Another study showing the benefits of adding AR blocker to ADT. Improved PFs and suggestive improvement in OS, also less fatigue.
For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), delaying progression to castration-resistant disease is important not only for overall survival (OS) but also for patients’ quality of life. Darolutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with docetaxel improved OS versus ADT and docetaxel in patients with mHSPC. The ARANOTE trial evaluated darolutamide and ADT without chemotherapy in patients with mHSPC.
In this global phase III trial, patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, with concomitant ADT. The primary end point was radiological progression-free survival (rPFS).
From March 2021 to August 2022, 669 patients were randomly assigned (darolutamide n = 446; placebo n = 223). At the primary cutoff date (June 7, 2024), darolutamide plus ADT significantly improved rPFS, reducing the risk of radiological progression or death by 46% versus placebo plus ADT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71]; P < .0001), with consistent benefits across subgroups, including high- and low-volume disease. OS results were suggestive of benefit with darolutamide versus placebo (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12]), and clinical benefits were seen across all other secondary end points, including delayed time to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.51]) and time to pain progression (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.96]). Adverse events were similar in the two groups. Notably, the incidence of fatigue was lower in patients receiving darolutamide (5.6%) versus those receiving placebo (8.1%), and fewer patients receiving darolutamide (6.1%) versus placebo (9.0%) discontinued treatment because of adverse events.
These results confirm the efficacy and tolerability of darolutamide plus ADT in patients with mHSPC, demonstrating clinically and statistically significant improvement in rPFS and a favorable safety profile consistent with prior phase III darolutamide trials.
Less radiation is non-inferior, this is for low and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer patients. Would like input from our radiation oncologists as to whether or not this adoptable?
Protons vs IMRT for localized prostate cancer showed no difference in outcome or quality of life. There will be longer f/u and other endpoints studied but the take-home message is that protons are not significantly better than photons.
Will we be replaced by AI? It seems that for radiologists, an AI system was better than the human counterpart in this study looking at prostate cancer diagnostic imaging. I doubt many of us would accept a solely computer-generated report, but this study highlights how AI may help as a supportive tool in the primary diagnostic setting. Of course, prospective validation will be needed.
10-year metastasis-free survival was 71.9% in the short-course ADT group (6 months) and 78% in the long-course ADT group (24 months). So, it seems the longer the duration, the better the outcome. 93% had a Gleason score of 7 or higher.
We know that combination PARP and antiandrogen is better than antiandrogen alone. I have wondered if we need antiancrogen on those patients. This shows that, YES, we do. The combination also was better than PARP inhibitor monotherapy in those patients carrying HRRm.
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
