PURPOSE Precision medicine has revolutionized oncology; however, tumor biomarkers are not reflective of the heterogeneous cancer population. We evaluated NRG Oncology prostate cancer (PCa) clinical trials for demographic differences among patients with optional biospecimen collection (BC) consent and biospecimen submission (BSub). METHODS Data from 19 NRG PCa clinical trials closed before 2015 were analyzed. Patients who consented to BC and completed BSub were evaluated by race, ethnicity, median income, area deprivation index (ADI; categorized as highest v lowest three quartiles), age at enrollment, site, and year of enrollment. T/chi-square tests were used for continuous/categorical variables, respectively, followed by logistic regression. RESULTS Of the 15,648 randomized patients eligible for BC, 11,796 (75%) had specimens submitted. In all, 4,598 (82.2%) of 5,597 eligible patients consented for optional BC in nine clinical trials with a separate BC consent process (consent rates by race/ethnicity: 74.1% Black, 72.8% Hispanic/Latino, 83.8% White). A smaller proportion of Black and Hispanic/Latino patients consented to optional BC compared with those who did not (12.1% v 19.5% Black, P < .0001; 3.5% v 5.8% Hispanic, P = .0006). In univariable logistic regression models, high ADI (more socioeconomic disadvantage) was associated with a decreased likelihood for optional BC consent (odds ratio [OR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.82]; P = .02), but not a decreased likelihood for BSub (OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.53 to 1.04]; P = .08). Multivariable models demonstrated that Black/Hispanic/Latino patients were less likely to consent to optional BC, and Black patients were less likely to have BSub ( P < .05 for all). CONCLUSION White/non-Hispanic patients and those with less socioeconomic disadvantage were more likely to consent to optional BC, whereas Black patients were less likely to have BSub. Targeted solutions are needed to improve biorepository representation so that precision medicine approaches better reflect the cancer population.
Optimal Duration of Androgen Deprivation Therapy With Definitive Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer
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.
Prognostic Impact of Lymph Node Yield in a Phase III Clinical Trial (NRG/RTOG 9601) of Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Salvage Radiation Following Prostatectomy
ABSTRACTBackgroundWe aim to evaluate whether increased lymph node yield at prostatectomy (RP) is associated with improved outcomes in NRG/RTOG 9601, a randomized clinical trial of men who underwent either radiation (RT) alone or RT + bicalutamide for PSA elevation following RP for pT2/T3 prostate cancer.MethodsWe reviewed available pathology reports for patients in NRG/RTOG 9601 to determine the nodal count at RP. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess effect of lymph nodes yield, arm (RT alone or RT + bicalutamide), Gleason score, positive margins, and seminal vesicle invasion on the following endpoints: times to local and distant failure and overall and disease‐specific survival.ResultsOf 760 patients, 552 (73%, 276 in each arm) had complete data available. Median node count in the entire cohort was 6 (range: 0–33, IQR: 3–9). There were no significant differences between arms in terms of patient demographic or clinical characteristics, including total lymph nodes removed in either arm. There was no significant association between total lymph nodes and overall or disease‐specific survival with both arms combined and when adjusting for arm. Notably, interaction analysis revealed that in seminal vesicle invasion, there was a significant association between lymph node yield and OS and DSS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83–0.99, p = 0.034; HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.77–0.99, p = 0.029, respectively).ConclusionsAlthough lymph node yield in NRG/RTOG 9601 did not show association with adverse outcomes in the entire cohort or either arm alone, there was significant association between lymph node yield and adverse outcomes when seminal vesicle invasion was present. The therapeutic benefit of extensive lymph node dissection remains uncertain but could be more relevant in higher risk patients.
Implementing evidence‐based strategies for men with biochemically recurrent and advanced prostate cancer: Consensus recommendations from the US Prostate Cancer Conference 2024
AbstractCurrent US clinical practice guidelines for advanced prostate cancer management contain recommendations based on high‐level evidence from randomized controlled trials; however, these guidelines do not address the nuanced clinical questions that are unanswered by prospective trials but nonetheless encountered in day‐to‐day practice. To address these practical questions, the 2024 US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC 2024) was created to generate US‐focused expert clinical decision‐making guidance for circumstances in which level 1 evidence is lacking. At the second annual USPCC meeting (USPCC 2024), a multidisciplinary panel of experts convened to discuss ongoing clinical challenges related to 5 topic areas: biochemical recurrence; metastatic, castration‐sensitive prostate cancer; poly [ADP‐ribose] polymerase inhibitors; prostate‐specific membrane antigen radioligand therapy; and metastatic, castration‐resistant prostate cancer. Through a modified Delphi process, 34 consensus recommendations were developed and are intended to provide clinicians who manage prostate cancer with guidance related to the implementation of novel treatments and technologies. In this report, the authors review the areas of consensus identified by the USPCC 2024 experts and evaluate ongoing unmet needs regarding translational application of the current clinical evidence.
Long-term results of radiation with or without anti-androgens (AAT) in patients receiving salvage prostate bed radiation therapy (sRT) post prostatectomy.
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]
Basal-luminal subtyping of localized high-risk prostate cancer and benefit of adding docetaxel to definitive radiotherapy with androgen suppression in the NRG Oncology/RTOG 0521 phase III trial.
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.
Sequencing of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy of Short Duration With Radiotherapy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer (SANDSTORM): A Pooled Analysis of 12 Randomized Trials
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.
Biochemical Failure Is Not a Surrogate End Point for Overall Survival in Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Analysis of NRG Oncology/RTOG 9601
PURPOSE Metastasis-free survival (MFS), but not event-free survival, is a validated surrogate end point for overall survival (OS) in men treated for localized prostate cancer. It remains unknown if this holds true in biochemically recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy. Leveraging NRG/RTOG 9601, we aimed to determine the performance of intermediate clinical end points (ICEs) as surrogate end points for OS in recurrent prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS NRG/RTOG 9601 randomly assigned 760 men with recurrence after prostatectomy to salvage radiation therapy with 2 years of placebo versus bicalutamide 150 mg daily. ICEs assessed were biochemical failure (BF) per NRG/RTOG 9601 (prostate-specific antigen nadir + 0.3-0.5 ng/mL or initiation of salvage hormone therapy; [BF1]) and NRG/RTOG 0534 (prostate-specific antigen nadir+2 ng/mL; [BF2]), distant metastasis (DM), and MFS (DM or death). Surrogacy was assessed by the Prentice criteria and a two-stage meta-analytic approach (condition one assessed at the patient level with Kendall's τ and condition two assessed by randomly dividing the entire trial cohort into 10 pseudo trial centers and calculating the average R2 between treatment hazard ratios for ICE and OS). RESULTS BF1, BF2, DM, and MFS satisfied the four Prentice criteria. However, with the two-condition meta-analytic approach, there was strong correlation between MFS and OS (τ = 0.86), moderate correlation between DM and OS (τ = 0.66), and weaker correlation between BF1 (τ = 0.25) or BF2 (τ = 0.40) and OS. Similarly, for condition two, the treatment effect of antiandrogen therapy on MFS and OS were correlated ( R2 = 0.67), but this was not true for BF1 ( R2 = 0.09), BF2 ( R2 = 0.12), or DM ( R2 = 0.18) and OS. CONCLUSION MFS is also a strong surrogate for OS in men receiving salvage radiation therapy for recurrence after prostatectomy. Caution should be used when inferring survival benefit from effects on BF in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Lack of comorbidity data did not allow us to assess whether BF in men with no/minimal comorbidity could serve as a surrogate for OS.
Impact of lymph node yield at prostatectomy on outcomes in NRG/RTOG 9601.
265 Background: A recent study ( Fossati et al, 2018) found that higher lymph node count at radical prostatectomy was associated with improved outcomes in patients treated with salvage radiation for elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after surgery. We sought to validate these results in NRG/RTOG 9601, a randomized controlled trial of men with pT2/T3 disease who underwent either radiation (RT) alone or RT+antiandrogen (bicalutamide) therapy for PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy from 1998-2003. Methods: We reviewed available pathology reports for all patients in NRG/RTOG 9601 to determine the nodal count at radical prostatectomy. Clinical data was as of 11/5/2015, same as the primary endpoint for the trial. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the effect of number of positive lymph nodes, treatment arm (RT alone or RT+bicalutamide), Gleason score, positive margins, and seminal vesicle invasion on the following endpoints: times to local and distant failure and overall and disease specific survival. Results: Out of the 760 patients originally eligible in the trial, 552 (73%, 276 in each arm) had complete data available. Median node count in the entire cohort was 6 (range 0-33, Q1-Q3 3-9). There were no significant differences between treatment arms in terms of patient demographic or clinical characteristics, including total lymph nodes removed in either arm (RT alone vs RT+bicalutamide median 5 vs 6, p = 0.11). There was no significant association between total lymph nodes and overall survival with both arms combined (HR = 1.00, 95% CI:0.97-1.03, p = 0.87) or in the individual arms alone (RT+Casodex: HR = 1.01, 95% CI:0.97-1.05, p = 0.65; RT+Placebo: HR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.94-1.03, p = 0.45). There was also no significant association between total lymph nodes and disease-specific survival with both arms combined (HR = 1.00, 95% CI:0.95-1.04, p = 0.84) and in the arms alone (RT+Casodex: HR = 1.00, 95% CI:0.95-1.05, p = 0.92; RT+Placebo: HR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.92-1.07, p = 0.86). In multivariable analysis performed on the two arms, Gleason score was the only feature associated with worse overall and disease-specific survival, seen only in the RT alone arm. Similar findings were seen when evaluating times to local and distant failure. Conclusions: Lymph node yield in NRG/RTOG 9601 did not show any association with adverse outcomes in the entire cohort, or in either treatment arm alone. The therapeutic benefit of an extensive lymph node dissection in this population remains uncertain. Clinical trial information: NCT00002874.
Abstract 2528: Rurality and neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation associated with patient-reported outcomes andsurvivalin men with prostate cancer in NRG RTOG 0415
Abstract Background: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among men. Monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can enhance provider-patient communication, promote better decision-making, and improve survival. Geospatial factors, namely rurality and neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, could influence the experience across cancer treatment, thus impacting PROs and survival. This study examined associations of rurality, neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation (Area Deprivation Index [ADI]) with cancer treatment-related PROs and survival in men with prostate cancer. Methods: Data from men with prostate cancer in the trial NRG Oncology/RTOG 0415 were analyzed. In this trial, 1092 men were randomized to receive conventional radiotherapy (RT) or hypofractionated RT. Patients had Gleason scores of 2-6 and prostate-specific antigen of <10 ng/mL. Rurality was categorized as urban vs rural using Rural-Urban Continuum Codes via patient zip codes. Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation was assessed by the ADI calculated via the American Community Survey by patient zip codes. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) measures cancer-specific quality of life (QOL); Hopkins Symptom Checklist measures anxiety and depression; EuroQoL-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) VAS and Index scores assess general health. All PROs were measured at baseline before and 6, 12, 24 and 60 months after RT. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. Mixed effects models and generalized estimating equations were used to analyze PROs. Results: We analyzed 751 patients with complete data. Patients from the ADI 25% most deprived neighborhoods (vs. the other 75% of neighborhoods) were more likely to be non-white, unmarried and from rural areas. At baseline, patients from the most deprived areas had worse EPIC bowel score (P=0.011), worse sexual score (P=0.042) and worse hormonal score (P=0.015); patients from the most deprived areas had worse self-care (P=0.04) and more pain (P=0.047). Patients from rural areas had worse EPIC urinary score (P=0.03) and sexual score (P=0.003). Longitudinal analyses showed that ADI 25% most deprived areas (β=4.05, P=0.001) and rural areas (β=-5.70, P=0.003) were associated with worse EQ-5D VAS score. Compared to the 75% less deprived neighborhoods and urban, the ADI 25% most deprived neighborhoods and rural areas respectively had 47% (HR=1.466, P=0.033) and 93% (HR=1.925, P=0.026) relative increase in risk of recurrence or death (DFS). No differences were seen in OS. Conclusions: Patients with prostate cancer from the most deprived neighborhoods and rural areas had low QOL at baseline, poor general health and DFS. Interventions should target populations from socioeconomic deprived neighborhoods and rural areas to improve patient access to supportive care services and DFS. Citation Format: Jinbing Bai, Stephanie L. Pugh, Ronald Eldridge, Katherine Yeager, Qi Zhang, W Robert Lee, Amit B. Shah, Ian S. Dayes, David P. D'Souza, Jeff M. Michalski, Jason A. Efstathiou, John M. Longo, Thomas M. Pisansky, Jordan M. Maier, Sergio L. Faria, Anand B. Desai, Samantha A. Seaward, Howard M. Sandler, Mary E. Cooley, Deborah W. Bruner. Rurality and neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation associated with patient-reported outcomes andsurvivalin men with prostate cancer in NRG RTOG 0415 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 2528.