Secondary outcomes by prior definitive treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (hrBCR) treated with enzalutamide (enza) plus leuprolide (combo): EMBARK post hoc analysis.

N Neal D. Shore (START Carolinas/Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC) M Martin Gleave (Vancouver Prostate Centre) U Ugo De Giorgi (Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori Dino Amadori, Meldola, Italy) A Antti Rannikko (Department of Urology and Research Program in Systems Oncology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki) S Swetha Sridharan (Department of Radiation Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia) K Klaus Brasso (Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, Center for Cancer and Organ Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital – Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark) H Henry H. Woo (Department of Urology, Blacktown and Mount Druitt Hospitals, Blacktown, NSW, Australia) A Antonio Gómez Caamaño (Department of Radiation Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, Santiago De Compostela, Spain) L Luke Nordquist (XCancer, Omaha, NE) Y Yiyun Tang (Oncology Division, Pfizer, South San Francisco, CA) R Ruslan Croitoru (Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, IL) M Matt Rosales (Oncology Global Development, Astellas Pharma, Northbrook, IL) M Matko Kalac (Oncology Division, Pfizer, New York) O Olivier Peraud (Pfizer Inc., New York, NY) F Fong Wang (Pfizer, South San Francisco, CA) S Stephen J. Freedland (Department of Urology, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars–Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles)

Abstract

e17127 Background: In the phase 3 EMBARK trial, combo vs leuprolide alone meaningfully improved metastasis-free survival (primary endpoint) and secondary efficacy endpoints. Secondary endpoints for combo vs leuprolide alone are reported across prior definitive tx subgroups. Methods: EMBARK enrolled pts with hrBCR, defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of ≤9 months and PSA ≥1 ng/mL post radical prostatectomy (RP) ± radiotherapy (RT) or ≥2 ng/mL above nadir post RT. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to combo, leuprolide alone, or enza monotherapy. Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression, first use of new antineoplastic tx, distant metastasis, resumption of any hormonal therapy after tx suspension, and symptomatic progression. Post hoc subgroup analyses descriptively compared secondary endpoints for combo vs leuprolide alone in pts with prior RP only, RT only, or RP+RT. Results: Half of pts in each tx group (combo and leuprolide alone) had prior RP + RT (Table). All secondary endpoints favored combo vs leuprolide alone in all prior definitive tx subgroups (Table). When testing for interactions, there were no statistically significant differences in the observed tx effects for the key secondary endpoints of time to PSA progression ( P interaction =0.79) and first use of new antineoplastic tx ( P interaction =0.57) across prior definitive tx subgroups. P -interactions for other endpoints will be reported in the presentation. Conclusions: Tx with combo vs leuprolide alone showed improvements in all secondary endpoints by prior definitive tx, which supports the benefits of combo as the new standard of care for pts with hrBCR regardless of prior definitive tx. The small sample sizes of the nonrandomized subgroups and low event numbers should be considered when interpreting results. There were no interactions by prior tx for two key secondary endpoints. Disclosure: A genAI tool (10/01/24; Pfizer; GPT-4o) developed the first draft; authors assume content responsibility. Clinical trial information: NCT02319837 . Secondary endpoints Combo(n=355) Leuprolide alone(n=358) † RP only(n=90) RT only(n=86) RP + RT(n=179) RP only(n=75) RT only(n=104) RP + RT(n=179) Time to: Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n Events, n Events, n PSA progression 1 0.05(0.01, 0.41) 4 0.10(0.03, 0.27) 3 0.06(0.02, 0.21) 17 37 39 First use of new antineoplastic tx 16 0.54(0.28, 1.02) 15 0.28(0.15, 0.52) 27 0.34(0.21, 0.53) 25 48 67 Distant metastasis 5 0.51(0.17, 1.59) 12 0.47(0.22, 1.00) 13 0.34(0.18, 0.67) 9 20 30 Resumption of any hormonal therapy 69 0.74(0.51, 1.08) 64 0.92(0.61, 1.39) 123 0.60(0.46, 0.79) 54 47 116 Symptomatic progression 29 0.76(0.46, 1.28) 27 0.55(0.34, 0.89) 48 0.46(0.32, 0.66) 32 52 85 † Leuprolide alone was the comparator. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 43, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2025
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (16)

N

Neal D. Shore

START Carolinas/Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC

M

Martin Gleave

Vancouver Prostate Centre

U

Ugo De Giorgi

Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori Dino Amadori, Meldola, Italy

A

Antti Rannikko

Department of Urology and Research Program in Systems Oncology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki

S

Swetha Sridharan

Department of Radiation Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah, NSW, Australia

K

Klaus Brasso

Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, Center for Cancer and Organ Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital – Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

H

Henry H. Woo

Department of Urology, Blacktown and Mount Druitt Hospitals, Blacktown, NSW, Australia

A

Antonio Gómez Caamaño

Department of Radiation Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, Santiago De Compostela, Spain

L

Luke Nordquist

XCancer, Omaha, NE

Y

Yiyun Tang

Oncology Division, Pfizer, South San Francisco, CA

R

Ruslan Croitoru

Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, IL

M

Matt Rosales

Oncology Global Development, Astellas Pharma, Northbrook, IL

M

Matko Kalac

Oncology Division, Pfizer, New York

O

Olivier Peraud

Pfizer Inc., New York, NY

F

Fong Wang

Pfizer, South San Francisco, CA

S

Stephen J. Freedland

Department of Urology, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars–Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles