Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
esmo.org
MCRPC;
Choosing and sequencing drugs
in Practise
Ronald de Wit
ErasmusMC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam NL
DISCLOSURE SLIDE
- Consultancy,
Sanofi, Merck, Lilly, Bayer, Janssen, Roche, Clovis
- Speaker fees
- Sanofi, Merck
-
- Institutional financial interests,
- Sanofi,Bayer
2004: TAX 327 Survival benefit despite confounding effects on OS
Improved median survival by 2.9 months: • as compared with alternativeeffective treatment (mitoxantrone)• despite 30% crossover• despite imperfect design
(first PSA evaluation at 6 weeks)
Tannock et al, N Engl J Med 2004; 1502-1512Berthold et al , J Clin Oncol 2008; 242-245
Docetaxel exposure and OS in mCRPCPhase II study in Asiatic patients ( n:229)
Docetaxel (75 )/ pred vs Mitoxantrone/ pred (as TAX327).
gr ≥3 neutropenia almost twice as TAX327 (57.7% versus 32%)
OS benefit was 8 months (21.9 versus 13.7 months, HR 0.63)
Ti Zou et al, Plos one 2015
Phase III clinical trials in mCRPC
Optimal choice and sequence of current agents undefined
• Most trials conducted in parallel
• Optimal sequence undefined
• OS benefit likely smaller in subsequent lines of treatment;
is there any benefit to be expected in 3rd or even 4th line?
Limited efficacy of crossing over between AR targeted agents
Enza: enzalutamide; ABI: abiraterone acetate; DOC: docetaxel
Author Yearpublished
N pts MedianABI duration
� PSA≥50%
Median PFS
No prior ENZA
De Bono et al.1
(COU-AA-302) 2011 797 8 mo 29% 5.6 mo
ENZA �ABI
Loriot et al.2 2013 38 3 mo 8% 2.7 mo
Noonan et al.3 2013 30 3 mo 3% 3.6 mo
1. De Bono et al. NEJM 2011;364:1995-2005; 2. Loriot Y et al. Ann Oncol 2013;24:1807-12; 3. Noonan KL et al. Ann Oncol 2013;24:1802-7
Poor response to ABI in patients progressing on ENZ A
Author Yearpublished
N pts MedianENZ duration
� PSA≥50%
Median PFS
No prior ABI
Scher et al.1 2012 800 8.3 mo 54% 8.3 mo
ABI � ENZ
Schrader et al.2 2013 35 4.9 mo 29% -
Thomsen et al.3 2014 24 4.0 mo 17% 2.8 mo
Badrising et al.4 2014 61 3.0 mo 21% 2.8 mo
Bianchini et al.5 2014 39 2.9 mo 23% 2.8 mo
Schmid et al.6 2014 35 2.8 mo 10% 3.1 mo
Azad et al.7 2015 68 4.1 mo 22% 4.6 mo
Brasso et al.8 2014 137 3.2 mo 18% -
Joshua et al.9 2015 507 2.6 mo - -1. Scher HI. NEJM 2012; 2. Schrader AJ. Eur Urol 2014; 3. Thomsen F. Scand J Urol 2014;. Badrising S. Cancer 2014; 5. Bianchini D. Eur J Cancer 2014; 6. Schmid SC. Adv Ther 2014; 7. Azad AA. Eur Urol 2015; 8. Brasso K. Eur Urol 2014 9. Joshua A. Prostate 2015
Poor response to ENZA in patients progressing on AB I
Cross-resistance between ART
� PLATO - Prospective, phase IV, double-blind, Pbo-controlled trial in 251 chemo-naïve mCRPCwith PSA response to ENZA >3 months
� Randomized at PSA progression to ENZA+ABI/P vs Pbo+ABI/P
� PFS* (primary endpoint): 5.7 vs 5.6 months, P=0.22
Attard G et al. J Clin Oncol 2018 ; 36: 2639-46
Best PSA response
*PFS: progression free survival (radiological progression or unequivocal clinical progression)
100
75
50
25
0
PS
A C
ha
ng
e F
rom
Ba
seli
ne
, %
-25
-50
-75
-100
ENZA+ABI/P
� PSA ≥50% = 0.8%
Pbo+ABI/P
�PSA ≥50% = 2.5%
Is a taxane in between the cross-over reversing cross-resistance to ART?
Miyake H et al. Clin. GU Cancer 2016; 15: e217-22016
ART (ABI or ENZA)
in first-line
ART � DOC � ART
(response with 2nd ART)
63.6% 29.6%20.6%
ART � ART
(response with 2nd ART)
Best PSA response
302 patients with chemonaive mCRPC treated with new AR-targeted agents (ART) , ABI or ENZA
Optimal choice and sequence of current agents undefined
• Most trials conducted in parallel
• Optimal sequence undefined
• OS benefit likely smaller in subsequent lines of treatment;
is there any benefit to be expected in 3rd or even 4th line?
Limited efficacy of crossing over between AR targeted agents
• Need for biomarkers for response on taxanes and AR targeted agents
Primary resistance to AR-targeted agents
1. De Bono et al. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1995–2005; 2. Scher H et al. N Engl J Med 2012; ;367:1187-97 PFS: progression-free survival
Potential but not yet validated biomarkersof resistance to ART
Antonarakis ES et al. NEJM 2014;371:1028-38; Antonarakis ES et al. JAMA Oncol 2015;1:582-91 CTC: circulating tumor cell
PSA response rate:
AR-V7 positive: 0% (95% CI: 0-26%)
AR-V7 negative: 52.6% (95%CI: 29-76%)
P=0.004
PSA response rate:
AR-V7 positive: 0% (95% CI: 0-46%)
AR-V7 negative: 68.0% (95% CI: 46-85%)
P=0.004
PSA response rate:
AR-V7 positive: 41% (95% CI: 18-67%)
AR-V7 negative: 65% (95%CI: 41-85%)
P=0.19
AR-V7 positive AR-V7 negative
Abiraterone Enzalutamide Taxane*
PS
A c
ha
ng
e,
%
100
50
–50
–
100
100
5
0
0
–50
–100
100
5
0
0
–50
–100
*Docetaxel, N=30
Cabazitaxel, N=7
Initial Gleason score may guide treatment choice in chemo-naive mCRPC patients
1. van Soest R et al Eur Urol 2013 (epub ahead of print); 2. Fizazi K, J Clin Oncol 2014; 32 (suppl 4): abstract 20; Mo: months; P: prednisone
Short response to first ADT may predict poor response to Enzalutamide
( Oudard, discussant ESMO 2017)
Retrospective cohort of 173 patients, including 57 treated with enzalutamide in AFFIRM trial
TTCRPC: time to castration resistance; PFS: progression-free survival
Loriot Y et al. Eur J Cancer 2015 sept ; 51(14): 1946-52
Sequence of progression events
� Clinical Sequence of events is known in men treated with ART
� Influence of type of progression on overall survival in men treated with first-line chemotherapy; not documented
Ryan C, Smith M, de Bono J et al. Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy. N EnglJ Med. 2013;368(2):138–48. Beer T, Armstrong A, Rathkopf D et al. Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy. Med, N Engl J. 2014;371(5):424–33.
Primary resistance – How to identify?
� PSA is a pharmacodynamic measureof AR signaling1 � PSA falls when AR signalling is blocked
1. Rescigno P et al, Eur Urol. 2016: 724-731; 2. Fuerea A et al, Eur J Cancer 2016; 61: 44-51
• No PSA decline ≥ 30% at 1 month with ART associated with poor OS 1-2
� Imaging
� Bryce AH et al, Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2017; 20: 221-227
Of 265 chemonaive mCRPC patients with radiological
progression and evaluable PSA levels on enzalutamide,
65 (24.4%) had a non rising PSA
Regular imaging is needed +++
Bryce AH et al, Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2017; 20: 221-227
Post-hoc analysis of VENICE and TAX327
To explore the prognostic impact of type of progres sion at initiation of first-line chemotherapy on overall survival
� VENICE - training dataset
n = 1224
1st line DOC + aflibercept or placebo
� TAX-327 - validation dataset
n = 1006
1st line 3w DOC vs 1w DOC vs mitoxantrone
Robbrecht et al , ESMO 2018 poster
Post-hoc analysis of VENICE and TAX327
Type of progression at baseline:
Group 1 PSA progression only
Group 2 - Radiological progression (+/- PSA progression)
Group 3 - Clinical progression based on pain
(+/- PSA progression, +/- radiological progression)
• Radiological or clinical progression defined by PCWG2 criteria
• Pain recorded by using the Present Pain Intensity scale + analgesic score
• Clinical progression = main PPI of ≥ 2 and/or mean AS of ≥ 10
Results
Median OS in 3w DOC arm: 29.4, 24.4 and 15.5 months in G1, G2 and G3 resp. (p <0.001)
(p < 0.001)
(p < 0.001)
Median OS in 3w DOC arm:Not reached, 21.8 and 15.5 months in G1, G2 and G3, resp. (p<0.001)
Sequence of progression events duringdocetaxel treatment
PSA progression first event in 45-57%
* irrespective of type of progression at baseline
~50% clinical ór radiological progression first event during treatment, irrespective of baseline type of progression
~ 30% clinical progression preceding radiological progression
No association between type of progression at baseline and a specific sequenceof progression events during treatment
DO NOT RELY ON PSA ALONE
Optimal choice and sequence of current agents undefined
• Most trials conducted in parallel
• Optimal sequence undefined
• OS benefit likely smaller in subsequent lines of treatment;
is there any benefit to be expected in 3rd or even 4th line?
Limited efficacy of crossing over between AR targeted agents
• Need for biomarkers for response on taxanes and AR targeted agents
• Cross resistance between ART and taxanes
Cross resistance between taxanesand AR targeted agents
in vivo model of CRPC with acquired resistance to e nzalutamide
Van Soest, de Wit et al. Eur Urol 2014
Impaired Efficacy of Docetaxel Post-Abiraterone
1. Tannock et al. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14:760-8; 2. Mezynski & De Bono Annal Oncol 2012. 23: 2943–2947; 3. Schweizer MT et al. Eur Urol 2014; 66:646-52; 4. Azad et al. The Prostate 2014; 74:1544-1550; 5. De Bono et al. Eur Urol 2017
Cabazitaxel remains active in patients progressing with an AR -targeted agent
Progression-free survival Overall survival
Prospective, randomized phase 2 study of cabazitaxel± budesonide
Van Soest et al. Eur Urol 2016
1st line taxane phase III study ; FIRSTANA (ASCO 2016)
FIRSTANA: Overall Survival
FIRSTANA: Prior Treatment
1st line taxane in mCRPC
� Cabazitaxel 20mg and 25mg show a similar OS benefit as
Docetaxel in a non resistant population
( only 2% of patients treated with prior ABI or ENZA)
� 1 st line efficacy of Cabazitaxel as compared to Docetaxel in patients
progressing after ABI or ENZA is not known
If there is no benefit after 3 cycles of docetaxel in a post-abi/enza setting
consider to switch to cabazitaxel ( 20mg /m2)
ALSYMPCA Phase III Study Design
ALSYMPCA (ALpharadin in SYMptomatic Prostate CAncer)Phase 3, multinational, multicenter, randomized, do uble-blind, placebo-controlled study
(149 sites ; USA, Europe, Australia, Latin America, Canada & Asia)
900 patients with HRPC & skeletal metastases (≥ 2
hot spots)
No intention to use cytotoxic
chemotherapy within the next 6
months
Regular analgesia for cancer related
bone pain or treatment with EBRT for bone
pain
Randomised 2:1
Alpharadin 50 kBq/kg bw6 IV doses
Placebo 6 IV doses
Best supportive care
Best supportive care
Primary end point:
• OS
Secondary end points:• TTPP
• TTP in total-ALP• Safety• HRQoL
www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCTNCT00699751Targeted Therapy, 28 maart 2013
ALSYMPCA: Survival benefit across patient subgroups
Targeted Therapy, 28 maart 2013
Variable Subgroup N Hazard ratio HR 95% CIAll patients 809 0.695 0.552-0.875
Total ALP <220 U/L 452 0.691 0.497-0.962≥220 U/L 357 0.689 0.504-0.941
Current use of bisphosphonates Yes 331 0.582 0.397-0.85 4
No 478 0.752 0.567-0.999
Prior use of docetaxel Yes 470 0.755 0.565-1.009No 339 0.611 0.423-0.883
Baseline ECOG status 0 or 1 696 0.691 0.535-0.8922 or higher 110 0.731 0.398-1.343
0 0.5 1 1.5 2Favours
Radium-223Favours placebo
14 years of progress in theManagement of Prostate Cancer
� mCRPC; 2011 paradigm shift
Novel AR targeted agents
pre-chemotherapy
� mHSPC; 2014 paradigm shift
Docetaxel in addition to ADT
in men presenting with M1 disease
� mHSPC; 2017 shift addition of abiraterone to ADT
Combination of ADT and docetaxel
CHAARTED (M1) STAMPEDE (M0/M1)
Phase III randomized trial in 790 men with metastastic hormone-naïve PCa
Phase III randomized trial in M0/M1 patientswith hormone-naïve PCa
DOC: Docetaxel
1Sweeney C et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:737-46; 2James N et al. Lancet. 2015, December
ADT +/- abiraterone(AA)+P in mHSPC ; LATITUDE
mCRPC post CHAARTED/ LATITUDE 2018 treatment options
In many cases, treatment sequence in metastatic PCa likely to be as follows:
Need to define what is the optimal sequence(AR-targeted agent or CABA in 3rd line)
OR
1t line 2nd line 3rd line
GETUG 15 in metastatic HS PCaActivity of subsequent therapies
Lavaud P et al. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34 (suppl); abstract 5080
Modest PSA response and PFS in patients initially treated with ADT+DOC and rechallenged with DOC at disease progression
> Do NOT rechallenge
Short response to first ADT may predict poor response to Enzalutamide
( Oudard, discussant ESMO 2017)
Retrospective cohort of 173 patients, including 57 treated with enzalutamide in AFFIRM trial
TTCRPC: time to castration resistance; PFS: progression-free survival
Loriot Y et al. Eur J Cancer 2015 sept ; 51(14): 1946-52
CABA is effective in patients progressingduring or rapidly after last DOC cycle
CABA also acts in cases of primary resistance to DO C3
Subgroup analysis of the TROPIC (Overall survival) N HR (95% CI)
Progression during treatment with DOC 219 0.71 (0.53-0.96)
Progression <3 months after the last DOC cycle 339 0.70 (0.56-0.89)
In favour of CABA In favour of mito
0.25 0.5 1.00 2.00
TROPIC trial 1-2
1. De Bono J et al. Lancet 2010;376:1147-54 2. Oudard S et al. Future Oncol 2011;7:497-506
3. Di Lorenzo G et al. Eur Urol 2014;65:502-7
post CHAARTED/ STAMPEDE(doce) 2018 treatment
� For pts > 12 months response duration on ADT
reasonable option AR-targeted therapy
(subsequent line would be cabazitaxel)
� For pts< 12 months response duration on ADT choice would
appear cabazitaxel
ADT +/- abiraterone(AA)+P in mHSPC ; LATITUDE
LATITUDE subsequent life-prolonging therapy
Concern with design:double-blind
study !! (abi vs no abi)
>
*Patients who discontinued treatment and were eligible for subsequent therapy.
In 2018 Multiple Choices and Sequences
• mHSPC early taxane /late taxane /early abi/late abi
• mCRPC abi/enza (ART) predoce/ postdoce/pre/postcaba
• mCRPC Radium 223 post ART pre/ post taxane
• >Even after 4 lines many mCRPC patients opt to receive systemic therapies
• >New avenues: PSMA guided therapy
Molecular targeted therapies
Immunotherapy
Genomic data on prostate cancer
Cell, Volume 161, Issue 5, 21 May 2015, Pages 1215–1228
CPCT: Dutch Collab. study WGS 197pts
Future studies and hopefully treatment will be increasingly biology directed!
Remainder at this time : ART and taxanes
Rationale combining taxaneswith ART? ; yes
� Ongoing phase Ib- III clinical studies
Tagawa et al, Eur Urol 2016 ; Abiraterone + Docetaxel, ph 1b PSA RR: 85%
Massard et al. Ann Onco 2017; Abiraterone + Cabazitaxel PSA RR: 46%
ABIDO trial, Spain; Abiraterone + Docetaxel ongoing
CABA ENZA trial, UK; phase I/II trial,
Doce + Enza , as well as Caba + enza randomized phase II ongoing
Several more
NEED TO AWAIT PHASE 3 RESULTS
Influence of Enzalutamide on CabazitaxelPharmacokinetics
a Drug–Drug Interaction Study in mCRPC Patients
Belderbos , de Wit et al , Clin Cancer Res 2017; 24(3); 541–6
Combination Taxane with ART
� NO standard
� ONLY in context clinical trials
� That need to be well designed , incorporating drug-drug interaction data
� Cabazitaxel 20 mg/m2 is not inferior to 25 mg/m2 for OS * � however if 20 is used with enza this results in sub-
therapeutical levels of cabazitaxel
* PROSELICA De Bono et al. JCO 2016
Management of mCRPC
� 14 years of progress
� Many new agents, some remaining questions about sequence
� New avenues that need to be tested in well designed Phase III trials
� Future studies will be increasingly biology directed
esmo.org
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS