Efficacy and safety of interventions for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients progressing on androgen receptor-axis-targeted (ARAT) therapy: a systematic literature review.
Kevin Yan, Chakrapani Balijepalli, Lakshmi Gullapalli, Juhi Joshy, Sharon Kotum, Eric Druyts
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of interventions for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients progressing on androgen receptor-axis-targeted (ARAT) therapy: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Kevin Yan, Chakrapani Balijepalli, Lakshmi Gullapalli, Juhi Joshy, Sharon Kotum, Eric Druyts","doi":"10.1080/03007995.2024.2395435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To review the literature to outline findings from clinical trials assessing interventions for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in patients who have progressed on androgen receptor-axis-targeted (ARAT) therapies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature review was performed to identify trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of interventions used in patients that progressed on prior ARAT therapies. A literature search was conducted using the OVID platform that searched the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL bibliographic databases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 10,114 citations identified, a total of 36 studies representing 33 unique trials were included in the review. Of the 33 trials, 21 were randomized controlled trials and 12 were single-arm trials. A total of 11 were phase III trials, 13 were phase II trials, and 2 were phase I trials. The majority of included trials were open-label (<i>n</i> = 29) and the remaining were double-blind (<i>n</i> = 4). A total of 16 trials evaluated ARAT based therapies, 7 trials evaluated taxane-based treatments, 10 trials evaluated PARP inhibitors, 8 trials evaluated immunotherapies, and 8 trials evaluated other therapies (i.e. cabozantinib, mitoxantrone, radium-223,<sup>177</sup>[Lu-177]-PNT2002,<sup>177</sup>Lu-PSMA-617, samotolisib).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review demonstrated there are limited effective treatment options in this patient population. Unlike other cancer types, immunotherapy agents appear to provide little to no benefit. Conversely, agents such as taxane-based chemotherapy (e.g. cabazitaxel) and radionuclide therapy provide the most value in this patient population. Further research is needed to explore new therapies in this disease area and to optimize existing treatment strategies with more effective combination therapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":10814,"journal":{"name":"Current Medical Research and Opinion","volume":" ","pages":"1741-1752"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Medical Research and Opinion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2395435","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: To review the literature to outline findings from clinical trials assessing interventions for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in patients who have progressed on androgen receptor-axis-targeted (ARAT) therapies.
Methods: A systematic literature review was performed to identify trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of interventions used in patients that progressed on prior ARAT therapies. A literature search was conducted using the OVID platform that searched the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL bibliographic databases.
Results: Of the 10,114 citations identified, a total of 36 studies representing 33 unique trials were included in the review. Of the 33 trials, 21 were randomized controlled trials and 12 were single-arm trials. A total of 11 were phase III trials, 13 were phase II trials, and 2 were phase I trials. The majority of included trials were open-label (n = 29) and the remaining were double-blind (n = 4). A total of 16 trials evaluated ARAT based therapies, 7 trials evaluated taxane-based treatments, 10 trials evaluated PARP inhibitors, 8 trials evaluated immunotherapies, and 8 trials evaluated other therapies (i.e. cabozantinib, mitoxantrone, radium-223,177[Lu-177]-PNT2002,177Lu-PSMA-617, samotolisib).
Conclusions: This systematic review demonstrated there are limited effective treatment options in this patient population. Unlike other cancer types, immunotherapy agents appear to provide little to no benefit. Conversely, agents such as taxane-based chemotherapy (e.g. cabazitaxel) and radionuclide therapy provide the most value in this patient population. Further research is needed to explore new therapies in this disease area and to optimize existing treatment strategies with more effective combination therapies.
期刊介绍:
Current Medical Research and Opinion is a MEDLINE-indexed, peer-reviewed, international journal for the rapid publication of original research on new and existing drugs and therapies, Phase II-IV studies, and post-marketing investigations. Equivalence, safety and efficacy/effectiveness studies are especially encouraged. Preclinical, Phase I, pharmacoeconomic, outcomes and quality of life studies may also be considered if there is clear clinical relevance