Prabir Chakraborti

Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): Survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

Summary Background Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone. Methods Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m2) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544). Findings 2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60–71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23–184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30–60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79–1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66–0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69–0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3–5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc. Interpretation Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy. Funding Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

Abiraterone for prostate cancer not previously treated with hormone therapy

Background Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone improves survival in men with relapsed prostate cancer. We assessed the effect of this combination in men starting long‐term androgen‐deprivation therapy (ADT), using a multigroup, multistage trial design. Methods We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive ADT alone or ADT plus abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and prednisolone (5 mg daily) (combination therapy). Local radiotherapy was mandated for patients with node‐negative, nonmetastatic disease and encouraged for those with positive nodes. For patients with nonmetastatic disease with no radiotherapy planned and for patients with metastatic disease, treatment continued until radiologic, clinical, or prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) progression; otherwise, treatment was to continue for 2 years or until any type of progression, whichever came first. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. The intermediate primary outcome was failure‐free survival (treatment failure was defined as radiologic, clinical, or PSA progression or death from prostate cancer). Results A total of 1917 patients underwent randomization from November 2011 through January 2014. The median age was 67 years, and the median PSA level was 53 ng per milliliter. A total of 52% of the patients had metastatic disease, 20% had node‐positive or node‐indeterminate nonmetastatic disease, and 28% had node‐negative, nonmetastatic disease; 95% had newly diagnosed disease. The median follow‐up was 40 months. There were 184 deaths in the combination group as compared with 262 in the ADT‐alone group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.76; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.75 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.61 in those with metastatic disease. There were 248 treatment‐failure events in the combination group as compared with 535 in the ADT‐alone group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.34; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.21 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.31 in those with metastatic disease. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 47% of the patients in the combination group (with nine grade 5 events) and in 33% of the patients in the ADT‐alone group (with three grade 5 events). Conclusions Among men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer, ADT plus abiraterone and prednisolone was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and failure‐free survival than ADT alone. (Funded by Cancer Research U.K. and others; STAMPEDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00268476, and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN78818544.)

Osteonecrosis of the Jaw and Oral Health–Related Quality of Life After Adjuvant Zoledronic Acid: An Adjuvant Zoledronic Acid to Reduce Recurrence Trial Subprotocol (BIG01/04)

PURPOSE In patients with early breast cancer, adjuvant zoledronic acid (zoledronate) may reduce recurrence and improve survival. However, zoledronate is associated with the occasional development of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). We report on the frequency of ONJ and investigate oral health-related quality of life (Oral-QoL) in a large randomized trial (Adjuvant Zoledronic Acid to Reduce Recurrence [AZURE]). PATIENTS AND METHODS Three thousand three hundred sixty women with stage II or III breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive standard adjuvant systemic therapy alone or with zoledronate administered at a dose of 4 mg for 19 doses over 5 years. All potential occurrences of ONJ were reported as serious adverse events and centrally reviewed. Additionally, we invited 486 study participants to complete the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) to assess Oral-QoL around the time the patients completed 5 years on study. Multivariable linear regression was used to calculate mean scores and 95% CIs in addition to identifying independent prognostic factors. RESULTS With a median follow-up time of 73.9 months (interquartile range, 60.7 to 84.2 months), 33 possible cases of ONJ were reported, all in the zoledronate-treated patients. Twenty-six cases were confirmed as being consistent with a diagnosis of ONJ, representing a cumulative incidence of 2.1% (95% CI, 0.9% to 3.3%) in the zoledronate arm. Three hundred sixty-two patients (74%) returned the OHIP-14 questionnaire. Neither the prevalence nor severity of impacts on Oral-QoL differed significantly between zoledronate patients and control patients. CONCLUSION Adjuvant zoledronate used in the intensive schedule studied in the AZURE trial is associated with a low incidence of ONJ but does not seem to adversely affect Oral-QoL.

Clinical outcomes in patients with castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) metastatic to bone randomized in the factorial TRAPEZE trial to docetaxel (D) with strontium-89 (Sr89), zoledronic acid (ZA), neither, or both (ISRCTN 12808747).

LBA5000 Background: Bony metastatic CRPC has a poor prognosis and high morbidity. TRAPEZE is a factorial RCT using three agents, D, ZA, and Sr89. All have palliative benefits and are used in bony metastatic CRPC to control bone symptoms and (for D) to prolong survival. ZA was approved on the basis of reducing skeletal related events (SRE). Sr89 was approved to control pain from metastases and to reduce the need for subsequent bone treatments. ZA is commonly combined with D in practice but evidence that the combination is effective is lacking and costs considerable. Sr89 is generally used as a palliative therapy in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase II analysis confirmed the safety and feasibility of combining these agents. TRAPEZE aimed to determine clinical and cost-effectiveness scheduling. METHODS Patients were randomised to receive 6 cycles of D plus prednisolone: alone; with ZA; with a single dose of Sr89 after cycle 6 or both. Primary outcomes were clinical progression-free survival (CPFS: pain progression, SRE or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were SRE free interval (SREFI); total SREs, and overall survival (OS). The log rank test and Cox regression modelling were used to determine clinical effectiveness. RESULTS TRAPEZE randomised 757 patients; median age 68.7 yrs; ECOG 0: 40% 1: 52% 2: 8%; prior RT 45%; median PSA 144 (IQR 51, 354). Provisional stratified log rank analysis of CPFS did not reach statistical significance for either agent (Sr89 p=0.11, ZA p=0.45). Cox regression analysis adjusted for all stratification variables showed benefit of Sr89 on CPFS (HR=0.845; 95%CI 0.72, 0.99, p=0.036) and confirmed no effect of ZA (p=0.46). ZA did show a significant effect on SREFI (HR=0.76; 95%CI 0.63, 0.93, p=0.008). There was no effect of either agent on overall survival (Sr89 p=0.74, ZA p=0.91). CONCLUSIONS Sr89 after six cycles of docetaxel improved CPFS but not OS. ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but did significantly improve median SREFI, mostly post progression, suggesting a role as post chemotherapy maintenance therapy. Further health economic and QoL analyses are pending. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION 12808747.

TRAPEZE: a randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy with zoledronic acid, strontium-89, or both, in men with bony metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer

BACKGROUND Bony metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer is associated with a poor prognosis and high morbidity. TRAPEZE was a two-by-two factorial randomised controlled trial of zoledronic acid (ZA) and strontium-89 (Sr-89), each combined with docetaxel. All have palliative benefits, are used to control bone symptoms and are used with docetaxel to prolong survival. ZA, approved on the basis of reducing skeletal-related events (SREs), is commonly combined with docetaxel in practice, although evidence of efficacy and cost-effectiveness is lacking. Sr-89, approved for controlling metastatic pain and reducing need for subsequent bone treatments, is generally palliatively used in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase II analysis confirmed the safety and feasibility of combining these agents. TRAPEZE aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of each agent. METHODS Patients were randomised to receive six cycles of docetaxel plus prednisolone: alone, with ZA, with a single Sr-89 dose after cycle 6, or with both. Primary outcomes were clinical progression-free survival (CPFS: time to pain progression, SRE or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were SRE-free interval (SREFI), total SREs, overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL). Log-rank test and Cox regression modelling were used to determine clinical effectiveness. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from the NHS perspective and expressed as cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). An additional analysis was carried out for ZA to reflect the availability of generic ZA. RESULTS PATIENTS 757 randomised (median age 68.7 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale score 0, 40%; 1, 52%; 2, 8%; prior radiotherapy, 45%); median prostate-specific antigen 143.78 ng/ml (interquartile range 50.8-353.9 ng/ml). Stratified log-rank analysis of CPFS was statistically non-significant for either agent (Sr-89, p = 0.11; ZA, p = 0.45). Cox regression analysis adjusted for stratification variables showed CPFS benefit for Sr-89 [hazard ratio (HR) 0.845, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.99; p = 0.036] and confirmed no effect of ZA (p = 0.46). ZA showed a significant SREFI effect (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.93; p = 0.008). Neither agent affected OS (Sr-89, p = 0.74; ZA, p = 0.91), but both increased total cost (vs. no ZA and no Sr-89, respectively); decreased post-trial therapies partly offset costs [net difference: Sr-89 £1341; proprietary ZA (Zometa(®), East Hanover, NJ, USA) £1319; generic ZA £251]. QoL was maintained in all trial arms; Sr-89 (0.08 additional QALYs) and ZA (0.03 additional QALYs) showed slight improvements. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Sr-89 was £16,590, with £42,047 per QALY for Zometa and £8005 per QALY for generic ZA. CONCLUSION Strontium-89 improved CPFS, but not OS. ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but significantly improved SREFI, mostly post progression, suggesting a role as post-chemotherapy maintenance therapy. QoL was well maintained in all treatment arms, with differing patterns of care resulting from the effects of Sr-89 on time to progression and ZA on SREFI and total SREs. The addition of Sr-89 resulted in additional cost and a small positive increase in QALYs, with an ICER below the £20,000 ceiling per QALY. The additional costs and small positive QALY changes in favour of ZA resulted in ICERs of £42,047 (Zometa) and £8005 for the generic alternative; thus, generic ZA represents a cost-effective option. Additional analyses on the basis of data from the Hospital Episode Statistics data set would allow corroborating the findings of this study. Further research into the use of ZA (and other bone-targeting therapies) with newer prostate cancer therapies would be desirable. STUDY REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12808747. FUNDING This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 53. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Clinical Outcomes and Survival Following Treatment of Metastatic Castrate-Refractory Prostate Cancer With Docetaxel Alone or With Strontium-89, Zoledronic Acid, or Both The TRAPEZE Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Bony metastatic castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) has a poor prognosis and high morbidity. Zoledronic acid (ZA) is commonly combined with docetaxel in practice but lacks evidence that combining is effective, and strontium-89 (Sr89) is generally used palliatively in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase 2 analysis of the TRAPEZE trial confirmed combining the agents was safe and feasible, and the objectives of phase 3 include assessment of the treatments on survival. OBJECTIVE To determine clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of combining docetaxel, ZA, and Sr89, all having palliative benefits and used in bony metastatic CRPC to control bone symptoms and, for docetaxel, to prolong survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The TRAPEZE trial is a 2 × 2 factorial trial comparing docetaxel alone or with ZA, Sr89, or both. A cohort of 757 participants were recruited between February 2005 and February 2012 from hospitals in the United Kingdom. Overall, 169 participants (45%) had received palliative radiotherapy, and the median (IQR) prostate-specific antigen level was 146 (51-354). Follow-ups were performed for at least 12 months. INTERVENTIONS Up to 10 cycles of docetaxel alone; docetaxel with ZA; docetaxel with a single Sr89 dose after 6 cycles; or docetaxel with both ZA and Sr89. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcomes included clinical progression-free survival (CPFS) (pain progression, skeletal-related events [SREs], or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes included SRE-free interval, pain progression-free interval, total SREs, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, of 757 participants, 349 (46%) completed docetaxel treatment. Median (IQR) age was 68 (63-73) years. Clinical progression-free survival did not reach statistical significance for either Sr89 or ZA. Cox regression analysis adjusted for all stratification variables showed benefit of Sr89 on CPFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99; P = .03) and confirmed no effect of ZA (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.14; P = .81); ZA had a significant effect on SRE-free interval (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.95; P = .01). For OS, there was no effect of either Sr89 (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.79-1.08; P = 0.34) or ZA (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.84-1.16; P = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Strontium-89 combined with docetaxel improved CPFS but did not improve OS, SRE-free interval, or total SREs; ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but did significantly improve median SRE-free interval and reduced total SREs by around one-third, suggesting a role as postchemotherapy maintenance therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION isrctn.com Identifier: ISRCTN12808747.

Variation in Telangiectasia Predisposing Genes Is Associated With Overall Radiation Toxicity

PURPOSE In patients receiving radiotherapy for breast cancer where the heart is within the radiation field, cutaneous telangiectasiae could be a marker of potential radiation-induced heart disease. We hypothesized that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes known to cause heritable telangiectasia-associated disorders could predispose to such late, normal tissue vascular damage. METHODS AND MATERIALS The relationship between cutaneous telangiectasia as a late normal tissue radiation injury phenotype in 633 breast cancer patients treated with radiotherapy was examined. Patients were clinically assessed for the presence of cutaneous telangiectasia and genotyped at nine SNPs in three candidate genes. Candidate SNPs were within the endoglin (ENG) and activin A receptor, type II-like 1 (ACVRL1) genes, mutations in which cause hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia and the ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) gene associated with ataxia-telangiectasia. RESULTS A total of 121 (19.1%) patients exhibited a degree of cutaneous telangiectasiae on clinical examination. Regression was used to examine the associations between the presence of telangiectasiae in patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery, controlling for the effects of boost and known brassiere size (n=388), and individual geno- or haplotypes. Inheritance of ACVRL1 SNPs marginally contributed to the risk of cutaneous telangiectasiae. Haplotypic analysis revealed a stronger association between inheritance of a ATM haplotype and the presence of cutaneous telangiectasiae, fibrosis and overall toxicity. No significant association was observed between telangiectasiae and the coinheritance of the candidate ENG SNPs. CONCLUSIONS Genetic variation in the ATM gene influences reaction to radiotherapy through both vascular damage and increased fibrosis. The predisposing variation in the ATM gene will need to be better defined to optimize it as a predictive marker for assessing radiotherapy late effects.

Association between single nucleotide polymorphisms in the DNA repair gene LIG3 and acute adverse skin reactions following radiotherapy

Many genes have been associated with radiotherapy toxicity, but most have only been found in a single study. Using our cohort of 480 breast cancer patients, we provide replicated evidence that a polymorphism near the LIG3 gene is associated with acute skin toxicity following radiotherapy.

Adding abiraterone or docetaxel to long-term hormone therapy for prostate cancer: directly randomised data from the STAMPEDE multi-arm, multi-stage platform protocol

Abstract Background Adding abiraterone acetate with prednisolone (AAP) or docetaxel with prednisolone (DocP) to standard-of-care (SOC) each improved survival in systemic therapy for advanced or metastatic prostate cancer: evaluation of drug efficacy: a multi-arm multi-stage platform randomised controlled protocol recruiting patients with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic PCa starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The protocol provides the only direct, randomised comparative data of SOC + AAP versus SOC + DocP. Method Recruitment to SOC + DocP and SOC + AAP overlapped November 2011 to March 2013. SOC was long-term ADT or, for most non-metastatic cases, ADT for ≥2 years and RT to the primary tumour. Stratified randomisation allocated pts 2 : 1 : 2 to SOC; SOC + docetaxel 75 mg/m2 3-weekly×6 + prednisolone 10 mg daily; or SOC + abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + prednisolone 5 mg daily. AAP duration depended on stage and intent to give radical RT. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. This was not a formally powered comparison. A hazard ratio (HR) <1 favours SOC + AAP, and HR > 1 favours SOC + DocP. Results A total of 566 consenting patients were contemporaneously randomised: 189 SOC + DocP and 377 SOC + AAP. The patients, balanced by allocated treatment were: 342 (60%) M1; 429 (76%) Gleason 8–10; 449 (79%) WHO performance status 0; median age 66 years and median PSA 56 ng/ml. With median follow-up 4 years, 149 deaths were reported. For overall survival, HR = 1.16 (95% CI 0.82–1.65); failure-free survival HR = 0.51 (95% CI 0.39–0.67); progression-free survival HR = 0.65 (95% CI 0.48–0.88); metastasis-free survival HR = 0.77 (95% CI 0.57–1.03); prostate cancer-specific survival HR = 1.02 (0.70–1.49); and symptomatic skeletal events HR = 0.83 (95% CI 0.55–1.25). In the safety population, the proportion reporting ≥1 grade 3, 4 or 5 adverse events ever was 36%, 13% and 1% SOC + DocP, and 40%, 7% and 1% SOC + AAP; prevalence 11% at 1 and 2 years on both arms. Relapse treatment patterns varied by arm. Conclusions This direct, randomised comparative analysis of two new treatment standards for hormone-naïve prostate cancer showed no evidence of a difference in overall or prostate cancer-specific survival, nor in other important outcomes such as symptomatic skeletal events. Worst toxicity grade over entire time on trial was similar but comprised different toxicities in line with the known properties of the drugs. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00268476.

Randomized Phase II Study Investigating Pazopanib Versus Weekly Paclitaxel in Relapsed or Progressive Urothelial Cancer.

Purpose Two previous single-arm trials have drawn conflicting conclusions regarding the activity of pazopanib in urothelial cancers after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients and Methods This randomized (1:1) open-label phase II trial compared the efficacy of pazopanib 800 mg orally with paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days) in the second-line setting. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results Between August 2012 and October 2014, 131 patients, out of 140 planned, were randomly assigned. The study was terminated early on the recommendation of the independent data monitoring committee because of futility. Final analysis after the preplanned number of deaths (n = 110) occurred after a median follow-up of 18 months. One hundred fifteen deaths had occurred at the final data extract presented here. Median OS was 8.0 months for paclitaxel (80% CI, 6.9 to 9.7 months) and 4.7 months for pazopanib (80% CI, 4.2 to 6.4 months). The hazard ratio (HR) adjusted for baseline stratification factors was 1.28 (80% CI, 0.99 to 1.67; one-sided P = .89). Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months for paclitaxel (80% CI, 3.0 to 5.6 months) and 3.1 months for pazopanib (80% CI, 2.7 to 4.6 months; HR, 1.09; 80% CI, 0.85 to 1.40; one-sided P = .67). Discontinuations for toxicity occurred in 7.8% and 23.1% for paclitaxel and pazopanib, respectively. Conclusion Pazopanib did not have greater efficacy than paclitaxel in the second-line treatment of urothelial cancers. There was a trend toward superior OS for paclitaxel.