BACKGROUND: Inflammation plays a pivotal role in the progression of prostate cancer (PCa). Several immune-inflammatory indices, including neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lung immune prognostic index (LIPI), systemic inflammation response index (SIRI) and systemic immune inflammation index (SII), have demonstrated their prognostic values in several solid malignancies. However, Comparisons of superiority with these seven indices\' predictive efficacy within metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa (mHSPC) and metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC) remain uncertain.
METHODS: We retrospectively included 407 patients diagnosed with mHSPC and 158 patients with mCRPC at West China Hospital from 2005 to 2022. The seven immune-inflammatory indices were computed based on hematological data of mHSPC at initial diagnosis and mCRPC at progression to CRPC. Prognostic value for castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival (CFS), overall survival (OS), prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PSA-PFS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox regression models, and chi-square tests. The predictive performance of each immune-inflammatory index was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) in time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis and C-index calculation.
RESULTS: All seven immune-inflammatory indices were significantly associated with CFS and OS in the mHSPC cohort, as well as with PSA response, PSA-PFS, and OS in the mCRPC cohort. In the mHSPC cohort, LIPI consistently exhibited higher AUC values compared to NLR, dNLR, LMR, PLR, SII, and SIRI for predicting CFS and OS. This indicates that LIPI had a superior discriminative ability compared to the other indices (C-index of LIPI: 0.643 and 0.686 for CFS and OS, respectively). Notably, the predictive advantage of LIPI over other indices in the mHSPC stage diminished in the mCRPC stage.
CONCLUSIONS: This study firstly confirmed the prognostic value of SII, SIRI and LIPI in mHSPC and mCRPC, and revealed that LIPI had a higher predictive power than NLR, dNLR, LMR, PLR, SII and SIRI in mHSPC. These non-invasive indices can enable clinicians to quickly assess the prognosis of patients.

For metastatic prostate cancer, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the key strategy to control the disease. However, after 18-24 months of treatment, most patients will progress from metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) even with ADT. Once patients enter into mCRPC, they face with significant declines in quality of life and a dramatically reduced survival period. Thus, doublet therapy, which combines ADT with new hormone therapy (NHT) or ADT with docetaxel chemotherapy, substitutes ADT alone and has become the \"gold standard\" for the treatment of mHSPC. In recent years, triplet therapy, which combines ADT with NHT and docetaxel chemotherapy, has also achieved impressive effects in mHSPC. This article provides a comprehensive review of the recent applications of the triplet therapy in the field of mHSPC.

UNASSIGNED: The current treatment strategy for metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (mHSPC) is the combination of Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibitors (ARSIs) medicines with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, there is a lack of real-world data comparing the efficacy of different ARSI pharmaceuticals. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of bicalutamide, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide in combination with ADT for patients with mHSPC.
UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively analyzed 82 patients diagnosed with mHSPC, including 18 patients treated with abiraterone acetate with prednisone, 21 patients with enzalutamide, 20 patients with apalutamide, and 23 patients with bicalutamide. We evaluated PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), imaging progression-free survival (r PFS), castration resistance progression-free survival (CRPC-PFS), and overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Additionally, we explored relevant factors affecting prognosis through univariate and multivariate Cox risk-proportionality models. PSA response rates at 3, 6, and 12 months, nadir PSA levels (nPSA), and time to nadir (TTN) in different medication subgroups after treatment were documented, and we used one-way ANOVA to determine the effect of these measures on patient prognosis.
UNASSIGNED: In comparison with bicalutamide, both enzalutamide and apalutamide have shown significant advantages in delaying disease progression among mHSPC patients. Specifically, enzalutamide has been found to significantly prolong PSA-PFS (HR 2.244; 95% CI 1.366-3.685, p=0.001), rPFS (HR 2.539; 95% CI 1.181-5.461; p= 0.007), CRPC-PFS (HR 2.131; 95% CI 1.295-3.506; p= 0.003), and OS (HR 2.06; 95% CI 1.183-3.585; P=0.005). Similarly, apalutamide has significantly extended PSA-PFS (HR 5.071; 95% CI 1.711-15.032; P= 0.003) and CRPC-PFS (HR 6.724; 95% CI 1.976-22.878; P=0.002) among patients. On the other hand, the use of abiraterone in combination with ADT did not demonstrate a significant advantage in delaying diseases progression when compared with the other three agents in mHSPC patients. There were no significant differences in overall adverse event rates among the four pharmaceuticals in terms of safety. Additionally, the observation of PSA kinetics revealed that enzalutamide, apalutamide, and abiraterone acetate had a significant advantage in achieving deep PSA response (PSA ≤ 0.2 ng/ml) compared with bicalutamide (p=0.007 at 12 months). Enzalutamide and apalutamide exhibited preeminence efficacy, with no substantial difference observed between the two medications.
UNASSIGNED: Abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide were found to significantly reduce and stabilize PSA levels in mHSPC patients more quickly and thoroughly than bicalutamide. Furthermore, enzalutamide and apalutamide were found to significantly prolong survival and delay disease progression in mHSPC patients compared with bicalutamide. It should be noted that abiraterone did not demonstrate a significant advantage in delaying disease compared with enzalutamide and apalutamide. After conducting drug toxicity analyses, it was determined that there were no significant differences among the four drugs.

UNASSIGNED: This study assessed the treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), costs, and annual prevalence and incidence of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in China.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective study was conducted using electronic medical records (EMR) of patients with prostate cancer from three tertiary-care hospitals in China between January 2014 and March 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze study outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 1086 patients with mHSPC and 679 patients with nmCRPC were included. From 2015 to 2020, the annual percentage of prevalent and incident cases of mHSPC decreased from 22.4% to 20.0% and 11.1% to 6.9%, respectively; for nmCRPC, these increased from 3.8% to 13.6% and 3.3% to 8.4%. Androgen-deprivation therapy and first-generation antiandrogens (bicalutamide or flutamide) were the most frequently prescribed prostate cancer-related medications at baseline and follow-up in patients with mHSPC. Bicalutamide was the most frequently prescribed prostate cancer-related medication during follow-up in patients with nmCRPC. For mHSPC, inpatient admission costs were the highest, with the median (interquartile range) costs per person-month being USD 403.00 (USD 85.50-1226.20), whereas outpatient visit costs were the highest for nmCRPC (USD 372.60 [USD 139.50-818.50]).
UNASSIGNED: EMR-based study design did not capture treatment patterns, HRU and associated costs, and healthcare encounters that occurred outside of participating hospitals, which could have led to underestimation of the true disease burden.
UNASSIGNED: A contrasting trend of a decline in the prevalence and incidence of mHSPC and an increase in these for nmCRPC was observed between 2015 and 2020 in China. Androgen-deprivation therapy and first-generation antiandrogens were the most frequently prescribed prostate cancer-related medications. Healthcare resource utilization was driven by inpatient costs in mHSPC and outpatient costs in nmCRPC.

UNASSIGNED: The role of prednisone in the prevention of androgen receptor antagonist-related rash and treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) is unclear. This pilot trial (ChiCTR2200060388) aimed to investigate the feasibility of apalutamide combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and short-course low-dose prednisone in the treatment of mHSPC.
UNASSIGNED: All patients received apalutamide and ADT and were randomly divided into two groups based on the administration of oral prednisone or not (control group). The primary endpoint was the incidence of rash. The secondary endpoint included the proportions of patients with a decline in PSA ≥50% from baseline, PSA ≥90% from baseline, and decreased to PSA ≤0.2 ng/mL.
UNASSIGNED: Between June 2021 and March 2022, a total of 83 patients were enrolled (41 in the prednisone group and 42 in the control group). During the 6-month follow-up, the incidence of rash was significantly lower in the prednisone group compared with the control group (17.1% vs. 38.1%, P=0.049). There were no significant differences in the incidence of other adverse events, the number of patients who required dose adjustment (reduction, interruption, or discontinuation) of apalutamide due to rash, the number of patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decreased by ≥50%, the number of patients with PSA decrease ≥90%, and the number of patients with PSA ≤0.2 ng/mL between the two groups. All patients with diabetes had stable glycemic control with no glucose-related adverse events.
UNASSIGNED: In patients with mHSPC, the addition of short-course low-dose prednisolone to apalutamide plus ADT can reduce the incidence of rash without risk of other adverse events.

Androgen receptor (AR) signaling is essential in prostate cancer treatment. For many years, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been primarily applied to manage advanced prostate cancer. However, most individuals with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) administered ADT alone are at risk of developing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in less than two years. New approaches employing novel AR inhibitors (ARi) as intensified upfront systemic treatment in mHSPC have recently demonstrated substantial benefits in delaying disease progression and prolonging overall survival. Administration of novel ARi has become the new standard of care in mHSPC. The new landscape simultaneously makes treatment choice more challenging. This review provides comprehensive data on molecular structure, pharmaceutical properties, and efficacy and safety profiles reported by pivotal clinical trials. We also discuss future directions with ongoing Phase III trials of novel ARi in mHSPC. Considering these biological and clinical insights, this review aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of differences in the development and applications of novel ARi for mHSPC, which may be helpful in designing strategies for first-line treatment choices.

UNASSIGNED: We compared the effectiveness of currently available systemic therapies for high-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and aimed to establish the optimal treatment regimen.
UNASSIGNED: We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of systemic therapy in patients with high-volume mHSPC. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to indirectly compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of various systemic therapies.
UNASSIGNED: Eleven RCTs (6708 participants) finally met the eligibility criteria. Compared with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone, rezvilutamide (REZ) [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.77], abiraterone (ABI) (HR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.53-0.71), apalutamide (APA) (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56-0.88), enzalutamide (ENZ) (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.53-0.80), docetaxel (DOC) (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.63-0.84), darolutamide (DAR) + DOC (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.62), and ABI + DOC (HR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.38-0.71) significantly improved OS in patients with high-volume mHSPC. Compared with DOC, no advantages were observed for doublet therapies, including REZ, ABI, APA, and ENZ on the basis of ADT, whereas DAR + DOC (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.57-0.82) and ABI + DOC (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.55-0.95) was associated with better OS. The ranking analysis showed that triplet therapy (DAR + DOC + ADT and ABI + DOC + ADT) had the greatest improvement in OS, followed by REZ + ADT. All the regimens showed improved PFS in patients with high-volume mHSPC. Compared with DOC, significant differences were detected for DAR + DOC, ABI + DOC, ENZ + DOC, REZ, and ENZ. According to the ranking analysis, triplet therapy ranked first, followed by ENZ and REZ.
UNASSIGNED: REZ + ADT were the highest ranked doublet therapy for improvement in OS of patients with high-volume mHSPC, second only to triplet therapy (DAR + DOC + ADT and ABI + DOC + ADT).

暂无摘要。

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.

Bone metastasis has been suggested to be a significant impactor on the prognosis of newly diagnosed de novo metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), and some risk stratification models have been proposed on the basis of this hypothesis. However, the effectiveness of these risk stratification criteria has not been fully evaluated in China. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk stratification models in China.
A total of 140 patients who were newly diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer followed by primary androgen deprivation-based therapy from January 2008 to June 2021 at our institution were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into different groups on the basis of high- and low-volume disease (H/LVD) criteria, high-and low-risk disease (H/LRD) criteria, extremity bone metastasis criteria (EBM), and extent of disease (EOD) criteria. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to compare the validity and net benefit of these models. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, we performed univariable and multivariable analyses of the factors influencing overall survival (OS) and the time of progression to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).
The median patient age was 72 years. Most patients had a Gleason score ≥8 (102 cases, 72.9%) and clinical T stage >2 (75 cases, 53.6%). The median follow-up time was 25 months (range, 2-95 months). Ninety-two patients progressed to CRPC and fifty-seven patients died during the follow-up. The AUC of OS and CRPC showed that the EOD model had higher validity than the other risk stratification models. DCA shows that the net benefit of the EOD model on OS was better than that of the other risk stratification models. As for CRPC, the net benefit of the EOD model was second only to that of the H/LRD model when the threshold was <0.5; however, when the threshold was >0.5, the EOD model outperformed the other models. The effectiveness of EOD as an independent prognostic variable was verified through univariable and multivariable analyses.
The EOD model yields reasonable risk stratification for use in Chinese mHSPC patients, providing further evidence supporting its role in clinical decision-making.