暂无摘要。

Treatment intensification with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPi) have led to improved survival in advanced prostate cancer. However, ADT is linked to significant cardiovascular toxicity, and ARPi also negatively impacts cardiovascular health. Together with a higher prevalence of baseline cardiovascular risk factors reported among prostate cancer survivors at diagnosis, there is a pressing need to prioritise and optimise cardiovascular health in this population. Firstly, While no dedicated cardiovascular toxicity risk calculators are available, other tools such as SCORE2 can be used for baseline cardiovascular risk assessment. Next, selected patients on combination therapy may benefit from de-escalation of ADT to minimise its toxicities while maintaining cancer control. These patients can be characterised by an exceptional PSA response to hormonal treatment, favourable disease characteristics and competing comorbidities that warrant a less aggressive treatment regime. In addition, emerging molecular and genomic biomarkers hold the potential to identify patients who are suited for a de-escalated treatment approach either with ADT or with ARPi. One such biomarker is AR-V7 splice variant that predicts resistance to ARPi. Lastly, optimization of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors for patients through a coherent framework (ABCDE) and exercise therapy is equally important. This article aims to comprehensively review the cardiovascular impact of hormonal manipulation in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, propose overarching strategies to mitigate cardiovascular toxicity associated with hormonal treatment, and, most importantly, raise awareness about the detrimental cardiovascular effects inherent in our current management strategies involving hormonal agents.

OBJECTIVE: The utility of prostate radiotherapy (RT) is unclear in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) receiving intensified systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the role of prostate RT in low-volume mHSPC.
METHODS: Bibliographic databases and conference proceedings were searched through July 2023 for RCTs evaluating the addition of ARPIs or prostate RT to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy, defined as ADT or ADT plus docetaxel, for the initial treatment of mHSPC. We focused exclusively on aggregate data from the low-volume mHSPC subpopulation in these trials. We pooled the treatment arms into four groups: SOC, SOC plus ARPI, SOC plus RT, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). To compare treatment strategies, a fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was undertaken, while a Bayesian network meta-regression was performed to account for across-trial differences in docetaxel use as part of SOC and in proportions of patients with de novo presentation.
UNASSIGNED: Ten RCTs comprising 4423 patients were eligible. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve scores were 0.0006, 0.45, 0.62, and 0.94 for SOC, SOC plus RT, SOC plus ARPI, and SOC plus ARPI plus RT, respectively. On a meta-regression, in a population with de novo mHSPC and no docetaxel use, we did not find sufficient evidence of a difference in OS between SOC plus ARPI plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% credible interval: 0.51-1.16) and SOC plus RT versus SOC plus ARPI (HR: 1.10; 95% credible interval: 0.92-1.42).
CONCLUSIONS: There was some evidence that SOC plus ARPI plus RT reduced mortality compared with the next best strategy of SOC plus ARPI in patients with low-volume de novo mHSPC. A meta-analysis with individual patient data or an RCT is needed to confirm these findings.

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous cancer among American men. Multiple mechanisms are involved in tumorigenesis and progression to metastases. While androgen deprivation therapy remains the cornerstone of treatment, progression to castration-resistant disease becomes inevitable. Aberrant pathway activations of PI3K/AKT due to PTEN loss, epithelial-mesenchymal transition pathways, homologous recombination repair, and DNA repair pathway mechanisms of resistance and cross-talk lead to opportunities for therapeutic targeting in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. This review focuses on mechanisms of progression and key trials that evaluate the drugs and combinations that exploit these pathways.

The treatment paradigm for metastatic castrate-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) has evolved rapidly in the past decade with the approval of several life-prolonging therapies including docetaxel chemotherapy and multiple androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Recently reported phase-three trials have demonstrated a survival benefit of upfront triplet therapy with ADT, docetaxel plus either abiraterone acetate or darolutamide when compared to ADT plus docetaxel alone. However, multiple questions including the incremental benefit of docetaxel to a combination of ADT and ARPI, the timing of ARPI, optimal patient selection for triplet therapy and clinical and genomic biomarkers still remain to be answered. Moreover, real-world data suggest suboptimal treatment intensification with many patients treated with ADT alone highlighting challenges in implementation. In this article, we review the phase-three data associated with triplet therapy in mCSPC. We also discuss the knowledge gaps that exist despite the completion of these studies and how ongoing studies are likely to change the paradigm in the near future. Finally, we provide a simple algorithm based on current data that clinicians can use in daily practice to select patients for appropriate treatment strategies.

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer remains a challenging condition to treat. Among the available therapeutic options, the androgen receptor signaling inhibitors abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA) and enzalutamide (Enza), are currently the most used first-line therapies in clinical practice. However, validated clinical indicators of prognosis in this setting are still lacking. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a prognostic model based on the time of metastatic disease presentation (after prior local therapy [PLT] or de-novo [DN]) and disease burden (low volume [LV] or high-volume [HV]) at AA/Enza onset for mCRPC patients receiving either AA or Enza as first-line.
A cohort of consecutive patients who started AA or Enza as first-line treatment for mCRPC between January 1st, 2015, and April 1st, 2019 was identified from the clinical and electronic registries of the 9 American and European participating centers. Patients were classified into 4 cohorts by the time of metastatic disease presentation (PLT or DN) and volume of disease (LV or HV; per the E3805 trial, HV was defined as the presence of visceral metastases and/or at least 4 bone metastases of which at least 1 out the axial/pelvic skeleton) at AA/Enza onset. The endpoint was overall survival defined as the time from AA or Enza initiation, respectively, to death from any cause or censored at the last follow-up visit, whichever occurred first.
Of the 417 eligible patients identified, 157 (37.6%) had LV/PLT, 87 (20.9%) LV/DN, 64 (15.3%) HV/PLT, and 109 (26.1%) HV/DN. LV cohorts showed improved median overall survival (59.0 months; 95% CI, 51.0-66.9 months) vs. HV cohorts (27.5 months; 95% CI, 22.8-32.2 months; P = 0.0001), regardless of the time of metastatic presentation. In multivariate analysis, HV cohorts were confirmed associated with worse prognosis compared to those with LV (HV/PLT, HR = 1.87; p = 0.029; HV/DN, HR = 2.19; P = 0.002).
Our analysis suggests that the volume of disease could be a prognostic factor for patients starting AA or Enza as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, pending prospective clinical trial validation.

Over the last two decades, there has been significant progress in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Multiple treatments with diverse mechanisms of action have improved clinical outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) including taxane chemotherapy, immunotherapy, potent androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI), and radiopharmaceuticals (radium-223). As these treatments have entered standard clinical practise, clinicians have been challenged on how to optimally select and sequence them as the landmark studies establishing their efficacy had control arms with placebo or minimally effective therapy and there is a paucity of prospective trials examining treatment sequencing. More recently, the situation has been further complicated as the earlier up-front use of docetaxel and ARPI with standard gonadal testosterone inhibition has been shown to impart substantial improvements in disease control and survival for patients with castration sensitive prostate cancer. As new therapies enter into clinical practise such as the inhibitors of Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase and Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA)-targeted therapy, how to optimally select and sequence available treatments will be a continued dilemma in the absence of validated predictive biomarkers. This review will summarize the literature supporting the use of each active agent in mCRPC. We will propose a framework which will guide the selection of appropriate agents based on prior therapies, disease characteristics and biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: The last decade has seen a remarkable shift in the treatment landscape of advanced prostate cancer, none more so than in the management of metastatic castration-naïve disease.
METHODS: This narrative review will examine existing and emerging evidence supporting systemic therapy use for metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer (mCNPC) and provide guidance on the selection of these agents with respect to optimising patient outcomes.
RESULTS: The addition of either docetaxel (chemohormonal approach) or an AR pathway inhibitor (abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide) is a reasonable standard of care option for men commencing long-term ADT for mCNPC. While the issue of disease volume as a predictive biomarker for docetaxel benefit has previously been debated, recent data support consideration of upfront docetaxel in all patients, regardless of metastatic burden. Decisions regarding systemic treatment for men with mCNPC should be based on comprehensive consideration of disease, patient and logistical factors. Multiple novel therapeutics for mCNPC are currently under active investigation.
CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of potent systemic therapy earlier in the mCNPC disease course has resulted in dramatic improvements in clinical outcomes for patients. As the management of mCNPC continues to evolve, the future remains promising, with the expectation of ongoing improvements to patient outcomes and quality of life.