Impact of Concomitant Cardiovascular Therapies on Efficacy and Safety of Relugolix vs Leuprolide: Subgroup Analysis from HERO Study in Advanced Prostate Cancer.
Cardiovascular agents
Leuprolide
Prostate cancer
Relugolix
Journal
Advances in therapy
ISSN: 1865-8652
Titre abrégé: Adv Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8611864
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2023
11 2023
Historique:
received:
04
06
2023
accepted:
01
08
2023
medline:
12
10
2023
pubmed:
15
9
2023
entrez:
15
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cardiovascular (CV) events are the leading cause of death in prostate cancer. Men with prostate cancer are likely to have CV risk factors and use CV-related concomitant medications. In the phase 3 HERO study, a 54% lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events was reported in men treated with the oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, relugolix, vs leuprolide. Herein, we characterize the impact of concomitant CV therapies on efficacy and safety in the HERO study. In HERO, 930 men with advanced prostate cancer (APC) were randomized 2:1 and treated with relugolix (120 mg orally once daily; after single 360 mg loading dose) or leuprolide (injections every 3 months) for 48 weeks. Subgroups analyzed included men who received antihypertensives, antithrombotics, or lipid-modifying therapies (LMAs), as well as the most common drug classes (> 10%) and single most common agent within each class. Assessments included sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (< 50 ng/dL) through 48 weeks and safety. Antihypertensives, antithrombotics, and LMAs were utilized by 52.7%, 39.1%, and 39.6% of men in HERO, respectively. In the main subgroups, point estimates for sustained castration rates were generally consistent with overall estimates of relugolix and leuprolide observed in the overall population. Sustained castration rates were also mostly consistent for men taking the most common drug classes and individual agents in each class (losartan [n = 103]: relugolix, 95.4% vs leuprolide, 80.6%; amlodipine [n = 229]: 97.2% vs 85.5%; metoprolol [n = 88]: 95.7% vs 86.9%; acetylsalicylic acid [n = 259]: 97.0% vs 92.1%; clopidogrel [n = 43]: 96.4% vs 86.7%; simvastatin [n = 78]: 98.0% vs 87.3%). Incidence and types of adverse events (AEs) among men who received these medications were mostly consistent with overall population results, with some increases in grade ≥ 3 and fatal AEs. Relugolix suppressed testosterone and was generally well tolerated when given with concomitant CV agents. Clinical Trial ID NCT03085095. Data presented at 15th Annual Genitourinary Cancers Symposium; February 17-19, 2022, San Francisco, CA, USA [Abstract 101, Poster board E11]. The published abstract from this presentation can be found at https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.6_suppl.101 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 37713020
doi: 10.1007/s12325-023-02634-7
pii: 10.1007/s12325-023-02634-7
pmc: PMC10567896
doi:
Substances chimiques
Leuprolide
EFY6W0M8TG
relugolix
0
Antihypertensive Agents
0
Fibrinolytic Agents
0
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal
0
Testosterone
3XMK78S47O
Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone
33515-09-2
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03085095']
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
4919-4927Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Sturgeon KM, Deng L, Bluethmann SM, et al. A population-based study of cardiovascular disease mortality risk in US cancer patients. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(48):3889–97. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz766 .
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz766
pubmed: 31761945
pmcid: 6925383
Leong DP, Fradet V, Shayegan B, et al. Cardiovascular risk in men with prostate cancer: insights from the RADICAL PC study. J Urol. 2020;203(6):1109–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000714 .
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000714
pubmed: 31899651
Shore ND, Saad F, Cookson MS, et al. Oral relugolix for androgen-deprivation therapy in advanced prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(23):2187–96. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2004325 .
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2004325
pubmed: 32469183
Tisseverasinghe S, Tolba M, Saad F, Gravis G, Bahoric B, Niazi T. Should prostate cancer patients with history of cardiovascular events be preferentially treated with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antagonists? J Clin Oncol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.22.00883 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.00883
pubmed: 35862876
Tsai HK, D’Amico AV, Sadetsky N, Chen MH, Carroll PR. Androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer and the risk of cardiovascular mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(20):1516–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djm168 .
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm168
pubmed: 17925537
Conteduca V, Di Lorenzo G, Tartarone A, Aieta M. The cardiovascular risk of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists in men with prostate cancer: an unresolved controversy. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013;86(1):42–51.
doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2012.09.008
pubmed: 23092636
Albertsen PC, Klotz L, Tombal B, Grady J, Olesen TK, Nilsson J. Cardiovascular morbidity associated with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists and an antagonist. Eur Urol. 2014;65(3):565–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.032 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.032
pubmed: 24210090
Margel D, Peer A, Ber Y, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity in a randomized trial comparing GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist among patients with advanced prostate-cancer and pre-existing cardiovascular disease. J Urol. 2019;202(6):1199–1208. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000384 .
Lopes RD, Higano CS, Slovin SF, et al. Cardiovascular safety of degarelix versus leuprolide in patients with prostate cancer: the primary results of the PRONOUNCE randomized trial. Circulation. 2021;144(16):1295–307. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056810 .
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056810
pubmed: 34459214
pmcid: 9004319
Scailteux LM, Vincendeau S, Balusson F, et al. Androgen deprivation therapy and cardiovascular risk: no meaningful difference between GnRH antagonist and agonists-a nationwide population-based cohort study based on 2010–2013 French Health Insurance data. Eur J Cancer. 2017;77:99–108.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.03.002
pubmed: 28390298
Higano CS. Cardiovascular disease and androgen axis-targeted drugs for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(23):2257–9.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMe2016433
pubmed: 32469186
Lowrance W, Dreicer R, Jarrard DF, et al. Updates to advanced prostate cancer: AUA/SUO guideline (2023). J Urol. 2023;209(6):1082–90.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003452
pubmed: 37096583
National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Prostate cancer. 2022. Version 2.2023. July 17, 2023. Available at NCCN.org. Accessed 19 July 2023.
Cassileth BR, Soloway MS, Vogelzang NJ, Schellhammer PS, Seidmon EJ, Hait HI, Kennealey GT. Patients’ choice of treatment in stage D prostate cancer. Urology. 1989;33(5 Suppl):57–62.
doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(89)90108-8
pubmed: 2523612
Garje R, Chennamadhavuni A, Mott SL, Chambers IM, Gellhaus P, Zakharia Y, Brown JA. Utilization and outcomes of surgical castration in comparison to medical castration in metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2020;18(2):e157–66.
doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.09.020
pubmed: 31956009
Sun M, Choueiri TK, Hamnvik OP, et al. Comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and orchiectomy: effects of androgen-deprivation therapy. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(4):500–7.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.4917
pubmed: 26720632