Activity of Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer With and Without DNA Repair Gene Aberrations.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antineoplastic Agents
/ therapeutic use
DNA Repair-Deficiency Disorders
/ drug therapy
Docetaxel
/ therapeutic use
Drug Therapy
/ methods
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Paclitaxel
/ therapeutic use
Platinum Compounds
/ therapeutic use
Prostatic Neoplasms
/ therapy
Retrospective Studies
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 10 2020
01 10 2020
Historique:
entrez:
28
10
2020
pubmed:
29
10
2020
medline:
9
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
DNA repair gene aberrations occur in 20% to 30% of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and some of these aberrations have been associated with sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition platinum-based treatments. However, previous trials assessing platinum-based treatments in patients with CRPC have mostly included a biomarker-unselected population; therefore, efficacy in these patients is unknown. To characterize the antitumor activity of platinum-based therapies in men with CRPC with or without DNA repair gene alterations. In this case series, data from 508 patients with CRPC treated with platinum-based therapy were collected from 25 academic centers from 12 countries worldwide. Patients were grouped by status of DNA repair gene aberrations (ie, cohort 1, present; cohort 2, not detected; and cohort 3, not tested). Data were collected from January 1986 to December 2018. Data analysis was performed in 2019, with data closure in April 2019. Treatment with platinum-based compounds either as monotherapy or combination therapy. The primary end points were as follows: (1) antitumor activity of platinum-based therapy, defined as a decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of at least 50% and/or radiological soft tissue response in patients with measurable disease and (2) the association of response with the presence or absence of DNA repair gene aberrations. A total of 508 men with a median (range) age of 61 (27-88) years were included in this analysis. DNA repair gene aberrations were present in 80 patients (14.7%; cohort 1), absent in 98 (19.3%; cohort 2), and not tested in 330 (65.0%; cohort 3). Of 408 patients who received platinum-based combination therapy, 338 patients (82.8%) received docetaxel, paclitaxel, or etoposide, and 70 (17.2%) received platinum-based combination treatment with another partner. A PSA level decrease of at least 50% was seen in 33 patients (47.1%) in cohort 1 and 26 (36.1%) in cohort 2 (P = .20). In evaluable patients, soft tissue responses were documented in 28 of 58 patients (48.3%) in cohort 1 and 21 of 67 (31.3%) in cohort 2 (P = .07). In the subgroup of 44 patients with BRCA2 gene alterations, PSA level decreases of at least 50% were documented in 23 patients (63.9%) and soft tissue responses in 17 of 34 patients (50.0%) with evaluable disease. In cohort 3, PSA level decreases of at least 50% and soft tissue responses were documented in 81 of 284 patients (28.5%) and 38 of 185 patients (20.5%) with evaluable disease, respectively. In this study, platinum-based treatment was associated with relevant antitumor activity in a biomarker-positive population of patients with advanced prostate cancer with DNA repair gene aberrations. The findings of this study suggest that platinum-based treatment may be considered an option for these patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33112397
pii: 2772301
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.21692
pmc: PMC7593810
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antineoplastic Agents
0
Platinum Compounds
0
Docetaxel
15H5577CQD
Paclitaxel
P88XT4IS4D
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2021692Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn
Références
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 10;27(32):5431-8
pubmed: 19805692
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 20;34(12):1402-18
pubmed: 26903579
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Oct;20(10):1432-1443
pubmed: 31515154
Ann Oncol. 2009 Apr;20(4):703-8
pubmed: 19179557
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jul 9;361(2):123-34
pubmed: 19553641
Nat Med. 2018 May;24(5):628-637
pubmed: 29713086
Eur Urol. 2018 Feb;73(2):178-211
pubmed: 28655541
Nature. 2005 Apr 14;434(7035):913-7
pubmed: 15829966
Cancer Sci. 2020 Apr;111(4):1375-1384
pubmed: 31958182
Nature. 2012 Jul 12;487(7406):239-43
pubmed: 22722839
Clin Cancer Res. 2020 Jun 1;26(11):2487-2496
pubmed: 32086346
Lancet Oncol. 2020 Jan;21(1):162-174
pubmed: 31806540
Eur Urol. 2013 May;63(5):920-6
pubmed: 22981675
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 28;382(22):2091-2102
pubmed: 32343890
N Engl J Med. 2015 Oct 29;373(18):1697-708
pubmed: 26510020
Eur J Pharmacol. 2014 Oct 5;740:364-78
pubmed: 25058905
Eur Urol Focus. 2016 Dec;2(5):465-466
pubmed: 28723506
Cancer Res. 2012 Nov 1;72(21):5588-99
pubmed: 23118055
Nature. 2005 Apr 14;434(7035):917-21
pubmed: 15829967
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 20;37(6):490-503
pubmed: 30625039
Cancers (Basel). 2019 Mar 12;11(3):
pubmed: 30871108
PLoS Med. 2014 Aug 26;11(8):e1001711
pubmed: 25158064
Eur Urol. 2020 Apr;77(4):508-547
pubmed: 32001144
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 20;33(3):244-50
pubmed: 25366685
Ann Oncol. 2016 Jun;27(6):975-984
pubmed: 27052650
Eur Urol. 2016 Jun;69(6):992-5
pubmed: 26724258
Eur Urol. 2019 Jan;75(1):184-192
pubmed: 30340782
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 10;377(6):523-533
pubmed: 28578601
Cancer. 2017 Sep 15;123(18):3532-3539
pubmed: 28608931
N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 4;375(5):443-53
pubmed: 27433846
Cancer. 2007 Feb 1;109(3):477-86
pubmed: 17186531