Plasma androgen receptor and response to adapted and standard docetaxel regimen in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A multicenter biomarker study.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ administration & dosage
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ blood
Docetaxel
/ administration & dosage
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Drug Administration Schedule
Drug Monitoring
/ methods
Drug Resistance, Neoplasm
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Prednisone
/ administration & dosage
Progression-Free Survival
Prospective Studies
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant
/ blood
Receptors, Androgen
/ blood
Androgen receptor
Biomarker
Castration-resistant prostate cancer
Docetaxel
Dose modulation
Plasma DNA
Journal
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)
ISSN: 1879-0852
Titre abrégé: Eur J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9005373
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
received:
04
10
2020
revised:
27
03
2021
accepted:
19
04
2021
pubmed:
3
6
2021
medline:
11
11
2021
entrez:
2
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Plasma AR status has been identified as a potential biomarker of response in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receiving docetaxel or AR-targeted therapies. However, the relevance of plasma AR in the overall management of CRPC patients receiving different docetaxel doses is unknown. This was a multi-institution study of associations between baseline plasma AR copy number status, assessed by droplet digital PCR, and outcome in 325 mCRPC patients receiving docetaxel at standard or adapted regimen at the discretion of the treating physician. Upon analysis, patients were assigned randomly to either a training (n = 217) or validation (n = 108) cohort. In the training cohort, AR-gained patients treated with adapted docetaxel regimen had a significantly worse median progression-free survival (PFS) (3.8 vs 6.3 months, hazard ratio [HR] 2.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-4.95, p < 0.0001), median overall survival (10.8 vs 20.6 months, HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.09-3.62, p = 0.0064) and PSA response (PSA > -50%: odds ratio 4.88 95%CI 1.55-14.32, p = 0.013) as compared to plasma AR normal patients. These findings were all confirmed in the validation cohort. However, in patients treated with standard docetaxel regimen, these differences were not seen. The interaction between AR CN status and dose reduction of docetaxel was considered as independent factor for PFS in both the training and validation cohort (HR 2.84, 95% CI 1.41-5.73, p = 0.003, and HR 4.79, 95% CI 1.79-12.82, p = 0.002). Despite the retrospective non-randomised design of this study, our hypothesis-generating findings could suggest plasma AR as a potential biomarker for optimal docetaxel timing and dose in mCRPC patients. Prospective trials are warranted.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Plasma AR status has been identified as a potential biomarker of response in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receiving docetaxel or AR-targeted therapies. However, the relevance of plasma AR in the overall management of CRPC patients receiving different docetaxel doses is unknown.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
This was a multi-institution study of associations between baseline plasma AR copy number status, assessed by droplet digital PCR, and outcome in 325 mCRPC patients receiving docetaxel at standard or adapted regimen at the discretion of the treating physician. Upon analysis, patients were assigned randomly to either a training (n = 217) or validation (n = 108) cohort.
RESULTS
In the training cohort, AR-gained patients treated with adapted docetaxel regimen had a significantly worse median progression-free survival (PFS) (3.8 vs 6.3 months, hazard ratio [HR] 2.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-4.95, p < 0.0001), median overall survival (10.8 vs 20.6 months, HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.09-3.62, p = 0.0064) and PSA response (PSA > -50%: odds ratio 4.88 95%CI 1.55-14.32, p = 0.013) as compared to plasma AR normal patients. These findings were all confirmed in the validation cohort. However, in patients treated with standard docetaxel regimen, these differences were not seen. The interaction between AR CN status and dose reduction of docetaxel was considered as independent factor for PFS in both the training and validation cohort (HR 2.84, 95% CI 1.41-5.73, p = 0.003, and HR 4.79, 95% CI 1.79-12.82, p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION
Despite the retrospective non-randomised design of this study, our hypothesis-generating findings could suggest plasma AR as a potential biomarker for optimal docetaxel timing and dose in mCRPC patients. Prospective trials are warranted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34077818
pii: S0959-8049(21)00271-9
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.04.025
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
AR protein, human
0
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Receptors, Androgen
0
Docetaxel
15H5577CQD
Prednisone
VB0R961HZT
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03381326']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
49-59Subventions
Organisme : Prostate Cancer UK
ID : PG12-49
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
ID : A22744
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/P002072/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
ID : C416/A26822
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement G. Attard certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (e.g., employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: G. Attard reports receiving commercial research grants from Janssen, Arno Therapeutics, and Innocrin Pharma; has received honoraria and/or travel support from the speakers' bureaus of Janssen, Astellas, Sanofi-Aventis, and Roche/Ventana; has received travel support from Pfizer, Abbott Laboratories, Bayer Healthcare, and Essa Pharmaceuticals; has ownership interest (including patents) in the Institute of Cancer Research Rewards to Inventors; and is a consultant for/advisory board member of Janssen-Cilag, Veridex, Bayer Healthcare, Roche/Ventana, Astellas, Medivation, Pfizer, Novartis, Millennium Pharma, Abbott Laboratories, and Essa Pharma. V. Conteduca, E. Gonzalez-Billalabeitia, and U. De Giorgi received speaker honoraria or travel support from Astellas, Janssen-Cilag, and Sanofi-Aventis. V. Conteduca received consulting fee from Bayer and is an advisory board member of Janssen. E. Castro reports receiving commercial research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen; has received honoraria and/or travel support from the speakers’ bureaus of Astra Zeneca, Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb and Roche; and is an advisory board member of Astellas, Bayer and Janssen. N. Romero Laorden has received honoraria and/or travel support from Bayer, Astellas, Janssen-Cilag, and Sanofi-Aventis. D. Olmos has a compensated advisory role for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Genetech/Roche, Janssen, and uncompensated advisory role for BioOncotech, Tokai; has received a speaker fee from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, Sanofi, and travel support from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, Roche; has received research funding (to the institution): AstraZeneca, BioOncotech, Bayer, Janssen. M. Marín-Aguilera has received travel support from Bristol Myers Squibb. Aventis. B. Mellado reports receiving commercial research grants from Roche and Bayer; has received travel support from Pfizer and Janssen; and is a consultant for/advisory board member of Roche, Sanofi, Janssen, Astellas Oncology, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb and Ipsen. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by other authors.