A phase 2 trial of androgen deprivation therapy interruption in patients responding exceptionally to androgen receptor pathway inhibitor in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (A-DREAM / Alliance A032101).
Abstract
5004 Background: Patients (pts) with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) treated continuously with testosterone suppression (TS) plus an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) can experience cumulative toxicity. We conducted this single-arm phase 2 trial (NCT05241860) to test the hypothesis that pts who achieve favorable response to TS + ARPI can have prolonged treatment-free interval with testosterone recovery after treatment interruption (TI). Here we report on the primary endpoint. Methods: Eligible pts had mHSPC by conventional imaging with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥ 5 ng/ml and testosterone ≥ 150 ng/dl prior to starting TS+ARPI, with PSA < 0.2 ng/ml and testosterone < 50 ng/dl at the time of enrollment after having received TS for 540-750 days and ARPI for ≥ 360 days. Prior local therapy, radiation to metastases and docetaxel were permitted. After enrollment, pts discontinued TS and ARPI and were followed with PSA and testosterone levels every 3 months (mo), CT/MRI and bone scan at least every 6 mo, and FACT-P questionnaire for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) every 6 mo. Treatment was resumed for PSA ≥ 5 ng/ml, radiographic change (progressive disease [PD] per RECIST 1.1 on CT/MRI or unconfirmed PD per PCWG3 on bone scan), or prostate cancer-related symptoms. The primary endpoint was proportion of men remaining treatment-free 18 mo after TI with eugonadal testosterone ( > 150 ng/dl). Target enrollment was 75 pts to differentiate 18-mo treatment-free rates of 0.30 (H 0 ) and 0.45 (H a ). Results: Of 79 pts enrolled between 07/2022 and 03/2024, 78 were eligible and underwent TI. Among these 78, median PSA prior to starting TS+ARPI was 19 (range 5-6759), 27 (35%) had high volume disease, 31 (40%) never received local therapy, and 55 (71%) did not receive radiation to metastases. By 18 mo after TI, 67% (52/78) recovered testosterone and 58% (45/78) remained treatment-free; 41% (32/78) remained treatment-free with testosterone recovery (80% CI 33.5-48.9%, one-sided p 0.0249). At median follow-up of 21.2 mo, 35% (27/78) resumed initial TS+ARPI after meeting re-initiation criteria (of whom 1 required treatment switch for PD 9 mo later); 5% (4/78) resumed prior to meeting criteria; 9% (7/78) pursued alternative therapy instead of resuming TS+ARPI per protocol; 5% (4/78) withdrew; 1 died of myocardial infarction prior to resuming treatment. 4 pts died, 1 of prostate cancer. Conclusions: The primary objective was achieved with 41% of favorable responders to TS+ARPI remaining treatment-free with testosterone recovery at 18 mo after TI. Analyses of biomarkers and PROs are in progress, and pts will be followed for long-term outcomes. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, UG1CA189823, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org, Veracyte Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT05241860 .
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Atish Dipankar Choudhury
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
Karla V. Ballman
From the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda (A.B.A., N.S., S.N., L.L., L.C.), the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore (J.H.-C.), and the Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville (H.S., E.S.) — all in Maryland; the Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (K.V.B., M.O., C.M., G.P.B.); AdventHealth Cancer Institute and the University of Central Florida, Orlando (G.S.); Dana–Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, Boston (S.B., B.M.); UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill (W.Y.K.), and Duke University Medical Center and Duke Cancer Institute, Durham (J.H., S.H.) — both in North Carolina; the University of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood (R.P.); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (M.Y.T., M.J.M., J.E.R.), and Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo (G.C.) — both in...
Melissa A. Reimers
Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
Andrew Leonard Laccetti
Department of Medicine, Laura & Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY
Fabrice Smieliauskas
Wayne State University, Detroit, MI
Praful Ravi
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
Han Xiao
Department of Chemistry, Rice University, 6100 Main Street, Houston, Texas 77005, United States
Katharine Dooley
1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States
David W. Hillman
Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
Gina L. Mazza
Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ
Benjamin Gartrell
Department of Oncology, Montefiore Einstein Comprehensive Cancer Center, Bronx, NY
Preston D. Steen
Roger Maris Cancer Center, Fargo, ND
Thomas J. Smith
Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD
Himisha Beltran
Ronald C. Chen
University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS
Stephanie A. Berg
Department of Medical Oncology Dana‐Farber Cancer Institute Boston Massachusetts USA
Rana R. McKay
Department of Medicine, Urology, and Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences University of California‐San Diego La Jolla California USA
Matthew D. Galsky
Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Jonathan E. Rosenberg
Genitourinary Oncology Service Department of Medicine Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York New York USA
Michael J. Morris
Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center