Citations

PURPOSE 177Lu-PSMA-617 (LuPSMA) is an approved prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)–targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Older patients, particularly octogenarians, represent a substantial proportion of men with mCRPC but have been traditionally underrepresented in key registrational trials of LuPSMA. METHODS This retrospective multi-institutional study evaluated patients age 80 years and older with mCRPC after chemotherapy treated with ≥1 cycle of LuPSMA from August 2022 to December 2024. Clinical and demographic data were abstracted from electronic medical records. Outcomes included prostate specific antigen (PSA) response (PSA50 and PSA90), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated PFS/OS; descriptive statistics summarized baseline and safety data. RESULTS Ninety-five patients (median age, 83 years) were included, of whom 36 (38%) and 21 (22%) had a history of cardiac disease or chronic kidney disease, respectively. Median follow-up was 24.1 months (IQR, 6.7-28.1). Patients received a median of five cycles of LuPSMA. Fifty-two (57%) and 21 (23%) patients achieved a PSA50 and PSA90, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 7.3 months (95% CI, 6.4 to 8.7) and 13.5 months (95% CI, 9.7 to 18.8), respectively. Grade ≥3 hematologic toxicities included anemia (n = 19; 20%) and thrombocytopenia (n = 4, 4%); grade ≥3 acute kidney injury occurred in one patient. Fourteen (15%) patients had dose delays, seven (7%) required reductions, and 10 (11%) discontinued therapy due to toxicity. Thirty-seven patients (39%) were hospitalized during therapy, with intensive care unit-level care required in two patients (2%), and there was one treatment-related death. CONCLUSION LuPSMA had comparable outcomes in octogenarians with mCRPC to patients on registrational trials, although 2/5 of patients required hospitalization during therapy. These findings support the feasibility and efficacy of LuPSMA in well-selected older men with mCRPC and suggest a role for closer monitoring of older patients.

Background and Objective: Radiographic progression in prostate cancer (PCa) can occur even when prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels are undetectable. We aimed to determine the frequency and characteristics of radiographic disease progression (rDP) on PSMA PET/CT in patients with undetectable PSA, referred to as PSA zero rDP. Methods: We analyzed the Mayo Clinic PSMA PET Prostate Cancer Registry to identify patients with rDP on PSMA PET/CT despite undetectable PSA levels. Disease progression was confirmed via biopsy or treatment response. The cohort included patients with non-metastatic and metastatic hormone-sensitive disease, as well as those with castration-resistant prostate cancer at the time of imaging. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Group comparisons were performed with the log-rank test. Univariate Cox regression was used to identify factors associated with poor OS. Key findings and Limitations: Among 2141 patients imaged between 2021 and 2023, 257 (12%) had PSA zero rDP. Sixty-one percent had initially localized disease; 39% had de novo metastatic disease. Median (IQR) time from diagnosis to PSA zero rDP was 51.9 (18.4–115.5) months. A total of 184 patients (72%) progressed to castration-resistant PCa. Sites of rDP included bone (57%), visceral (15%), lymph node (18%), and local recurrence (10%). During median follow-up of 8.1 (3.5–11.9) months, 5% of patients died. Only visceral metastases were significantly associated with poorer OS (p < 0.0001). Conclusions and Clinical Implications: Prostate cancer patients frequently develop metastatic disease with undetectable PSA values. Our findings suggest the use of periodic advanced imaging techniques, irrespective of PSA value, for more prompt detection and early management of disease progress.

703 Background: The association of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) reduction with treatment response has been investigated across multiple malignancies. This study aims to assess the impact of ctDNA response on survival outcomes in patients receiving enfortumab-pembrolizumab (EV-P). Methods: We identified 32 patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who received EV-P and had ≥2 ctDNA assessments with ≥1 detectable level. Deep molecular response was defined as >2-log reduction from highest ctDNA detection. Radiographic progression was determined from radiology reports documenting progression by RECIST criteria. Kaplan Meier analyses were performed to compute Hazard Ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for radiographic progression free survival (rPFS), defined as time from treatment start to radiographic progression or death and overall survival (OS) defined as time from treatment start to death were computed. Log-rank tests were performed to compare PFS and OS in patients with deep molecular response to those without response. A p-value <0.05 indicated a statistically significant association with response. Results: Thirty-two patients were included (median age 71 years; range 39–90). Median follow-up was 10.6 months. At cutoff (10/1/2025), 26 patients were alive and 6 had died. Seventeen (53%) achieved a ≥2-log ctDNA reduction (responders), while 15 (47%) did not (non-responders). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in responders (log-rank P < 0.001); median PFS was 5.9 months (95% CI 2.4–NR) in non-responders and not reached in responders (HR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02–0.44; P = 0.0026). Median overall survival was 12.7 months (95% CI 10.0–NR) in non-responders versus not reached in responders (log-rank P = 0.011; HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01–0.88; P = 0.037). At cutoff, 94% of responders and 67% of non-responders were alive. Conclusions: Achieving a >2-log decrease in ctDNA during EV + Pembrolizumab therapy was significantly associated with improved progression free and overall survival. These findings support ctDNA kinetics as a potential early biomarker of response warranting prospective validation. Clinical outcomes by >2-log ctDNA reduction status. Endpoint > 2-log drop (n = 17 ≤ 2-log drop (n = 15) Log-rank p Median (mo) ≤ 2-log > 2-log HR (95% CI) P C-index PFS 2 events (12%) 10 events (67%) 0.0002 5.9 (2.4–NA) NR 0.09 (0.02–0.44) 0.0026 0.77 OS 1 event (6%) 6 events (40%) 0.011 12.7 (10.0–NA) NR 0.11 (0.01–0.88) 0.037 0.73

567 Background: Selecting adjuvant therapy after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) requires reviewing scattered electronic health records (EHR) and performing accurate eligibility and risk assessments. Large Language Models (LLMs) may assist physicians by extracting key clinical data and generating evidence-based recommendations between active surveillance and adjuvant pembrolizumab. Methods: We selected RCC patients who underwent nephrectomy at Mayo Clinic in Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota between December 2021 and September 2025. Data extraction from EHRs was performed by a HIPAA-compliant LLM (GPT-5 and Gemini 2.0-Flash-001) and compared to human labels. Data on patients’ demographics, medical history, pathology, laboratory results, and imaging were collected. GPT-5 generated treatment recommendations using a structured prompt that incorporated patients’ features and relevant clinical information that is available to clinicians. Concordance between the human labels and LLM was evaluated for extraction. For treatment recommendations, agreement between the LLM’s output and physician’s documented recommendation in clinical notes was assessed, with disagreements reviewed independently by two blinded genitourinary oncologists. Results: The dataset included 85 patients, median (range) age of 65 (34-84) years; 24.7% were females. Patients who declined adjuvant treatment for personal reasons were excluded. LLM achieved an extraction accuracy of 95% for presenting symptoms, 97% for BMI and ECOG, and > 99% for pathology variables. Concordance between LLM and physician treatment recommendations was 84.7% (72/85). Among 13 discrepant cases, one oncologist agreed with the LLM in 9 cases and the other in 8. The main reasons for disagreement between the physicians and the LLM were that the LLM favored active surveillance for patients with declining renal function, whereas physicians still considered adjuvant pembrolizumab appropriate in such cases. Additionally, the LLM demonstrated hesitancy to recommend pembrolizumab for patients with low performance status. Overall, the 13 discrepant cases were nuanced and challenging, with disagreement observed between the two oncologists themselves in three instances. Conclusions: LLMs demonstrated high accuracy in extracting clinically relevant variables and generating objective, evidence-based adjuvant treatment recommendations for RCC after nephrectomy. Importantly, LLM did not generate any inappropriate or potentially harmful recommendations. Our pipeline can serve as a supportive decision tool to enhance consistency in post-nephrectomy management and assist physicians in choosing between active surveillance and adjuvant pembrolizumab. However, final treatment decisions should remain the responsibility of the treating physician after comprehensive patient evaluation.

360 Background: Adding NHT to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves survival in mCSPC, but their comparative impact on patient-reported QoL and time to deterioration (TTD) across FACT-P domains remains underexplored. Methods: MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched from each database’s inception through August 21, 2025, to identify Phase III trials assessing NHT treatment in mCSPC. Time to FACT-P (total, physical, emotional, functional, and social/family well-being) deterioration across trials with the latest follow up were extracted. Hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled and mixed treatment comparisons were made using network meta-analysis. P-scores were computed; a higher score indicated better QoL. Results: A total of 4 trials (12 references) with 4,037 patients met the inclusion criteria with median follow up ranging from 14.4 months to 30 months. Median time to QoL deterioration ranged from 11.4 to 12.9 months. In terms of FACT-P overall, darolutamide (DARO)+ADT (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.62-0.93), abiraterone acetate (AAP)+ADT (0.85; 0.73-0.98) significantly improved TTD as compared to ADT alone. DARO+ADT was associated with significant improvement in TTD when compared to APA+ADT (0.75; 0.56-0.98). In terms of FACT-P social/family wellbeing, DARO+ADT significantly improved TTD when compared to AAP+ADT (0.75; 0.57-0.96), and ADT (0.79; 0.64-0.98). Likewise, ENZA+ADT significantly improved TTD when compared to AAP+ADT (0.77; 0.63-0.95), APA+ADT (0.88; 0.61-0.99) and ADT (0.82; 0.70-0.95). However, there was no statistically significant difference between DARO+ADT and ENZA+ADT. In terms of FACT-P physical wellbeing, AAP+ADT was associated with statistically significant improvement in TTD when compared to APA+ADT (0.66; 0.52-0.83), ENZA+ADT (0.74; 0.61-0.90), and ADT (0.75; 0.65-0.87). In terms of FACT-P functional wellbeing, DARO+ADT was associated with statistically significant improvement in TTD when compared to ADT (0.78; 0.63-0.96). The ranking analysis is showed in Table. Conclusions: Novel hormonal therapies significantly delay QoL deterioration in mCSPC, particularly across overall, emotional, and functional domains. Domain-specific analyses suggest darolutamide may preserve social/family and functional well-being, while abiraterone favors physical well-being. Rank table. Rank (P-score) FACT-Ptotal FACT-Psocial/family FACT-Pphysical FACT-Pfunctional FACT-Pemotional AAP+ADT 2 (0.73) 5 (0.18) 1 (0.98) 2 (0.62) 3 (0.52) APA+ADT 5 (0.17) 4 (0.22) 5 (0.07) 4 (0.33) 4 (0.52) DARO+ADT 1 (0.90) 1 (0.88) 2 (0.68) 1 (0.92) 2 (0.66) ENZA+ADT 3 (0.50) 2 (0.84) 4 (0.36) 3 (0.52) 1 (0.67) ADT 4 (0.18) 3 (0.38) 3 (0.42) 5 (0.11) 5 (0.13)

352 Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) receptor expression in prostate cancer tissue has raised concerns that GLP1 receptor agonists (GLP1A) may influence tumor growth or progression. We compared prostate cancer severity at diagnosis among patients receiving GLP1A versus other glucose lowering therapies. Methods: A retrospective chart review identified patients who received GLP1A or alternative second-line glucose lowering agents (DPP4/SGLT2 inhibitors) and were subsequently diagnosed with prostate cancer. Patients receiving both drug classes were excluded. Baseline demographics (race, ethnicity, age), comorbidities (diabetes, myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease) concomitant medications (insulin, metformin, statins), appointments (within past year) and laboratory values (HbA1c, eGFR) at therapy initiation were recorded. Primary outcomes included Gleason grade group and metastatic presentation within three months of diagnosis. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics between groups. Mann-Whitney U tests compared grade groups. Chi-square tests compared metastatic presentation, reporting odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of grade group (low-grade: 1-2; high-grade: ≥3) and metastatic presentation, reporting OR with 95% CI. A p value <0.05 indicated a significant association. Results: Of 260 propensity-matched patients (GLP1A: 130, comparison: 130), 87% were White and 95% were Non-Hispanic/Non-Latino in each group. Median HbA1c was 7% (IQR: 6.4-8) in GLP1A group versus 7.5% (6.2-8.5) in comparison group. Median eGFR was 75mL/min/1.73m 2 (IQR: 61.5-90.0) in GLP1A group versus 60.0 (52.0-80.5) in comparison group. High-grade disease occurred in 33 (25%) GLP1A patients and 37 (29%) comparison patients. Among patients with available imaging (GLP1A: 40; comparison: 32), metastatic presentation occurred in 7 (18%) GLP1A group and 7 (22%) comparison group patients. No significant differences were observed in grade group (GLP1A median: 2; IQR: 1-2 vs. comparison median: 2; 1-3; p=0.44) or metastatic presentation (OR: 1.32; 95%CI: 0.41-4.25; p=0.64) between groups. In multivariable analysis, higher HbA1c was associated with high-grade disease in GLP1A group (OR: 1.83; 95%CI: 1.07-3.35; p=0.03) while higher eGFR was associated with low-grade disease in the comparison group (0.97; 0.93-0.99; p=0.04). Conclusions: GLP1A use was not associated with prostate cancer grade or metastatic presentation at diagnosis compared to alternative glucose-lowering agents. However, the association between elevated HbA1c and high-grade disease in GLP1A patients suggests a potential impact of poor glycemic control on tumor biology. Prospective studies are needed to elucidate the relationship between metabolic dysregulation and prostate cancer severity.

144 Background: Androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (abiraterone acetate [AAP], apalutamide [APA], enzalutamide [E], darolutamide [DARO] have become the cornerstone for pts with PCa due to survival benefits. Comparative data on fracture risk among ARPi are limited. This study quantified the risk of bone fractures with ARPi plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and compared fracture risk across different ARPi agents. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception through September 1 st 2025 to identify positive phase III trials assessing ARPi in addition to ADT in pts with PCa (m0CRPC, mCSPC, mCRPC). Trials were included if they reported bone fractures in either arm. Pairwise, random-effects meta-analysis was conducted using Paul-Mendel approach. Sensitivity analyses using Hartung-Knapp (HK) adjustment was performed to assess robustness of results. To assess the comparative risk of bone fractures among different ARPi agents, mixed treatment comparisons were made using frequentist network meta-analysis. P-scores were computed to assess relative treatment rankings. Treatment effect was expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: This systematic review included 13 phase III trials with 15468 pts (8890 received ARPi+ADT, 6578 received ADT alone). A total of 596 (6.7%) bone fractures were observed with ARPi+ADT compared to 180 (2.74%) with ADT alone. Patients receiving ARPi+ADT were associated with an increased risk of bone fractures compared to those receiving ADT (OR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.93-2.98). Sensitivity analyses with HK adjustment showed consistent results (2.40; 1.88-3.06). There was no statistically significant effect modification by PCa clinical setting (p: 0.27). Mixed treatment comparisons showed a statistically significant increased risk of bone fractures with AAP+ADT (2.35; 1.29-4.27), APA+ADT (2.04; 1.47-2.86), and E+ADT (3.13; 2.44-4.00) but not with DARO+ADT (1.30; 0.80-2.08) when compared to ADT alone. Among different ARPi agents, E+ADT was associated with an increased risk compared to APA+ADT (1.54; 1.01-2.33) and DARO+ADT (2.44; 1.41-4.17). Ranking analysis showed that E+ADT was ranked as potentially the least safe treatment (P score: 0.05) in terms of relative fracture risk followed by AAP+ADT (P score: 0.30), APA+ADT (P score: 0.43), DARO+ADT (P score: 0.76). Sensitivity analyses limiting to mCSPC trials only showed consistent results. Conclusions: The risk of bone fractures varies among different ARPi agents, with enzalutamide posing the highest relative risk and darolutamide the lowest. These differences may guide treatment selection, particularly in pts with mCSPC and bone metastases. Prospective studies adjusting for covariates are needed to evaluate bone-protective strategies to mitigate fracture risk particularly in mCSPC patients who are considering treatment with ARPi.

142 Background: LuPSMA is a life-prolonging radioligand therapy that is widely considered to have favorable tolerability. SPPADE symptoms (Sleep disturbance, Pain, Physical dysfunction, Anxiety, Depression, low Energy) are common in prostate cancer, yet data on patient-reported outcomes with LuPSMA in real-world settings remain limited. Methods: The E2C2 study (NCT03892967) evaluates the impact of a collaborative care intervention on patient-centered outcomes and healthcare utilization. This analysis includes mCRPC patients who initiated LuPSMA at Mayo Clinic (June 2022-July 2023) and completed at least one symptom survey within 6 weeks before or 2 weeks after the first LuPSMA treatment (baseline survey). SPPADE symptoms were rated on 0-10 scales; scores of 4-6 indicate moderate and 7-10 severe burden. A composite z-score was derived by standardizing each SPPADE domain to the cohort mean and averaging z-scores across domains per patient. Patients were stratified by composite symptom burden using cohort median and upper-tertile cutoffs. Associations with PSA50 response and overall survival (OS, from start of LuPSMA) were assessed using chi-square and Kaplan-Meier methods. In a longitudinal subgroup of patients completing a baseline survey plus at least one additional PRO survey while receiving LuPSMA (≥2 surveys), scores were compared from baseline to best during-treatment using Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Of 373 patients starting LuPSMA, 51 patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 71 years, 31% had visceral metastases, and median baseline PSA was 42.1 ng/mL. Overall, 85% of patients reported at least one moderate symptom and 46% at least one severe symptom. The most common moderate-to-severe symptoms were low energy (58%), pain (52%), and sleep disturbance (49%). Using an upper-tertile cutoff of the composite SPPADE score, 17 patients had high and 34 had low/moderate symptom burden prior to LuPSMA. PSA50 response was achieved in 17.6% of patients with high vs 47.1% with low/moderate composite symptom scores (p = 0.08). Median OS was 9.2 vs 16.7 months for high vs low symptom groups (p = 0.15, median split). The longitudinal subgroup included 24 patients with serial ePRO assessments while on LuPSMA. Composite SPPADE scores improved from baseline to the best during-treatment assessment in both PSA50 responders (n=10) and non-responders (n=14), with median composite z-score Δ of 0.35 vs 0.20, respectively (p = 0.68). Conclusions: Among patients with mCRPC receiving LuPSMA, baseline SPPADE symptom burden was high. Though not statistically significant in this underpowered cohort, PSA response and OS were numerically inferior in those with higher baseline burden. These findings suggest that ePRO-captured symptom burden may provide prognostic and patient-centered insights beyond traditional clinical variables. Clinical trial information: NCT03892967 .

127 Background: Bone metastases affect up to 90 % of patients with metastatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer (mHRPC) and cause substantial morbidity from skeletal-related events (SREs) such as fracture, spinal-cord compression, and palliative interventions. Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) including bisphosphonates and denosumab reduce SRE risk and are NCCN-recommended, however, real-world use remains inconsistent. Methods: Patients with mHRPC treated from January 2017-September 2024 across Mayo Clinic sites were identified using SQL-based EHR queries confirmed by manual chart review. Bone Metastases were detected through keyword searchers of radiology reports and confirmed through manual chart review. SRE-prevention dosing was defined as zoledronic acid 4mg IV or denosumab 120mg SC; osteoporosis dosing was excluded. SREs were identified using diagnosis codes and text-pattern searches for radiotherapy, surgery, fracture, and spinal-cord compression. Descriptive statistics summarized BMA utilization and SRE incidence. Categorical variables were compared using Chi-square tests, and a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals was calculated to evaluate association between early BMA initiation and SRE risk. Results: Among 778 patients with mHRPC, 685 (88 %) had bone metastases (mean age 70.5 years). Of these, 169 (24.7 %) had an SRE, and 261 (38.1 %) received BMAs at SRE-prevention doses (denosumab n = 157 [60 %]; zoledronic acid n = 104 [40 %]). Based on a chi-square test, combined SRE incidence did not differ significantly (No BMA 23 %, denosumab 23 %, zoledronic 33 %; p = 0.069). Bone pain at baseline was more common in patients who later received a BMA (136 [68 %]) than in those who did not (82 [41 %]; p < 0.001). Among 200 randomly sampled non-BMA patients, 83 had no recorded BMA discussion (66 also lacked bone pain), 38 lacked dental clearance, 32 had uncompleted plans and 18 declined therapy. Early BMA initiation (before first bone metastases) was associated with fewer SREs (16 % vs 29 %; RR 0.56, 95 % CI 0.33–0.96). Conclusions: Less than half of bone-metastatic mHRPC patients received BMAs. Non-initiation was often linked to modifiable factors such as delayed dental clearance or lack of treatment discussions, highlighting the need for system-level strategies to improve timely bone-directed care. SREs were common, affecting one quarter of patients. Small sample size precluded meaningful comparison of the impact of BMAs on SRE incidence however early BMA initiation may lower SREs. Incidence of SREs stratified by no BMA vs BMA treatment. SRE No BMA BMA Overall Pathological Fracture 6.4% (27/424) 4.9% (13/261) 5.8% (40/685) Radiotherapy to Bone 13.9% (59/424) 18.8% (49/261) 15.7% (108/685) Spinal Cord Compression 0.7% (3/424) 3.1% (8/261) 1.6% (11/685) Surgery to Bone 2.1% (9/424) 0.3% (1/261) 1.5% (10/685) Combined 23% (98/424) 27.2% (71/261) 24.7% (169/685)

TPS898 Background: Enfortumab vedotin with pembrolizumab (EV/Pembro) is now first-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) following the EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39 trial, which demonstrated a 67.7% response rate and prolonged survival. However, ~35% of cancers exhibited primary resistance and most responders relapse within one year, with post-EV/Pembro therapies achieving < 15% response and median survival < 3 years. We previously showed that therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) removed soluble PD-L1 and other immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) blocking soluble factors from the blood and that this overcame ICI resistance. Combining TPE with EV/Pembro rechallenge may overcome acquired resistance and restore antitumor immunity. Methods: RECIPE-B1 [NCT07087860] is an open-label, randomized phase II trial enrolling 50 patients (1:1) with EV/Pembro-refractory la/mUC and ECOG 0–2. Arm A receives TPE on days 1–3 followed by EV 1.25 mg/kg IV plus pembrolizumab 200 mg IV on day 3 of each 21-day cycle for the first three cycles, then continues EV/Pembro alone from cycle 4. Arm B receives investigator’s-choice next-line standard of care (SOC) per NCCN guidelines. Tumor assessments occur at the end of cycle 4 (±28 days) and every 12 weeks thereafter; safety is monitored each cycle (CTCAE v5.0). The primary endpoint is objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1, comparing TPE + EV/pembro versus SOC. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, quality of life (EORTC QLQ-CIPN20), and safety. Correlative studies evaluate circulating and urinary tumor DNA and exosomal biomarkers (including exosomal Nectin-4) as predictors of response and resistance. The trial is open at Mayo Clinic; as of September 2025, 2 of 50 patients have been enrolled, with planned accrual of ~2 patients/month and central coordination at Mayo Clinic and affiliates. Clinical trial information: NCT07087860 .