Choice of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPi) by disease volume and timing of metastases in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).

S Syed Arsalan Ahmed Naqvi (Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ) K Kunwer Sufyan Faisal (Ziauddin Medical University, Karachi, Pakistan) K Kaneez Zahra Rubab Khakwani (University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ) D Daniel S Childs (Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) J Jacob Orme (Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN) J Jack Andrews (Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ) P Praful Ravi (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA) S Syed A. Hussain N Neeraj Agarwal (Division of Medical Oncology Department of Internal Medicine Huntsman Cancer Institute University of Utah Salt Lake City Utah USA) P Parminder Singh (Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ) Y Yousef Zakharia (Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine Mayo Clinic Phoenix Arizona USA) A Alton Oliver Sartor (LCMC Health, New Orleans, LA) I Irbaz Bin Riaz (Irbaz Bin Riaz, MD, PhD; R. Bryan Rumble, MSc; Thomas A. Hope, MD; Giuseppe Procopio, MD; and Neha Vapiwala, MD; Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ; American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA; University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy; and University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA) A Alan Haruo Bryce (Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ)

Abstract

184 Background: We update evidence on mHSPC when new evidence becomes available (PMID: 36862387). ARANOTE trial prompted us to assess the comparative efficacy of darolutamide (DARO) with other ARPi agents in mHSPC using the living network meta-analysis (LNMA). Methods: This LNMA is conducted using the living interactive evidence (LIvE) synthesis framework. Phase III trials assessing systemic treatments in mHSPC are included. Mixed treatment comparisons were made using a frequentist network meta-analysis. P-scores were computed to assess relative treatment rankings with higher values indicating potentially better efficacy. Results: This report of LNMA includes a total 11 trials (12628 patients; 12 unique treatment options) as of October 1 st , 2024. Overall results were consistent with prior updates. Analysis limited to the ARPi trials showed that inhigh volume, abiraterone acetate (AAP)+androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) (HR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.40-0.53; rank 1), apalutamide (APA)+ADT (0.53; 0.41-0.68; rank 3), DARO+ADT (0.60; 0.44-0.81; rank 4) and enzalutamide (E)+ADT (0.48; 0.41-0.56; rank 2) significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) compared to ADT alone. No statistically significant differences were observed with DARO+ADT compared to AAP+ADT (1.30; 0.94-1.82), APA+ADT (1.14; 0.77-1.67) and E+ADT (1.24; 0.89-1.79). Inlow volume, AAP+ADT (0.48; 0.37-0.63; rank 4), APA+ADT (0.36; 0.22-0.58; rank 3), DARO+ADT (0.30; 0.15-0.60; rank 1) and E+ADT (0.32; 0.25-0.41; rank 2) significantly improved rPFS compared to ADT. E+ADT significantly improved rPFS compared to AAP+ADT (0.67; 0.47-0.96) in low volume. No statistically significant differences were observed with DARO+ADT compared to AAP+ADT (0.62; 0.30-1.30), APA+ADT (0.83; 0.36-1.92) and E+ADT (0.93; 0.45-1.94). In synchronous disease, AAP+ADT (0.58; 0.51-0.67; rank 4), APA+ADT (0.49; 0.39-0.62; rank 2), DARO+ADT (0.59; 0.44-0.79; rank 3) and E+ADT (0.42; 0.36-0.50; rank 1) significantly improved rPFS compared to ADT. E+ADT significantly improved rPFS compared to AAP+ADT (0.73; 0.59-0.89) in synchronous disease. In metachronous disease, DARO+ADT (0.34; 0.17-0.67; rank 1), APA+ADT (0.41; 0.22-0.77; rank 2) and E+ADT (0.44; 0.35-0.57; rank 3) significantly improved rPFS compared to ADT. No statistically significant differences were observed with DARO+ADT compared to APA+ADT (0.83; 0.33-2.08) and E+ADT (0.76; 0.37-1.57) in metachronous disease. The results were consistent for overall survival. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests no significant differences for darolutamide as compared to other ARPi agents. Enzalutamide may be preferred over AAP in low-volume or synchronous disease. Given similar efficacy, choice of ARPi requires careful consideration of patient-specific factors including cost, accessibility and toxicity.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 5_suppl
Published February 10, 2025
Pages 184-184
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (14)

S

Syed Arsalan Ahmed Naqvi

Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ

K

Kunwer Sufyan Faisal

Ziauddin Medical University, Karachi, Pakistan

K

Kaneez Zahra Rubab Khakwani

University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

D

Daniel S Childs

Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

J

Jacob Orme

Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN

J

Jack Andrews

Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ

P

Praful Ravi

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA

S

Syed A. Hussain

N

Neeraj Agarwal

Division of Medical Oncology Department of Internal Medicine Huntsman Cancer Institute University of Utah Salt Lake City Utah USA

P

Parminder Singh

Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ

Y

Yousef Zakharia

Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine Mayo Clinic Phoenix Arizona USA

A

Alton Oliver Sartor

LCMC Health, New Orleans, LA

I

Irbaz Bin Riaz

Irbaz Bin Riaz, MD, PhD; R. Bryan Rumble, MSc; Thomas A. Hope, MD; Giuseppe Procopio, MD; and Neha Vapiwala, MD; Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ; American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA; University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy; and University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA

A

Alan Haruo Bryce

Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ