Polypharmacy and potential drug–drug interactions with novel androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) in patients (pts) with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in a real-world setting.
Abstract
346 Background: Patients (pts) with nmCRPC are typically elderly, with comorbidities often leading to polypharmacy and a higher risk of drug–drug interactions (DDIs). Efficacy and safety of ARPIs may be compromised by DDIs. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence and relevance of polypharmacy and potential DDIs involving ARPIs in a real-world setting. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort (March 2009 to July 2023) at a tertiary cancer center. Patients with high-risk nmCRPC were defined by ≥3 consecutive PSA rises and a PSA doubling time (PSADT) <10 months, with no metastasis on conventional imaging (CT and bone scans), as per criteria from pivotal trials (SPARTAN, PROSPER, ARAMIS). DDIs were assessed using Drugs.com and Lexicomp. Polypharmacy was defined as >4 concomitant drugs. Overall survival (OS), prostate cancer–specific survival (PCSS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS) were estimated from nmCRPC diagnosis by the Kaplan–Meier method and analyzed with univariate Cox models. Results: A total of 1,234 pts with prostate cancer (ICD-10 C61) were screened, and 96 had high-risk nmCRPC. Median age was 73 years (IQR 69–80), PSA 3.0 ng/mL (IQR 1.1–8.5), PSADT 3.3 months (IQR 1.8–5.6), and Charlson Comorbidity Index 5 (IQR 5–7). Most patients (97%) used at least 1 concomitant medication, with a median of 4 (IQR 3–6). Polypharmacy occurred in 43% and was associated with a trend to shorter OS (3.6 vs 4.5 y; HR 1.53, 95% CI 0.93–2.47, p = 0.08) and PCSS (3.6 vs 5.1 y; HR 1.52, 95% CI 0.95–2.47, p = 0.09), but not MFS (2.1 vs 2.9 y, p = 0.64). Potential DDIs were more frequent with enzalutamide and apalutamide (Table). Amlodipine (18%) was the most common major interaction in the Drugs.com database; omeprazole (18%) was most associated with prohibitive interactions (risk rating X) in Lexicomp. Cross-database inconsistencies were identified: 1 major and 15 moderate interactions reported only in Drugs.com, and 6 Lexicomp category C interactions not listed in Drugs.com. Conclusions: Polypharmacy and potential DDIs with ARPIs are common in nmCRPC. Although darolutamide was associated with fewer interactions, some major or X-rated DDIs were observed, reinforcing the need for individualized management and database cross-checking. Potential DDIs with ARPIs in different databases. Drugs.com – n (%) Minor Moderate Major Enzalutamide 1 (1%) 83 (86.4%) 28 (29.1%) Apalutamide 1 (1%) 82 (85.4%) 28 (29.1%) Darolutamide 27 (28.1%) 20 (20.1%) 2 (2.1%) Lexicomp – n (%) C D X Enzalutamide 60 (62.5%) 9 (9.37%) 1 (1%) Apalutamide 49 (51%) 7 (7.3%) 20 (20.8%) Darolutamide 40 (41.6%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%)
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (15)
Edwin Albert D'Souza
Hospital das Clinicas da FMUSP, São Paulo, Brazil
Paulo Roberto Villa
Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Chang Chiann
Institute of Mathematics and Statistics USP, São Paulo, Brazil
Guilherme Keichi Nakandakare
Universidade de São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
Rafael Costa
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
David Queiroz Borges Muniz
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Guilherme Filaho de Freitas
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Vivian Naomi Horita
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
João Carlos Resende Martins
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Leopoldo Alves Ribeiro-Filho
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Caio Suartz
Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada
Wilson Calvo
Instituto de Pesquisas Energéticas e Nucleares - IPEN-CNEN, São Paulo, Brazil
Elaine Bortoleti de Araujo
Instituto de Pesquisas Energéticas e Nucleares - IPEN-CNEN, São Paulo, Brazil
William Carlos Nahas
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Jose Mauricio Mota
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil