BACKGROUND: Triplet therapy, androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) plus docetaxel plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), is a novel guideline-recommended treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the optimal selection of the patient most likely to benefit from triplet therapy remains unclear.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis to assess the oncologic benefit of triplet therapy in mHSPC patients stratified by disease volume and compare them with doublet treatment regimens. Three databases and meeting abstracts were queried in March 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating patients treated with systemic therapy for mHSPC stratified by disease volume. Primary interests of measure were overall survival (OS). We followed the PRISMA guideline and AMSTAR2 checklist.
RESULTS: Overall, eight RCTs were included for meta-analyses and network meta-analyses (NMAs). Triplet therapy outperformed docetaxel plus ADT in terms of OS in both patients with high-(pooled HR: 0.73, 95%CI 0.64-0.84) and low-volume mHSPC (pooled HR: 0.71, 95%CI 0.52-0.97). There was no statistically significant difference between patients with low- vs. high-volume in terms of OS benefit from adding ARSI to docetaxel plus ADT (p = 0.9). Analysis of treatment rankings showed that darolutamide plus docetaxel plus ADT (90%) had the highest likelihood of improved OS in patients with high-volume disease, while enzalutamide plus ADT (84%) had the highest in with low-volume disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Triplet therapy improves OS in mHSPC patients compared to docetaxel-based doublet therapy, irrespective of disease volume. However, based on treatment ranking, triplet therapy should preferably be considered for patients with high-volume mHSPC while those with low-volume are likely to be adequately treated with ARSI + ADT.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear to what extent the therapy of the primary local tumor, such as radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiation therapy (RT), improves overall survival in patients with low-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, data suggest a benefit of these therapies in preventing local events secondary to local tumor progression.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of adding local therapy (RP or RT) to systemic therapies, including androgen deprivation therapy, docetaxel, and/or androgen receptor axis-targeted agents, in preventing local events in mHSPC patients compared with systemic therapy alone (ie, without RT of the prostate or RP).
METHODS: Three databases and meeting abstracts were queried in November 2023 for studies analyzing mHSPC patients treated with local therapy. The primary outcome of interest was the prevention of overall local events (urinary tract infection, urinary tract obstruction, and gross hematuria) due to local disease progression. Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes according to the type of local therapy (RP or RT).
RESULTS: Overall, six studies, comprising two randomized controlled trials, were included for a systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall incidence of local events was significantly lower in the local treatment plus systemic therapy group than in the systemic therapy only groups (relative risk [RR]: 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28-0.88, p = 0.016). RP significantly reduced the incidence of overall local events (RR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.11-0.52) and that of local events requiring surgical intervention (RR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.03-0.25). Although there was no statistically significant difference between the RT plus systemic therapy and systemic therapy only groups in terms of overall local events, the incidence of local events requiring surgical intervention was significantly lower in the RT plus systemic therapy group (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.49-0.99); local events requiring surgical intervention of the upper urinary tract was significantly lower in local treatment groups (RR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.37-0.98, p = 0.04). However, a subgroup analysis revealed that neither RP nor RT significantly impacted the prevention of local events requiring surgical intervention of the upper urinary tract.
CONCLUSIONS: In some patients with mHSPC, RP or RT of primary tumor seems to reduce the incidence of local progression and events requiring surgical intervention. Identifying which patients are most likely to benefit from local therapy, and at what time point (eg, after response of metastases), will be necessary to set up a study assessing the risk, benefits, and alternatives to therapy of the primary tumor in the mHSPC setting.
RESULTS: Our study suggests that local therapy of the prostate, such as radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer can prevent local events, such as urinary obstruction and gross hematuria.

Second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs), namely enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide, are good for improving survival outcomes in prostate cancer patients, but some researchers have shown that using SGARIs increases side effects, which complicates clinicians\' choice of. Therefore, we performed this network meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and toxicity of several SGARIs in the treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from January 2000 to December 2022 to identify randomized controlled studies associated with SGARIs. We use Stata 16.0 and R 4.4.2 for data analysis, hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the results.
This meta-analysis included 7 studies with a total of 9488 patients. In mHSPC, enzalutamide and darolutamide had a positive effect on overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.82), but we did not find a difference in their efficacy to improve OS (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.75-1.89). Also in nmCRPC, enzalutamide, apalutamide and darolutamide were beneficial for metastasis-free survival (MFS) (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.25-0.41). Compared to darolutamide, enzalutamide (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.93) and apalutamide (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.91) prolonged MFS, but there was no difference in efficacy between enzalutamide and apalutamide (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73-1.28). Finally in mCRPC, there was no significant difference in indirect effects on OS between pre- and post-chemotherapy enzalutamide (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70-1.13). However, using enzalutamide before chemotherapy to improve radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) was a better option (HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.62-2.73).
The SGARIs used in each trial were beneficial for the primary endpoint in the study. Firstly there was no significant difference in the effect of enzalutamide and darolutamide in improving OS in patients with mHSPC. Secondly improving MFS in patients with nmCRPC was best achieved with enzalutamide and apalutamide. In addition both pre- and post-chemotherapy use of enzalutamide was beneficial for OS in mCRPC patients, but for improving rPFS pre-chemotherapy use of enzalutamide should be preferred.The INPLASY registration number of this systematic review is INPLASY202310084.

Purpose: To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of currently available docetaxel-based systemic triplet therapies for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Methods: We searched for eligible publications in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Improvements in overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression-free time (rPFS) were compared indirectly using network meta-analysis and evaluated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Other secondary endpoints, such as time to castration-resistant prostate cancer and/or adverse events (AEs), were also compared and evaluated. Results: Five trials were selected and analyzed using a network meta-analysis. Compared to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel, darolutamide (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.68, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.57-0.80) and abiraterone (HR: 0.75, 95% CrI: 0.59-0.95) triplet therapy had significantly longer OS, and darolutamide triplet therapy was the first treatment ranked. Abiraterone (HR: 0.49, 95% CrI: 0.39-0.61) and enzalutamide (HR: 0.52, 95% CrI: 0.30-0.89) had significantly better rPFS than ADT plus docetaxel; however, all three therapies, including abiraterone, apalutamide, and enzalutamide, were the best options with a similar SUCRA. At most secondary endpoints, systemic triplet therapy was superior to ADT plus docetaxel. The risk of any AEs in darolutamide or abiraterone triplet therapy was comparable with ADT plus docetaxel (odds ratio [OR]: 2.53, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.68-12.63; OR: 1.07, 95% CrI: 0.03-36.25). Abiraterone triplet therapy had an increased risk of grade≥3 AEs (OR: 1.56, 95% CrI: 1.15-2.11). Conclusion: Systemic triplet therapy was more effective than ADT plus docetaxel for mHSPC. Of the triplet therapy regimens, darolutamide ranked first in terms of improved OS. Abiraterone and enzalutamide triplet ranked first in terms of rFPS, however, it did not confer a statistically difference among all triplet regimens. The overall risk of AEs was comparable. More studies are required for current and potential combinations of systemic triplet therapy.

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported overall survival benefit of triplet therapy (androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy agent [ARAT], docetaxel, and androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) over that of doublet therapy (docetaxel and ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Ranking of therapy options and comparisons between triplet therapy and doublet ARAT and ADT therapy are scarce.
To rank therapy options (triplet vs doublet [docetaxel and ADT] vs doublet [ARAT and ADT]) and address them within formal network meta-analyses (NMAs); subsequently, NMAs were refitted following stratification according to (1) low- and high-volume tumor burden and (2) doublet versus triplet therapy.
A systematic literature review (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane database) of RCT trials that investigated the overall survival efficacy of systemic treatment in the setting of mHSPC was conducted. The study search and inclusion criteria were in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.
Ten RCTs (n = 9702) were identified. The NMA focusing on the overall cohort of mHSPC demonstrated that triplet therapies (darolutamide, docetaxel, and ADT, and abiraterone, docetaxel, and ADT) were ranked first and second (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-0.66; HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.46-0.78), followed by doublet therapy (ARAT and ADT) and lastly docetaxel and ADT. Owing to missing data within one RCT, the NMA for low- and high-volume mHSPC focused on nine trials. In high-volume disease, triplet therapy (abiraterone, docetaxel, and ADT) was ranked first (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.38-0.71).
Triplet therapy, consisting of an ARAT, docetaxel, and ADT, ranked first in systematic treatment in mHSPC. Moreover, triplet therapy might result in more pronounced overall survival benefit than doublet ARAT and ADT therapy in high-volume mHSPC.
We compared different systemic therapy options for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and concluded that triplet therapy, consisting of androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy agent, docetaxel, and androgen deprivation therapy, seems to be most beneficial for overall survival. Back to top.

Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examined the role of adding androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs), including abiraterone acetate (ABI), apalutamide, darolutamide (DAR), and enzalutamide (ENZ), to docetaxel (DOC) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).
To analyze the oncologic benefit of triplet combination therapies using ARSI + DOC + ADT, and comparing them with available treatment regimens in patients with mHSPC.
Three databases and meetings abstracts were queried in April 2022 for RCTs analyzing patients treated with first-line combination systemic therapy for mHSPC. The primary interests of measure were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients with low- and high-volume disease as well as de novo and metachronous metastasis.
Overall, 11 RCTs were included for meta-analyses and network meta-analyses (NMAs). We found that the triplet combinations outperformed DOC + ADT in terms of OS (pooled hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.84) and PFS (pooled HR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.42-0.58). There was no statistically significant difference between patients with low- and high-volume disease in terms of an OS benefit from adding an ARSI to DOC +ADT (both HR: 0.79; p = 1). Based on NMAs, triplet therapy also outperformed ARSI + ADT in terms of OS (DAR + DOC + ADT: pooled HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-0.99) and PFS (ABI + DOC + ADT: HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.91, and ENZ + DOC + ADT: HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.93). An analysis of treatment ranking among de novo mHSPC patients showed that triplet therapy had the highest likelihood of improved OS in patients with high-volume disease; however, doublet therapy using ARSI + ADT had the highest likelihood of improved OS in patients with low-volume disease.
We found that the triplet combination therapy improves survival endpoints in mHSPC patients compared with currently available doublet treatment regimens. Our findings need to be confirmed in further head-to-head trials with longer follow-up and among various patient populations.
Our study suggests that triplet therapy with androgen receptor signaling inhibitor, docetaxel, androgen deprivation therapy prolongs survival in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer compared with the current standard doublet therapy.

Determining the risk for progression or survival after standard androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) is essential for stratifying patients according to expected outcomes in future studies of treatment combination. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to estimate the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) probabilities in the control group of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different regimens of standard androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) in mHSPC and to identify possible predictors of outcomes.
Studies reporting time-dependent outcomes (progression or death) after standard ADT treatment of mHSPC were searched in MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and the Cochrane Library from inception through June 2021. Data on patient populations and outcomes were extracted from each study by three independent observers and combined using a distribution-free summary survival curve. Primary outcomes were actuarial probabilities of disease progression and survival. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate of the actuarial PFS rate was 35.2% at two years. The pooled actuarial OS rate was 62.5% at three years. Heterogeneity among studies was highly significant for all outcomes. By univariate meta-regression analyses, high-volume disease and the presence of visceral metastases were associated with shorter survival. Our findings show that PFS and OS are highly variable in patients with mHSPC treated with ADT, providing a helpful benchmark for indirect comparisons of the benefits of the combination of chemotherapy and second-generation hormonotherapy.