Clinical Utility of the Nuclear-localized AR-V7 Biomarker in Circulating Tumor Cells in Improving Physician Treatment Choice in Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.
Aged
Androgen Receptor Antagonists
/ therapeutic use
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ blood
Cell Nucleus
Cross-Sectional Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplastic Cells, Circulating
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant
/ blood
Protein Isoforms
/ blood
Receptors, Androgen
/ blood
Survival Rate
Taxoids
/ therapeutic use
Treatment Outcome
AR-V7
Circulating tumor cells
Liquid biopsy
Prostate cancer
Treatment decisions
Journal
European urology
ISSN: 1873-7560
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 7512719
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2020
02 2020
Historique:
received:
28
03
2019
accepted:
13
08
2019
pubmed:
28
10
2019
medline:
19
3
2021
entrez:
26
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Proof of the clinical utility of a biomarker is when its use informs a management decision and improves patient outcomes relative to when it is not used. To model the clinical benefit of the nuclear-localized androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) test for men with progressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) at the second line of therapy or greater to inform the choice of an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) or a taxane. The study population was a cross-sectional cohort of 193 unique patients with progressing mCRPC from whom 255 samples were drawn at the time of the second line or later treatment decision who then received an ARSI or taxane, with up to 3 yr of additional follow-up Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were identified from blood samples and tested for AR-V7. Physicians were blinded to AR-V7 status and the testing laboratory was blinded to outcomes. We measured physician propensity for choosing an ARSI or taxane based on patient prognosis. We also measured overall survival (OS) adjusted for physician propensity by drug class; OS data were analyzed both without and with knowledge of nuclear-localized AR-V7 status. Treating physicians had a propensity for choosing a taxane over an ARSI for patients with more advanced disease or who received an ARSI as the immediate prior therapy. After adjusting for physician propensity, discernible OS differences were not observed between taxane- and ARSI-treated patients (median 15.6 vs 14.4 mo; p =0.11). Patients with detectable nuclear-localized AR-V7 in CTCs had superior survival with taxanes over ARSIs (median 9.8 vs 5.7 mo; p = 0.041). AR-V7-negative patients had superior survival on ARSIs over taxanes (p = 0.033) but overlapping curves limit the interpretation. Mutivariable models showed a robust interaction between AR-V7 status and drug, and a lower risk of death on taxanes for AR-V7-positive men. Use of the nuclear-localized AR-V7 CTC test to inform treatment choice can improve patient outcomes relative to decisions based solely on standard-of-care measures. Men with metastatic prostate cancer who test positive for AR-V7 protein in circulating tumor cells are likely to live longer if taxane chemotherapy is used.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Proof of the clinical utility of a biomarker is when its use informs a management decision and improves patient outcomes relative to when it is not used.
OBJECTIVE
To model the clinical benefit of the nuclear-localized androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) test for men with progressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) at the second line of therapy or greater to inform the choice of an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) or a taxane.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
The study population was a cross-sectional cohort of 193 unique patients with progressing mCRPC from whom 255 samples were drawn at the time of the second line or later treatment decision who then received an ARSI or taxane, with up to 3 yr of additional follow-up Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were identified from blood samples and tested for AR-V7. Physicians were blinded to AR-V7 status and the testing laboratory was blinded to outcomes.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES
We measured physician propensity for choosing an ARSI or taxane based on patient prognosis. We also measured overall survival (OS) adjusted for physician propensity by drug class; OS data were analyzed both without and with knowledge of nuclear-localized AR-V7 status.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS
Treating physicians had a propensity for choosing a taxane over an ARSI for patients with more advanced disease or who received an ARSI as the immediate prior therapy. After adjusting for physician propensity, discernible OS differences were not observed between taxane- and ARSI-treated patients (median 15.6 vs 14.4 mo; p =0.11). Patients with detectable nuclear-localized AR-V7 in CTCs had superior survival with taxanes over ARSIs (median 9.8 vs 5.7 mo; p = 0.041). AR-V7-negative patients had superior survival on ARSIs over taxanes (p = 0.033) but overlapping curves limit the interpretation. Mutivariable models showed a robust interaction between AR-V7 status and drug, and a lower risk of death on taxanes for AR-V7-positive men.
CONCLUSIONS
Use of the nuclear-localized AR-V7 CTC test to inform treatment choice can improve patient outcomes relative to decisions based solely on standard-of-care measures.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Men with metastatic prostate cancer who test positive for AR-V7 protein in circulating tumor cells are likely to live longer if taxane chemotherapy is used.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31648903
pii: S0302-2838(19)30669-4
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.08.020
pmc: PMC7472426
mid: NIHMS1621320
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Androgen Receptor Antagonists
0
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Protein Isoforms
0
Receptors, Androgen
0
Taxoids
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
170-177Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P50 CA092629
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Références
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Feb;16(2):152-60
pubmed: 25601341
Am J Community Psychol. 2013 Dec;52(3-4):380-92
pubmed: 24185755
Stat Med. 1998 Oct 15;17(19):2265-81
pubmed: 9802183
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017 Jun 19;:
pubmed: 28729067
J Clin Oncol. 2019 May 1;37(13):1120-1129
pubmed: 30865549
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Nov 4;101(21):1446-52
pubmed: 19815849
JAMA Oncol. 2016 Nov 1;2(11):1441-1449
pubmed: 27262168
Genet Med. 2016 Aug;18(8):780-7
pubmed: 26633547
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018 Jun;16(3):219-225
pubmed: 29274813
Eur Urol. 2018 Jul;74(1):37-45
pubmed: 28844372
Ann Oncol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1589-604
pubmed: 26041764
Eur Urol. 2017 Jun;71(6):874-882
pubmed: 27979426
Urol Oncol. 2018 Nov;36(11):500.e1-500.e9
pubmed: 30201382
Med Oncol. 2017 Aug 10;34(9):160
pubmed: 28795333
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 20;34(12):1402-18
pubmed: 26903579
Eur Urol. 2015 Jan;67(1):23-29
pubmed: 25018038
Eur Urol. 2017 Feb;71(2):151-154
pubmed: 27477525
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Mar 1;26(7):1148-59
pubmed: 18309951
Eur Urol. 2014 Jan;65(1):30-6
pubmed: 23849416
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Sep 1;4(9):1179-1186
pubmed: 29955787