS was 9.9 years. No significant differences in clinical or pathological variables were observed between LP and non-LP subtypes. In MVA, we did not detect any significant LP subtype-by-CT treatment interaction but observed evidence of non-proportional hazards (Grambsch-Therneau test, p<0.05). In unselected patients, 5- and 10-year RMST difference between the arms was 0.9 (95% CI [-1.5, 3.4], p=0.46) and 5.7 (95% CI [-2.5, 13.9], p=0.17) months of OS. Stratifying by tumor subtype, at 5 years the RMST difference in months was 3.8 (95% CI [0.3, 7.2], p=0.03) for LP and -0.2 ([-3.4, 2.9], p=0.89) for non-LP. The RMST difference in months at 10-years was 13.7 (95% CI [-0.2, 27.5], p=0.053) for LP and 2.5 ([-7.6, 12.5], p=0.63) for non-LP. Conclusions: In pre-treatment biopsy samples from a Phase 3 trial cohort of localized high-risk men, luminal-basal subtyping of tumors demonstrated differential response to docetaxel CT. Similar to results from the CHAARTED trial of metastatic disease, LP tumors may derive greater benefit from addition of CT. Validation of these findings may enable effective earlier use of CT in men with PCa.

TPS283 Background: There is no clear standard of care for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) with positron emission tomography (PET)-detected oligometastases and normal conventional imaging (CIM). Phase II trials show that stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) to oligometastases may delay cancer progression and initiation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and its untoward effects. ADT with radiation prolongs survival in locally advanced PCa and in CIM metastatic PCa. However, there is a knowledge gap about timing and benefit vs toxicity of ADT with SABR in early oligometastatic PCa. NRG GU011 (PROMETHEAN) is a randomized phase II trial of SABR with or without relugolix for early PET-detected recurrent oligometastatic PCa. This study aims to evaluate the impact of relugolix, a novel oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist, when combined with SABR to oligometastases. Relugolix allows for rapid testosterone recovery and is associated with fewer cardiovascular events when compared to leuprolide and is hypothesized to have low late ADT toxicity. GU011 will provide patients and their physicians data on the relative risks and benefits of early or delayed ADT in this setting. Methods: NRG-GU011 NCT# 05053152 is a randomized phase II double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial with randomization to SABR + 6 months placebo vs SABR + 6 months relugolix. Eligible patients have biochemical recurrence after prior curative intent radiation or surgery for localized PCa, PSA < 10 ng/mL, negative CIM and 1-5 PET-evident metastases (≥1 extrapelvic). SABR is delivered in 1-5 fractions to BED >100 Gy1.5, followed by placebo or relugolix 120mg daily for 6 months. Patients will then be followed with imaging at time of biochemical recurrence. The planned sample size of 260 patients (130 per arm) will provide 85% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.65 for radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), based on a one-sided test at alpha 0.10. Planned enrollment is predicted at 8 patients per month with an estimated study completion date of late 2026. The primary endpoint is CIM rPFS. Secondary endpoints include PET-based rPFS, sexual and hormonal quality of life (QoL) assessed by EPIC-26, other QoL measures from EQ5D-5L, EORTC QLQ-30 and PROMIS Fatigue, and between-group comparisons of time to salvage therapy, castration-resistance, local progression (SABR-targeted lesion), biochemical progression, distant metastases, prostate cancer-specific mortality, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival. We also aim to determine adverse event rates for both treatment arms and evaluate genomic and blood markers of treatment response. This study opened in December 2021. Clinical trial information: NCT05053152 .

199 Background: Contained within the spectrum of metastatic cancer is an oligometastatic state where metastases are limited in number. Recent prospective data have shown that metastasis directed therapy (MDT) can alter the natural history of oligometastatic disease. In hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC), the positive clinical effect of MDT has been observed by the phase II STOMP and ORIOLE trials. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are a likely origin of the formation of macroscopic metastases. CTCs thus may provide an approach for identifying subgroups of patients with oligometastatic HSPC (oligoHSPC) that would benefit most from MDT. Our main goal was to evaluate the association between presence of CTCs at baseline or day 180 with clinical outcomes in the ORIOLE trial. Methods: ORIOLE was a phase II trial randomizing men with recurrent oligoHSPC with 1-3 metastases to observation (Obs) versus stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) MDT. Blood samples were prospectively collected at baseline and day 180. Progression-free survival (PFS) was a composite endpoint including any of the following: a PSA rise of at least 2 ng/dL and 25% above nadir; radiologic progression by CT, MRI or bone scan (RECIST v1.1); symptomatic progression of disease; initiation of ADT; or death. Patient blood samples were shipped for analysis on Epic Sciences liquid biopsy platform (Epic Sciences, San Diego, CA). Machine learning algorithms identified CTCs and characterized androgen receptor (AR) expression. Comparisons of patient and tumor characteristics between the groups were performed by two-sample t-tests. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and p-values were calculated using log-rank test. Analysis was performed using SPSS version 28. Results: A total of 82 samples were collected: 70 from the SABR arm (35 baseline and 35 on day 180) and 12 Obs (7 baseline and 5 on day 180). CTCs were detected in 30/42 samples at baseline (71%, AR+= 7) and in 26/40 samples on day 180 (65%, AR+= 9). In the SABR group there was no difference between CTC+ versus CTC- and AR + versus AR- groups for PSA evaluated at baseline, day 90 or day 180 or Gleason score. With a median follow-up of 41.7 months, PFS was significantly lower in the patients with AR+ versus AR- CTCs at baseline in the SABR arm (p = 0.011, mean PFS: AR+ = 9.3 months, AR- = 27.1 months). The mean biochemical failure-free survival was AR+= 12.9 versus AR-= 29.2 months (p = 0.058). Conclusions: Our preliminary results demonstrate an association between AR+ CTCs at baseline and Day 180 with clinical outcomes following SABR MDT in oligoHSPC. This is the first report examining baseline and dynamic presence of CTCs in oligoHSPC treated from a prospective randomized trial of SABR. Longer follow-up, further analysis and a greater number of patients are needed for a more comprehensive conclusion.

PURPOSE The sequencing of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy (RT) may affect outcomes for prostate cancer in an RT-field size-dependent manner. Herein, we investigate the impact of ADT sequencing for men receiving ADT with prostate-only RT (PORT) or whole-pelvis RT (WPRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Individual patient data from 12 randomized trials that included patients receiving neoadjuvant/concurrent or concurrent/adjuvant short-term ADT (4-6 months) with RT for localized disease were obtained from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate consortium. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed with propensity scores derived from age, initial prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, T stage, RT dose, and mid-trial enrollment year. Metastasis-free survival (primary end point) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by IPTW-adjusted Cox regression models, analyzed independently for men receiving PORT versus WPRT. IPTW-adjusted Fine and Gray competing risk models were built to evaluate distant metastasis (DM) and prostate cancer–specific mortality. RESULTS Overall, 7,409 patients were included (6,325 neoadjuvant/concurrent and 1,084 concurrent/adjuvant) with a median follow-up of 10.2 years (interquartile range, 7.2-14.9 years). A significant interaction between ADT sequencing and RT field size was observed for all end points ( P interaction < .02 for all) except OS. With PORT (n = 4,355), compared with neoadjuvant/concurrent ADT, concurrent/adjuvant ADT was associated with improved metastasis-free survival (10-year benefit 8.0%, hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.79; P < .0001), DM (subdistribution HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = .0046), prostate cancer–specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.54; P < .0001), and OS (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.83; P = .0001). However, in patients receiving WPRT (n = 3,049), no significant difference in any end point was observed in regard to ADT sequencing except for worse DM (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.05; P = .0009) with concurrent/adjuvant ADT. CONCLUSION ADT sequencing exhibits a significant impact on clinical outcomes with a significant interaction with field size. Concurrent/adjuvant ADT should be the standard of care where short-term ADT is indicated in combination with PORT.