Patients’ and partners’ views of care and treatment provided for metastatic castrate‐resistant prostate cancer in the UK (2019)

Type of publication:
Journal article

Author(s):
Catt S, Matthews L, May S, Payne H, Mason M, Jenkins V.

Citation:
European Journal of Cancer Care. 2019 Nov;28(6):e13140.

Note:
14 of the 37 participants were recruited from the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital

Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: Documentations of the experiences of patients with advanced prostate cancer and their partners are sparse. Views of care and treatment received for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are presented here.
METHODS: Structured interviews conducted within 14 days of a systemic therapy for mCRPC starting and 3 months later explored the following: treatment decisions, information provision, perceived benefits and harms of treatment, and effects of these on patients’ and partners’ lives.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients and 33 partners recruited from UK cancer centres participated. The majority of patients (46%) reported pain was their worst symptom and many wanted to discuss its management (baseline-50%; 3 months-33%). Patients and partners believed treatment would delay progression (>75%), improve wellbeing (33%), alleviate pain (≈12%) and extend life (15% patients, 36% partners). At 3 months, most men (42%) said fatigue was the worst treatment-related side effect (SE), 27% experienced unexpected SEs and 54% needed help with SEs. Most patients received SE information (85% written; 75% verbally); many additionally searched the Internet (33% patients; 55% partners). Only 54% of patients said nurse support was accessible.
CONCLUSION: Pain and other symptom management are not optimal. Increased specialist nurse provision and earlier palliative care links are needed. Dedicated clinics may be justified.

Link to full-text

Altmetrics:

Addition of docetaxel to hormonal therapy in low- and high-burden metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer: long-term survival results from the STAMPEDE trial (2019)

Type of publication:
Journal article

Author(s):
Clarke, N W; Ali, A; Ingleby, F C; Hoyle, A; Amos, C L; Attard, G; Brawley, C D; Calvert, J; Chowdhury, S; Cook, A; Cross, W; Dearnaley, D P; Douis, H; Gilbert, D; Gillessen, S; Jones, R J; Langley, R E; MacNair, A; Malik, Z; Mason, M D; Matheson, D; Millman, R; Parker, C C; Ritchie, A W S; Rush, H; Russell, J M; Brown, J; Beesley, S; Birtle, A; Capaldi, L; Gale, J; Gibbs, S; Lydon, A; Nikapota, A; Omlin, A; O’Sullivan, J M; Parikh, O; Protheroe, A; Rudman, S; *Srihari, N N; Simms, M; Tanguay, J S; Tolan, S; Wagstaff, J; Wallace, J; Wylie, J; Zarkar, A; Sydes, M R; Parmar, M K B; James, N D

Citation:
Annals of Oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology; Sep 2019 [epub ahead of print]

Abstract:
BACKGROUND STAMPEDE has previously reported that the use of upfront docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report on long-term outcomes stratified by metastatic burden for M1 patients.
METHODS We randomly allocated patients in 2 : 1 ratio to standard-of-care (SOC; control group) or SOC + docetaxel. Metastatic disease burden was categorised using retrospectively-collected baseline staging scans where available. Analysis used Cox regression models, adjusted for stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time where hazards were non-proportional.
RESULTS Between 05 October 2005 and 31 March 2013, 1086 M1 patients were randomised to receive SOC (n = 724) or SOC + docetaxel (n = 362). Metastatic burden was assessable for 830/1086 (76%) patients; 362 (44%) had low and 468 (56%) high metastatic burden. Median follow-up was 78.2 months. There were 494 deaths on SOC (41% more than the previous report). There was good evidence of benefit of docetaxel over SOC on OS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.95, P = 0.009) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P = 0.827). Analysis of other outcomes found evidence of benefit for docetaxel over SOC in failure-free survival (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57-0.76, P < 0.001) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.81, P < 0.001) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P > 0.5 in each case). There was no evidence that docetaxel resulted in late toxicity compared with SOC: after 1 year, G3-5 toxicity was reported for 28% SOC and 27% docetaxel (in patients still on follow-up at 1 year without prior progression).
CONCLUSIONS The clinically significant benefit in survival for upfront docetaxel persists at longer follow-up, with no evidence that benefit differed by metastatic burden. We advocate that upfront docetaxel is considered for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients regardless of metastatic burden.

Link to full-text [open access – no password required]

Altmetrics

Addition of Docetaxel to First-line Long-term Hormone Therapy in Prostate Cancer (STAMPEDE): Modelling to Estimate Long-term Survival, Quality-adjusted Survival, and Cost-effectiveness (2018)

Type of publication:
Journal article

Author(s):
Woods B.S.; Sideris E.; Sculpher M.J.; Sydes M.R.; Gannon M.R.; Parmar M.K.B.; Millman R.; Alzouebi M.; Attard G.; Dearnaley D.P.; Birtle A.J.; Brock S.; Cathomas R.; Chakraborti P.R.; Cook A.; Cross W.R.; Gale J.; Gibbs S.; Graham J.D.; Hughes R.; Jones R.J.; Laing R.; Mason M.D.; Matheson D.; McLaren D.B.; O’Sullivan J.M.; Parikh O.; Parker C.C.; Peedell C.; Protheroe A.; Ritchie A.W.S.; Robinson A.; Russell J.M.; Simms M.S.; *Srihari N.N.; Srinivasan R.; Staffurth J.N.; Sundar S.; Thalmann G.N.; Tolan S.; Tran A.T.H.; Tsang D.; Wagstaff J.; James N.D.

Citation:
European Urology Oncology; Dec 2018; vol. 1 (no. 6); p. 449-458

Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Results from large randomised controlled trials have shown that adding docetaxel to the
standard of care (SOC) for men initiating hormone therapy for prostate cancer (PC) prolongs survival for those with metastatic disease and prolongs failure-free survival for those without. To date there has been no formal assessment of whether funding docetaxel in this setting represents an appropriate use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources.
OBJECTIVE(S): To assess whether administering docetaxel to men with PC starting long-term hormone therapy is cost-effective in a UK setting.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We modelled health outcomes and costs in the UK NHS using data collected within the STAMPEDE trial, which enrolled men with high-risk, locally advanced metastatic or recurrent PC starting first-line hormone therapy. INTERVENTION: SOC was hormone therapy for >=2 yr and radiotherapy in some patients. Docetaxel (75mg/m2) was administered alongside SOC for six three-weekly cycles. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The model generated lifetime predictions of costs, changes in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The model predicted that docetaxel would extend survival (discounted quality-adjusted survival) by 0.89 yr (0.51) for metastatic PC and 0.78 yr (0.39) for nonmetastatic PC, and would be cost-effective in metastatic PC (ICER 5514/QALY vs SOC) and nonmetastatic PC (higher QALYs, lower costs vs SOC). Docetaxel remained cost-effective in nonmetastatic PC when the assumption of no survival advantage was modelled.
CONCLUSION(S): Docetaxel is cost-effective among patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic PC in a UK setting. Clinicians should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support docetaxel use in patients with nonmetastatic PC, as the opportunity to offer docetaxel at hormone therapy initiation will be missed for some patients by the time more mature survival data are available. PATIENT SUMMARY: Starting docetaxel chemotherapy alongside hormone therapy represents a good use of UK National Health Service resources for patients with prostate cancer that is high risk or has spread to other parts of the body.

Radiotherapy to the primary tumour for newly diagnosed, metastatic prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial (2018)

Type of publication:
Randomised controlled trial

Author(s):
Parker, Christopher C; James, Nicholas D; Brawley, Christopher D; Clarke, Noel W; Hoyle, Alex P; Ali, Adnan; Ritchie, Alastair W S; Attard, Gerhardt; Chowdhury, Simon; Cross, William; Dearnaley, David P; Gillessen, Silke; Gilson, Clare; Jones, Robert J; Langley, Ruth E; Malik, Zafar I; Mason, Malcolm D; Matheson, David; Millman, Robin; Russell, J Martin; Thalmann, George N; Amos, Claire L; Alonzi, Roberto; Bahl, Amit; Birtle, Alison; Din, Omar; Douis, Hassan; Eswar, Chinnamani; Gale, Joanna; Gannon, Melissa R; Jonnada, Sai; Khaksar, Sara; Lester, Jason F; O’Sullivan, Joe M; Parikh, Omi A; Pedley, Ian D; Pudney, Delia M; Sheehan, Denise J; *Srihari, Narayanan Nair; Tran, Anna T H; Parmar, Mahesh K B; Sydes, Matthew R; Systemic Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Prostate cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy (STAMPEDE) investigators

Citation:
Lancet, Volume 392, Issue 10162, 1–7 December 2018, Pages 2353-2366

Abstract:
BACKGROUND Based on previous findings, we hypothesised that radiotherapy to the prostate would improve overall survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer, and that the benefit would be greatest in patients with a low metastatic burden. We aimed to compare standard of care for metastatic prostate cancer, with and without radiotherapy. METHODS We did a randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 117 hospitals in Switzerland and the UK. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. We randomly allocated patients open label in a 1:1 ratio to standard of care (control group) or standard of care and radiotherapy (radiotherapy group). Randomisation was stratified by hospital, age at randomisation, nodal involvement, WHO performance status, planned androgen deprivation therapy, planned docetaxel use (from December, 2015), and regular aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. Standard of care was lifelong androgen deprivation therapy, with up front docetaxel permitted from December, 2015. Men allocated radiotherapy received either a daily (55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks) or weekly (36 Gy in six fractions over 6 weeks) schedule that was nominated before randomisation. The primary outcome was overall survival, measured as the number of deaths; this analysis had 90% power with a one-sided α of 2·5% for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·75. Secondary outcomes were failure-free survival, progression-free survival, metastatic progression-free survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and symptomatic local event-free survival. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. The primary outcome analysis was by intention to treat. Two prespecified subgroup analyses tested the effects of prostate radiotherapy by baseline metastatic burden and radiotherapy schedule. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number CT00268476. FINDINGS Between Jan 22, 2013, and Sept 2, 2016, 2061 men underwent randomisation, 1029 were allocated the control and 1032 radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced, with a median age of 68 years (IQR 63-73) and median amount of prostate-specific antigen of 97 ng/mL (33-315). 367 (18%) patients received early docetaxel. 1082 (52%) participants nominated the daily radiotherapy schedule before randomisation and 979 (48%) the weekly schedule. 819 (40%) men had a low metastatic burden, 1120 (54%) had a high metastatic burden, and the metastatic burden was unknown for 122 (6%). Radiotherapy improved failure-free survival (HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·68-0·84; p<0·0001) but not overall survival (0·92, 0·80-1·06; p=0·266). Radiotherapy was well tolerated, with 48 (5%) adverse events (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3-4) reported during radiotherapy and 37 (4%) after radiotherapy. The proportion reporting at least one severe adverse event (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or worse) was similar by treatment group in the safety population (398
[38%] with control and 380 [39%] with radiotherapy). INTERPRETATION Radiotherapy to the prostate did not improve overall survival for unselected patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis.

Link to full-text [NHS OpenAthens account required]

Altmetrics

A patient centred, self-management app providing digital support and follow up care for citizens with prostate cancer (2018)

Type of publication:
Conference abstract

Author(s):
*Elves A.; *Dunk S.; *Perry S.; *Srihari N.; Khanduri S.; Redgrave R.; Pope R.

Citation:
Journal of Clinical Urology; Jun 2018; vol. 11 ; p. 26

Abstract:
Introduction: The challenges of increasing cancer survivors, National Survivorship Programme/Recovery package and drive to stratified care combined with funding and workforce constraints require novel approaches to follow-up care. We describe a web-based App facilitating stratified care through remote patient self management for patients undergoing follow-up for prostate cancer. Method: Patients with stable prostate cancer were eligible for recruitment. The App was offered as a replacement to face to face follow-up or for communication and support. App functionalities include remote follow-up, self-reporting of disease/treatment effects, multimedia information/sign posting and secure messaging to a clinical nurse specialist. Outcomes included up-take, use of App functionalities, number of follow-ups delivered, escalations in care and user satisfaction. Results: One hundred and twenty patients identified were eligible for the App. Sixty five patients recruited gen-erated 342 messages and 627 patient self-reported disease/treatment effect entry sessions providing 3036 readings. Sexual health and hormone side effects were most common reported issues.Sixty-six per cent of users were over 69 years. Forty four patients received digital follow-up over the 10 month period. Clinician concerns about disease progression or user lack of internet access or device were the principle obstacle to recruitment. Conclusion: The App was safe and allowed patients to provide feedback upon symptoms, wellbeing and interact proactively with their healthcare team on an ad hoc basis as well as regular follow-up. This fundamental change in approach to delivery of clinical care has wider application to a range of urological conditions.

Adding abiraterone or docetaxel to long-term hormone therapy for prostate cancer: directly randomised data from the STAMPEDE multi-arm, multi-stage platform protocol (2018)

Type of publication:
Journal article

Author(s):
Sydes, M R; Spears, M R; Mason, M D; Clarke, N W; Dearnaley, D P; de Bono, J S; Attard, G; Chowdhury, S; Cross, W; Gillessen, S; Malik, Z I; Jones, R; Parker, C C; Ritchie, A W S; Russell, J M; Millman, R; Matheson, D; Amos, C; Gilson, C; Birtle, A; Brock, S; Capaldi, L; Chakraborti, P; Choudhury, A; Evans, L; Ford, D; Gale, J; Gibbs, S; Gilbert, D C; Hughes, R; McLaren, D; Lester, J F; Nikapota, A; O’Sullivan, J; Parikh, O; Peedell, C; Protheroe, A; Rudman, S M; Shaffer, R; Sheehan, D; Simms, M; *Srihari, N; Strebel, R; Sundar, S; Tolan, S; Tsang, D; Varughese, M; Wagstaff, J; Parmar, M K B; James, N D; STAMPEDE Investigators

Citation:
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology; May 2018; vol. 29 (no. 5); p. 1235-1248

Abstract:
Background Adding abiraterone acetate with prednisolone (AAP) or docetaxel with prednisolone (DocP) to standard-of-care (SOC) each improved survival in systemic therapy for advanced or metastatic prostate cancer: evaluation of drug efficacy: a multi-arm multi-stage platform randomised controlled protocol recruiting patients with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic PCa starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The protocol provides the only direct, randomised comparative data of SOC+AAP versus SOC+DocP. Method Recruitment to SOC+DocP and SOC+AAP overlapped November 2011 to March 2013. SOC was long-term ADT or, for most non-metastatic cases, ADT for≥2years and RT to the primary tumour. Stratified randomisation allocated pts 2:1:2 to SOC; SOC+docetaxel 75mg/m2 3-weekly×6+prednisolone 10mg daily; or SOC+abiraterone acetate 1000mg+prednisolone 5mg daily. AAP duration depended on stage and intent to give radical RT. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. This was not a formally powered comparison. A hazard ratio (HR) <1 favours SOC+AAP, and HR>1 favours SOC+DocP. Results A total of 566 consenting patients were contemporaneously randomised: 189 SOC+DocP and 377 SOC+AAP. The patients, balanced by allocated treatment were: 342 (60%) M1; 429 (76%) Gleason 8-10; 449 (79%) WHO performance status 0; median age 66years and median PSA 56ng/ml. With median follow-up 4years, 149 deaths were reported. For overall survival, HR=1.16 (95% CI 0.82-1.65); failure-free survival HR=0.51 (95% CI 0.39-0.67); progression-free survival HR=0.65 (95% CI 0.48-0.88); metastasis-free survival HR=0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.03); prostate cancer-specific survival HR=1.02 (0.70-1.49); and symptomatic skeletal events HR=0.83 (95% CI 0.55-1.25). In the safety population, the proportion reporting≥1 grade 3, 4 or 5 adverse events ever was 36%, 13% and 1% SOC+DocP, and 40%, 7% and 1% SOC+AAP; prevalence 11% at 1 and 2 years on both arms. Relapse treatment patterns varied by arm. Conclusions This direct, randomised comparative analysis of two new treatment standards for hormone-naïve prostate cancer showed no evidence of a difference in overall or prostate cancer-specific survival, nor in other important outcomes such as symptomatic skeletal events. Worst toxicity grade over entire time on trial was similar but comprised different toxicities in line with the known properties of the drugs.Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00268476.

Altmetrics

A pilot experience in using a digital app to follow-up prostate cancer patients in Shropshire, UK (2018)

Type of publication:
Conference abstract

Author(s):
*Phan Y.; *Loh A.; *Anandakumar A.; *Umranikar S.; *Elves A.

Citation:
European Urology, Supplements; Mar 2018; vol. 17 (no. 2)

Abstract:
Introduction & Objective: It is not uncommon for patients with cancer to experience physical, mental and social distress, forming a significant burden that has a negative impact on their quality of life. We have piloted a digital app called VitruCare in our hospital in order to address these issues in patients with prostate cancer. More importantly, the app also serves as a communication tool between the hospital medical team and the patients. Materials and Methods: Patients with prostate cancer were invited to use VitruCare in our pilot study. 53 users were followed prospectively. Data on various domains such as “My Goals”, “My Lifestyle”, “My Priorities”, “My Diaries”, and “How Do I Feel Today” were analysed retrospectively. Results: The users of this application have a median age of 72.5 years old. 14% have nodal or bone metastasis, and median time since treatment is 48 months. 60% have completed the lifestyle questionnaire and “How Do I Feel Today” trackers. 20% of the users who completed the lifestyle questionnaire reported anxiety. 42% have used the diary function and 47% have used the secured messaging function. Usage of the lifestyle questionnaire, “How Do I Feel Today” trackers, secured messaging and diary functions does not appear to be age related. Patients who have been treated and further away from treatment in time are more likely to be used the app. Conclusions: The level of engagement in this pilot study reflects the willingness of patients to utilize this innovative app that has the potential to monitor the well-being of patients with prostate cancer out with the constraints of a fixed clinic appointment.

Feasibility of performing MRI prostate before prostate biopsy in a district general hospital in the UK (2017)

Type of publication:
Conference abstract

Author(s):
*Phan Y.; *Loh A.; *Anandakumar A.; *Umranikar S.; *Lynn N.

Citation:
Journal of Endourology; Sep 2017; vol. 31, S2

Abstract:
Introduction & Objective: Men with abnormal digital rectal examination or raised PSA usually undergo
transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostate biopsies. NICE guidelines do not recommend routine MRI prostate before prostate biopsy unless they have a previous negative prostate biopsy. However, all men with positive prostate biopsies will have MRI prostates. The recent publication of PROMIS (Prostate MR Imaging Study) trial suggests that MRI prostate can reduce unnecessary biopsies by a quarter and can improve detection of clinically significant cancer. In light of this, we would like to determine if performing MRI prostate before biopsy is likely to increase workload in our radiology department in a district general hospital in the UK. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent TRUS prostate biopsy between 3 Dec 2015 to 28 April 2016 were identified. Their data were analysed retrospectively. 1 year follow-up was chosen to see how many patients would have had MRIs. Results: 173 patients were listed for prostate biopsies but only 158 patients had biopsies with an average age of 69.8 years old (range: 49-88 years old) and an average PSA of 48.1ug/l (range: 0.5-3283.1ug/l). 57 patients had a negative prostate biopsy during this period. 30/57 patients did not have a MRI at all; 12/57 patients had a MRI after biopsy; 1/57 patient had a MRI as an acute setting after biopsy to look for abscesses; and 14/57 patients had a MRI before biopsy. Conclusions: In our study, 30/158 (19.0%) did not have any MRI prostate in 1 year after their first prostate biopsy. However, it is possible that this group of patients will have a MRI prostate in the second year or later. If we were to perform a MRI prostate before TRUS prostate biopsy for all patients, it would increase 19.0% workload for our radiology department.

A pilot experience in using a digital app to follow-up prostate cancer patients in Shropshire, UK (2017)

Type of publication:
Conference abstract

Author(s):
*Phan Y.; *Loh A.; *Anandakumar A.; *Umranikar S.; *Elves A.

Citation:
Journal of Endourology; Sep 2017; vol. 31, S2

Abstract:
Introduction & Objective: It is not uncommon for patients with cancer to experience physical, mental and social distress, forming a significant burden that has a negative impact on their quality of life. We have piloted a digital app called VitruCare in our hospital in order to address these issues in patients with prostate cancer. More importantly, the app also serves as a communication tool between the hospital medical team and the patients. Materials and Methods: Patients with prostate cancer were invited to use VitruCare in our pilot study. 53 users were followed prospectively. Data on various domains such as “My Goals”, “My Lifestyle”, “My Priorities”, “My Diaries”, and “How Do I Feel Today” were analysed retrospectively. Results: The users of this application have a median age of 72.5 years old. 14% have nodal or bone metastasis, and median time since treatment is 48 months. 60% have completed the lifestyle questionnaire and “How Do I Feel Today” trackers. 20% of the users who completed the lifestyle questionnaire reported anxiety. 42% have used the diary function and 47% have used the secured messaging function. Usage of the lifestyle questionnaire, “How Do I Feel Today” trackers, secured messaging and diary functions does not appear to be age related. Patients who have been treated and further away from treatment in time are more likely to be used the app. Conclusions: The level of engagement in this pilot study reflects the willingness of patients to utilize this innovative app that has the potential to monitor the well-being of patients with prostate cancer out with the constraints of a fixed clinic appointment.

Abiraterone for prostate cancer not previously treated with hormone therapy (2017)

Type of publication:
Randomised controlled trial

Author(s):
James, Nicholas D. Ph.D.; de Bono, Johann S. Ph.D.; Spears, Melissa R. M.Sc.; Clarke, Noel W. Ch.M.; Mason, Malcolm D. F.R.C.R.; Dearnaley, David P. F.R.C.R.; Ritchie, Alastair W.S. M.D.; Amos, Claire L. Ph.D.; Gilson, Clare M.R.C.P.; Jones, Rob J. M.B., Ch.B.; Matheson, David Ph.D.; Millman, Robin; Attard, Gerhardt M.D.; Chowdhury, Simon Ph.D.; Cross, William R. F.R.C.S.; Gillessen, Silke M.D.; Parker, Christopher C. M.D.; Russell, Martin J. F.R.C.R.; Berthold, Dominik R. M.D.; Brawley, Chris M.Sc.; Adab, Fawzi F.R.C.R.; Aung, San M.R.C.P.; Birtle, Alison J. F.R.C.R.; Bowen, Jo F.R.C.R.; Brock, Susannah F.R.C.R.; Chakraborti, Prabir F.R.C.R.; Ferguson, Catherine F.R.C.R.; Gale, Joanna B.M.; Gray, Emma F.R.C.R.; Hingorani, Mohan Ph.D.; Hoskin, Peter J. F.R.C.R.; Lester, Jason F. F.R.C.R.; Malik, Zafar I. F.R.C.R.; McKinna, Fiona F.R.C.R.; McPhail, Neil F.R.C.R.; Money-Kyrle, Julian F.R.C.R.; O’Sullivan, Joe Ph.D.; Parikh, Omi F.R.C.R.; Protheroe, Andrew F.R.C.P.; Robinson, Angus F.R.C.R.; *Srihari, Narayanan N. F.R.C.R.; Thomas, Carys M.R.C.P.; Wagstaff, John Ch.B.; Wylie, James F.R.C.R.; Zarkar, Anjali F.R.C.R.; Parmar, Mahesh K.B. D.Phil.; Sydes, Matthew R. M.Sc.; the STAMPEDE Investigators

Citation:
New England Journal of Medicine; Jul 2017; vol. 377 (no. 4); p. 338-351

Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone improves survival in men with relapsed prostate cancer. We assessed the effect of this combination in men starting long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), using a multigroup, multistage trial design. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive ADT alone or ADT plus abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and prednisolone (5 mg daily) (combination therapy). Local radiotherapy was mandated for patients with node-negative, nonmetastatic disease and encouraged for those with positive nodes. For patients with nonmetastatic disease with no radiotherapy planned and for patients with metastatic disease, treatment continued until radiologic, clinical, or prostatespecific
antigen (PSA) progression; otherwise, treatment was to continue for 2 years or until any type of progression, whichever came first. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. The intermediate primary outcome was failure-free survival (treatment failure was defined as radiologic, clinical, or PSA progression or death from prostate cancer). RESULTS: A total of 1917 patients underwent randomization from November 2011 through January 2014. The median age was 67 years, and the median PSA level was 53 ng per milliliter. A total of 52% of the patients had metastatic disease, 20% had node-positive or node-indeterminate nonmetastatic disease, and 28% had node-negative, nonmetastatic disease; 95% had newly diagnosed disease. The median follow-up was 40 months. There were 184 deaths in the combination group as compared with 262 in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.76; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.75 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.61 in those with metastatic disease. There were 248 treatment-failure events in the combination group as compared with 535 in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.34; P<0.001); the hazard ratio was 0.21 in patients with nonmetastatic disease and 0.31 in those with metastatic disease. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 47% of the patients in the combination group (with nine grade 5 events) and in 33% of the patients in the ADT-alone group (with three grade 5 events). CONCLUSIONS: Among men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer, ADT plus abiraterone and prednisolone was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and failure-free survival than ADT alone. (Funded by Cancer Research U.K. and others; STAMPEDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00268476, and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN78818544.)

Link to full-text [OpenAthens account required]