Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

A randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase 3b study of the efficacy and safety of continuing enzalutamide (ENZA) in chemotherapy-naïve, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients (pts) treated with docetaxel (DOC) pl

View through CrossRef
15 Background: PRESIDE (NCT02288247) evaluated the benefit of continued ENZA + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with DOC + PDN in men with mCRPC who progressed on ENZA + ADT. Methods: PRESIDE (Dec 2014–Apr 2020) enrolled chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC and disease progression while on a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist/antagonist (ADT) or after bilateral orchiectomy. Pts received open-label ENZA (160 mg) + ADT in Period 1 (P1). Those with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response of ≥50% change from baseline to week (wk) 13 and later progression were eligible for Period 2 (P2). P2 pts received DOC (75 mg/m2), PDN (10 mg), and ADT, and were randomized to ENZA (160 mg) or PBO. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in P2 (from randomization to radiographic/clinical progression or death). Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression (TTPP) [≥25% increase; absolute increase ≥2 ng/mL] and PSA response in P2. Hazard ratios (HRs) were from a Cox proportional hazards model with covariates for treatment and P1 progression. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded to assess safety. Results: 687 pts received ENZA in P1; 273 pts were randomized and 271 were treated in P2. Baseline demographics and characteristics were balanced between P2 arms. Median ENZA exposure was 62.6 wks in P1 and 36.1 and 30.1 wks in P2 with ENZA and PBO, respectively. At P2 data cut-off (Apr 30, 2020), 269 (99.3%) pts had discontinued therapy; 93 pts in each arm (ENZA, 74.4%; PBO, 75.6%) had progression. PFS was significantly improved with ENZA (HR 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53, 0.96; p = 0.027), with a higher median PFS with ENZA (9.53 months; 95% CI 8.25, 10.87) than with PBO (8.28 months; 95% CI 6.28, 8.71). ENZA also significantly delayed TTPP (8.44 vs. 6.24 months with PBO; HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.41, 0.82; p = 0.002) and improved PSA response at any time (ENZA, n = 76 [55.9%]; PBO, n = 50 [37.0%]). There were 46 (6.7%) deaths in P1 and 20 (ENZA, n = 13 [9.6%]; PBO, n = 7 [5.2%]) in P2. In P2, 264 (97.4%) pts had a treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) [ENZA, n = 133 (97.8%); PBO, n = 131 (97.0%)]. Grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported by 84 (61.8%) pts on ENZA and 84 (62.2%) on PBO, and 12 (8.8%) and 9 (6.7%) pts, respectively, had TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Neutropenia (ENZA, 16.9%; PBO, 20.7%) was the most common grade 4 TEAE. Drug-related TEAEs (ENZA, 46.3%; PBO, 41.5%) were similar, and 90.4% of pts in each arm reported DOC-related TEAEs. Conclusions: Continued ENZA therapy in men with mCRPC who progressed on ENZA + ADT and received post-progression DOC + PDN significantly improved PFS compared to PBO. Treatment was well tolerated and ENZA AEs were consistent with its known safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT02288247.
Title: A randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase 3b study of the efficacy and safety of continuing enzalutamide (ENZA) in chemotherapy-naïve, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients (pts) treated with docetaxel (DOC) pl
Description:
15 Background: PRESIDE (NCT02288247) evaluated the benefit of continued ENZA + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with DOC + PDN in men with mCRPC who progressed on ENZA + ADT.
Methods: PRESIDE (Dec 2014–Apr 2020) enrolled chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC and disease progression while on a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist/antagonist (ADT) or after bilateral orchiectomy.
Pts received open-label ENZA (160 mg) + ADT in Period 1 (P1).
Those with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response of ≥50% change from baseline to week (wk) 13 and later progression were eligible for Period 2 (P2).
P2 pts received DOC (75 mg/m2), PDN (10 mg), and ADT, and were randomized to ENZA (160 mg) or PBO.
The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in P2 (from randomization to radiographic/clinical progression or death).
Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression (TTPP) [≥25% increase; absolute increase ≥2 ng/mL] and PSA response in P2.
Hazard ratios (HRs) were from a Cox proportional hazards model with covariates for treatment and P1 progression.
Adverse events (AEs) were recorded to assess safety.
Results: 687 pts received ENZA in P1; 273 pts were randomized and 271 were treated in P2.
Baseline demographics and characteristics were balanced between P2 arms.
Median ENZA exposure was 62.
6 wks in P1 and 36.
1 and 30.
1 wks in P2 with ENZA and PBO, respectively.
At P2 data cut-off (Apr 30, 2020), 269 (99.
3%) pts had discontinued therapy; 93 pts in each arm (ENZA, 74.
4%; PBO, 75.
6%) had progression.
PFS was significantly improved with ENZA (HR 0.
72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.
53, 0.
96; p = 0.
027), with a higher median PFS with ENZA (9.
53 months; 95% CI 8.
25, 10.
87) than with PBO (8.
28 months; 95% CI 6.
28, 8.
71).
ENZA also significantly delayed TTPP (8.
44 vs.
6.
24 months with PBO; HR 0.
58; 95% CI 0.
41, 0.
82; p = 0.
002) and improved PSA response at any time (ENZA, n = 76 [55.
9%]; PBO, n = 50 [37.
0%]).
There were 46 (6.
7%) deaths in P1 and 20 (ENZA, n = 13 [9.
6%]; PBO, n = 7 [5.
2%]) in P2.
In P2, 264 (97.
4%) pts had a treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) [ENZA, n = 133 (97.
8%); PBO, n = 131 (97.
0%)].
Grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported by 84 (61.
8%) pts on ENZA and 84 (62.
2%) on PBO, and 12 (8.
8%) and 9 (6.
7%) pts, respectively, had TEAEs leading to discontinuation.
Neutropenia (ENZA, 16.
9%; PBO, 20.
7%) was the most common grade 4 TEAE.
Drug-related TEAEs (ENZA, 46.
3%; PBO, 41.
5%) were similar, and 90.
4% of pts in each arm reported DOC-related TEAEs.
Conclusions: Continued ENZA therapy in men with mCRPC who progressed on ENZA + ADT and received post-progression DOC + PDN significantly improved PFS compared to PBO.
Treatment was well tolerated and ENZA AEs were consistent with its known safety profile.
Clinical trial information: NCT02288247.

Related Results

Microwave Ablation with or Without Chemotherapy in Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
Microwave Ablation with or Without Chemotherapy in Management of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction  Microwave ablation (MWA) has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment for patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, whether it i...
Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM)
Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM)
This section provides current contact details and a summary of recent or ongoing clinical trials being coordinated by Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM). Clinical trials...
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract Introduction Tarlatamab is a Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) -directed bispecific T-cell engager recently approved for use in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCL...
Abstract 100: NF-κB2/p52 induces resistance to enzalutamide possibly by upregulation of AR-V7.
Abstract 100: NF-κB2/p52 induces resistance to enzalutamide possibly by upregulation of AR-V7.
Abstract Introduction and Objective: Despite initial response of prostate cancer (CaP) to androgen deprivation, clinical observations suggest that castration-resista...

Back to Top