De Phung

Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy

BACKGROUND Enzalutamide is an oral androgen-receptor inhibitor that prolongs survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in whom the disease has progressed after chemotherapy. New treatment options are needed for patients with metastatic prostate cancer who have not received chemotherapy, in whom the disease has progressed despite androgen-deprivation therapy. METHODS In this double-blind, phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 1717 patients to receive either enzalutamide (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo once daily. The coprimary end points were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS The study was stopped after a planned interim analysis, conducted when 540 deaths had been reported, showed a benefit of the active treatment. The rate of radiographic progression-free survival at 12 months was 65% among patients treated with enzalutamide, as compared with 14% among patients receiving placebo (81% risk reduction; hazard ratio in the enzalutamide group, 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15 to 0.23; P<0.001). A total of 626 patients (72%) in the enzalutamide group, as compared with 532 patients (63%) in the placebo group, were alive at the data-cutoff date (29% reduction in the risk of death; hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.84; P<0.001). The benefit of enzalutamide was shown with respect to all secondary end points, including the time until the initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.35), the time until the first skeletal-related event (hazard ratio, 0.72), a complete or partial soft-tissue response (59% vs. 5%), the time until prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression (hazard ratio, 0.17), and a rate of decline of at least 50% in PSA (78% vs. 3%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Fatigue and hypertension were the most common clinically relevant adverse events associated with enzalutamide treatment. CONCLUSIONS Enzalutamide significantly decreased the risk of radiographic progression and death and delayed the initiation of chemotherapy in men with metastatic prostate cancer. (Funded by Medivation and Astellas Pharma; PREVAIL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01212991.).

Safety and efficacy of the specific endothelin-A receptor antagonist ZD4054 in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases who were pain free or mildly symptomatic: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND The endothelin-A receptor (ETAR) has been implicated in the progression of prostate cancer. OBJECTIVES To investigate the safety and efficacy of the specific ETAR antagonist ZD4054 in patients with metastatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer (HRPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial in patients attending cancer centres with HRPC and bone metastases who were pain free or mildly symptomatic for pain. INTERVENTION Patients were randomised to receive once-daily oral tablets of ZD4054 10 mg, or ZD4054 15 mg, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS The primary end point was time to progression, defined as clinical progression, requirement for opiate analgesia, objective progression of soft-tissue metastases, or death in the absence of progression. Secondary end points included overall survival, time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, and safety. Statistical significance was preset at 20%. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 312 patients were randomised (ZD4054 10 mg, n=107; ZD4054 15 mg, n=98; placebo, n=107). At the primary analysis, median time to progression was 3.6 mo, 4.0 mo, and 3.8 mo in the placebo, ZD4054 10 mg, and ZD4054 15 mg groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference between ZD4054 groups and placebo (hazard ratio [HR] vs placebo for the ZD4054 10mg group: 0.88 [80% CI: 0.71-1.09]; HR vs placebo for the ZD4054 15 mg group: 0.83 [80% CI: 0.66-1.03]). However, a signal for prolonged overall survival was observed in the ZD4054 treatment groups versus placebo, based on 40 deaths. At a subsequent analysis after 118 deaths, this survival benefit was confirmed (HR vs placebo for the ZD4054 10 mg group, 0.55 [80% CI: 0.41-0.73], p=0.008; HR vs placebo for the ZD4054 15 mg group, 0.65 [80% CI: 0.49-0.86], p=0.052) but the differences in time to progression remained nonsignificant. Median overall survival was 17.3 mo, 24.5 mo, and 23.5 mo in the placebo group, the ZD4054 10 mg group, and the ZD4054 15 mg group, respectively. Discordance between results for time to progression and overall survival may be due to the sensitivity of the definition of progression. Adverse events were in line with the expected pharmacologic effects of an ETAR antagonist. CONCLUSIONS The primary end point of time to progression was not achieved in this study, but an improvement was seen in overall survival in both active treatment arms. ZD4054 was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00090363.

Final safety and efficacy analysis of the specific endothelin A receptor antagonist zibotentan (ZD4054) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases who were pain-free or mildly symptomatic for pain: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase II trial

Study Type – Therapy (RCT)
Level of Evidence 1b

Enzalutamide Versus Bicalutamide in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: The STRIVE Trial

PURPOSE Enzalutamide, a potent oral androgen receptor inhibitor, improves survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) before and after chemotherapy. Bicalutamide, a nonsteroidal antiandrogen, is widely used to treat men with nonmetastatic or metastatic CRPC. The efficacy and safety of these drugs were compared in this randomized, double-blind, phase II study of men with CRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 396 men with nonmetastatic (n = 139) or metastatic (n = 257) CRPC were randomly assigned to enzalutamide 160 mg per day (n = 198) or bicalutamide 50 mg per day (n = 198). Androgen deprivation therapy was continued in both arms. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Enzalutamide reduced the risk of progression or death by 76% compared with bicalutamide (hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.32; P < .001). Median PFS was 19.4 months with enzalutamide versus 5.7 months with bicalutamide. Enzalutamide resulted in significant improvements in all key secondary end points: time to prostate-specific antigen progression (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.26; P < .001); proportion of patients with a ≥ 50% prostate-specific antigen response (81% v 31%; P < .001); and radiographic PFS in metastatic patients (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.50; P < .001). Beneficial effects with enzalutamide were observed in both nonmetastatic and metastatic subgroups. The observed adverse event profile was consistent with that from phase III enzalutamide trials. CONCLUSION Enzalutamide significantly reduced risk of prostate cancer progression or death compared with bicalutamide in patients with nonmetastatic or metastatic CRPC.

Effect of enzalutamide on health-related quality of life, pain, and skeletal-related events in asymptomatic and minimally symptomatic, chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PREVAIL): results from a randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Enzalutamide significantly increased overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival compared with placebo in the PREVAIL trial of asymptomatic and minimally symptomatic, chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We report the effect of enzalutamide on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pain, and skeletal-related events observed during this trial. METHODS In this phase 3, double-blind trial, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive enzalutamide 160 mg/day (n=872) or placebo (n=845) orally. HRQoL was assessed at baseline and during treatment using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and EQ-5D questionnaires. Pain status was assessed at screening, baseline, week 13, and week 25 with the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF). The primary analysis of HRQoL data used a mixed-effects model to test the difference between least square means change from baseline at week 61. We assessed change from baseline, percentage improvement, and time to deterioration in HRQoL and pain, the proportion of patients with a skeletal-related event, and time to first skeletal-related event. Analysis was done on the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01212991. FINDINGS Median treatment duration was 16·6 months (IQR 10·1-21·1) in the enzalutamide group and 4·6 months (2·8-9·7) in the placebo group. The mixed-effects model analyses showed significant treatment differences in change from baseline to week 61 with enzalutamide compared with placebo for most FACT-P endpoints and EQ-5D visual analogue scale. Median time to deterioration in FACT-P total score was 11·3 months (95% CI 11·1-13·9) in the enzalutamide group and 5·6 months (5·5-5·6) in the placebo groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0·62 [95% CI 0·54-0·72]; p<0·0001). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the enzalutamide group than in the placebo group reported clinically meaningful improvements in FACT-P total score (327 [40%] of 826 vs 181 [23%] of 790), in EQ-5D utility index (224 [28%] of 812 vs 99 [16%] of 623), and visual analogue scale (218 [27%] of 803 vs 106 of [18%] 603; all p<0·0001). Median time to progression in BPI-SF pain at its worst was 5·7 months (95% CI 5·6-5·7) in the enzalutamide group and 5·6 months (5·4-5·6) in the placebo group (HR 0·62 [95% CI 0·53-0·74]; p<0·0001). Progression of pain at its worst was less common in the enzalutamide group than in the placebo group at week 13 (220 [29%] of 769 vs 257 [42%] of 610; p<0·0001), but not at week 25 (225 [32%] of 705 vs 135 [38%] of 360; p=0·068). 278 (32%) of 872 patients in the enzalutamide group and 309 (37%) of 845 patients in the placebo group had experienced a skeletal-related event by data cutoff. Median time to first skeletal-related events in the enzalutamide group was 31·1 months (95% CI 29·5-not reached) and 31·3 months (95% CI 23·9-not reached) in the placebo group (HR 0·72 [95% CI 0·61-0·84]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION In addition to improving overall survival relative to placebo, enzalutamide significantly improves patient-related outcomes and delays occurrence of first skeletal-related event in chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING Astellas Pharma and Medivation.

Efficacy and safety of enzalutamide versus bicalutamide for patients with metastatic prostate cancer (TERRAIN): a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND Enzalutamide is an oral androgen-receptor inhibitor that has been shown to improve survival in two placebo-controlled phase 3 trials, and is approved for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The objective of the TERRAIN study was to compare the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide with bicalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS TERRAIN was a double-blind, randomised phase 2 study, that recruited asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic men with prostate cancer progression on androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) from academic, community, and private health-care provision sites across North America and Europe. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive enzalutamide 160 mg/day or bicalutamide 50 mg/day, both taken orally, in addition to ADT, until disease progression. Patients were stratified by a permutated block method (block size of four), by whether bilateral orchiectomy or receipt of luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist therapy started before or after the diagnosis of metastases, and by study site. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed in all randomised patients. Safety outcomes were analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The open-label period of the trial is in progress, wherein patients still on treatment at the end of the double-blind treatment period were offered open-label enzalutamide at the discretion of the patient and study investigator. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01288911. FINDINGS Between March 22, 2011, and July 11, 2013, 375 patients were randomly assigned, 184 to enzalutamide and 191 to bicalutamide. 126 (68%) and 168 (88%) patients, respectively, discontinued their assigned treatment before study end, mainly due to progressive disease. Median follow-up time was 20·0 months (IQR 15·0-25·6) in the enzalutamide group and 16·7 months (10·2-21·9) in the bicalutamide group. Patients in the enzalutamide group had significantly improved median progression-free survival (15·7 months [95% CI 11·5-19·4]) compared with patients in the bicalutamide group (5·8 months [4·8-8·1]; hazard ratio 0·44 [95% CI 0·34-0·57]; p<0·0001). Of the most common adverse events, those occurring more frequently with enzalutamide than with bicalutamide were fatigue (51 [28%] of 183 patients in the enzalutamide group vs 38 [20%] of 189 in the bicalutamide group), back pain (35 [19%] vs 34 [18%]), and hot flush (27 [15%] vs 21 [11%]); those occurring more frequently with bicalutamide were nausea (26 [14%] vs 33 [17%]), constipation (23 [13%] vs 25 [13%]), and arthralgia (18 [10%] vs 30 [16%]). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the enzalutamide or bicalutamide treatment groups, respectively, were hypertension (13 [7%] vs eight [4%]), hydronephrosis (three [2%] vs seven [4%]), back pain (five [3%] vs three [2%]), pathological fracture (five [3%] vs two [1%]), dyspnoea (four [2%] vs one [1%]), bone pain (one [1%] vs four [2%]), congestive cardiac failure (four [2%] vs two [1%]), myocardial infarction (five [3%] vs none), and anaemia (four [2%] vs none]). Serious adverse events were reported by 57 (31%) of 183 patients and 44 (23%) of 189 patients in the enzalutamide and bicalutamide groups, respectively. One of the nine deaths in the enzalutamide group was thought to be possibly related to treatment (due to systemic inflammatory response syndrome) compared with none of the three deaths in the bicalutamide group. INTERPRETATION The data from the TERRAIN trial support the use of enzalutamide rather than bicalutamide in patients with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING Astellas Pharma, Inc and Medivation, Inc.

Enzalutamide monotherapy in hormone-naive prostate cancer: primary analysis of an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND The androgen receptor inhibitor enzalutamide is approved for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that has progressed on docetaxel. Our aim was to assess the activity and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy in men with hormone-naive prostate cancer. METHODS This trial is an ongoing open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, done across 12 European sites. Men aged over 18 years, with hormone-naive prostate cancer for whom hormone therapy was indicated, and who had non-castration levels of testosterone and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 2 ng/mL or greater at screening, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0, received oral enzalutamide 160 mg/day. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with an 80% or greater decline in PSA at week 25. All analyses included all patients who had received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01302041. FINDINGS 67 men were enrolled into the study. 62 patients (92.5%, 95% CI 86.2-98.8) had a decline in PSA of 80% or greater at week 25. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events up to week 25 were gynaecomastia (n=24), fatigue (n=23), nipple pain (n=13), and hot flush (n=12), all of which were of mild to moderate severity. Nine patients had a treatment-emergent adverse event of grade 3 or higher, most of which were reported in one patient each, except for pneumonia (grade 3, two patients) and hypertension (grade 3, four patients). Five patients reported serious adverse events, none of which were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION Our findings suggest that enzalutamide monotherapy in men with hormone-naive prostate cancer of varying severity provides a level of disease suppression, and was generally well tolerated. These findings provide a rationale for further investigation of clinical response and outcomes with enzalutamide in non-castrate men with prostate cancer.

Efficacy and safety of enzalutamide in patients 75 years or older with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from PREVAIL

BACKGROUND Prostate cancer disproportionately affects older men. Because age affects treatment decisions, it is important to understand the efficacy and tolerability of therapies for advanced prostate cancer in elderly men. This analysis describes efficacy and safety outcomes in men aged ≥75 years who received enzalutamide, an androgen receptor inhibitor, in the phase III PREVAIL trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS PREVAIL was a randomised, double-blind, multinational study of oral enzalutamide 160 mg/day (N = 872) versus placebo (N = 845) in chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) were coprimary end points. Subgroup analysis of men aged ≥75 years (elderly) and men aged <75 years was pre-specified for the coprimary end points and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS Among 609 elderly patients (35%) who participated in PREVAIL, median treatment duration was 16.6 and 5.0 months in the enzalutamide and placebo arms, respectively. In the elderly subgroup, OS was greater with enzalutamide than with placebo [32.4 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 27.7-not yet reached] versus 25.1 months (95% CI 22.6-28.0); hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61 (95% CI 0.47-0.79); P = 0.0001], as was rPFS [not yet reached (95% CI 12.3-not yet reached) versus 3.7 months (95% CI 3.6-5.3); HR = 0.17 (95% CI 0.12-0.24); P < 0.0001]. Irrespective of treatment assignment, incidence of AEs was similar between the two age groups, except for an overall higher incidence of falls among elderly patients than younger patients [84/609 (13.8%) versus 62/1106 (5.6%)] and among elderly patients receiving enzalutamide than those receiving placebo [61/317 (19.2%) versus 23/292 (7.9%)]. CONCLUSIONS Elderly men benefited from treatment with enzalutamide in terms of OS and rPFS. Enzalutamide was well tolerated in the elderly subgroup and those aged <75 years. Age and enzalutamide treatment were associated with a higher incidence of falls. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER NCT01212991, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Enzalutamide in men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND Men with nonmetastatic, castration‐resistant prostate cancer and a rapidly rising prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level are at high risk for metastasis. We hypothesized that enzalutamide, which prolongs overall survival among patients with metastatic, castration‐resistant prostate cancer, would delay metastasis in men with nonmetastatic, castration‐resistant prostate cancer and a rapidly rising PSA level. METHODS In this double‐blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, men with nonmetastatic, castration‐resistant prostate cancer and a PSA doubling time of 10 months or less who were continuing androgen‐deprivation therapy to receive enzalutamide (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo once daily. The primary end point was metastasis‐free survival (defined as the time from randomization to radiographic progression or as the time to death without radiographic progression). RESULTS A total of 1401 patients (median PSA doubling time, 3.7 months) underwent randomization. As of June 28, 2017, a total of 219 of 933 patients (23%) in the enzalutamide group had metastasis or had died, as compared with 228 of 468 (49%) in the placebo group. The median metastasis‐free survival was 36.6 months in the enzalutamide group versus 14.7 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.24 to 0.35; P<0.001). The time to the first use of a subsequent antineoplastic therapy was longer with enzalutamide treatment than with placebo (in 142 vs. 226 patients; hazard ratio, 0.21; P<0.001) as was the time to PSA progression (in 208 vs. 324 patients; hazard ratio, 0.07; P<0.001). At the first interim analysis of overall survival, 103 patients (11%) receiving enzalutamide and 62 (13%) receiving placebo had died. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 31% of the patients receiving enzalutamide, as compared with 23% of those receiving placebo. CONCLUSIONS Among men with nonmetastatic, castration‐resistant prostate cancer with a rapidly rising PSA level, enzalutamide treatment led to a clinically meaningful and significant 71% lower risk of metastasis or death than placebo. Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profile of enzalutamide. (Funded by Pfizer and Astellas Pharma; PROSPER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02003924.)

Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Enzalutamide Monotherapy in Hormone-naïve Prostate Cancer: 1- and 2-Year Open-label Follow-up Results.

BACKGROUND Enzalutamide is an androgen receptor inhibitor with a demonstrated overall survival benefit in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. A phase 2 study of enzalutamide monotherapy in patients with hormone-naïve prostate cancer (HNPC) showed a high response rate for the prespecified primary endpoint (ie, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] response at week 25), regardless of metastases at baseline, and favorable tolerability. OBJECTIVE To determine the long-term efficacy and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy at 1 and 2 yr. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Open-label, single-arm study in patients with HNPC and noncastrate testosterone (≥230 ng/dl). INTERVENTION Oral enzalutamide 160mg/d until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS PSA response (≥80% decline from baseline) assessed at 1 yr (49 wk) and 2 yr (97 wk). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The median (range) age was 73 (48-86) yr and 26 patients (39%) presented with metastases at study entry. Of 67 patients enrolled, 45 (67%) remained on enzalutamide at week 97. For patients remaining on therapy, the PSA response rate at week 97 was 100% (95% confidence interval 92-100%). Of 26 patients with metastases at baseline, 13 (50%) had a complete and four (15.4%) had a partial response as best overall tumor response up to 97 wk on treatment. There was overall maintenance of total-body bone mineral density (BMD) and moderate changes in lean and fat body mass at 49 and 97 wk. The most common adverse events were gynecomastia, nipple pain, fatigue, and hot flushes. The study limitations include lack of a control group and of endocrine, glycemic, and lipid data at 97 wk. CONCLUSIONS Long-term enzalutamide monotherapy in men with noncastrate HNPC is associated with large sustained reductions in PSA, signals indicating a favorable tumor response, and favorable safety/tolerability profile, with relatively small negative effects on total-body BMD. PATIENT SUMMARY In this long-term follow-up of the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide monotherapy in patients with hormone-naïve prostate cancer, enzalutamide maintained long-term reductions in prostate-specific antigen, with a minimal impact on total-body bone mineral density. TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT01302041.