Efficacy and safety of enzalutamide (ENZ) vs placebo (PL) in chemotherapy-naïve patients (pts) with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) following androgen deprivation therapy (ADT): An Asian multinational study

D. Ye,H. Ahn,Y-S. Pu,H. Weiqing,L-P. Xie,S-P. Huang,H-C. Wu,L. Ma,S. Yamada,S. Noda,Y. Sun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw372.33
IF: 51.769
2016-01-01
Annals of Oncology
Abstract:In PREVAIL, pts with progressive mCRPC following ADT had significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) on ENZ vs PL (Beer TM et al, N Engl J MED, 2014). In the current study, the efficacy and safety of ENZ vs PL were evaluated in a similar patient population in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea. Pts with asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic progressive mCRPC following ADT were randomised 1:1 to ENZ (160 mg/day) or PL. The primary endpoint was time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression (time from randomisation to PSA progression or death). The secondary endpoints were OS (time from randomisation to death) and rPFS (time from randomisation to radiographic progression). An interim analysis was planned following 169 PSA progression events. The unstratified Cox proportional hazards model (covariate = treatment group) and log-rank test (2-sided significance level = 0.011, primary; 0.05, secondary) were used. Safety was assessed by recording adverse events (AE). 409 pts from 49 centres were randomised (209 ENZ, 200 PL). Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. 169 PSA progression events occurred. Median time to PSA progression was 7.5 months in the ENZ arm vs 2.9 for PL (HR 0.36; 95% CI 0.27, 0.50; p < 0.0001). Median OS was not yet reached (NYR). Current results show a reduced risk of death in the ENZ arm vs PL (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.17, 0.70; p = 0.0021). Median time to radiographic progression was also NYR for ENZ but was 4.7 months for PL (HR 0.28; 95% CI 0.19, 0.42; p < 0.0001). The median time on treatment was 6.6 months for ENZ and 3.7 for PL. Although slightly more ENZ pts reported at least 1 treatment-emergent AE (TEAE; 84.7% vs 80.5%), more pts in the PL arm reported at least 1 serious TEAE, 17.2% vs 24.5%; grade ≥3 TEAE, 24.4% vs 29.5% and TEAE leading to treatment discontinuation, 12.9% vs 17.0%. No seizures or convulsions were reported in either arm. ENZ showed significantly improved time to PSA progression over PL and was generally well tolerated. The trial was stopped as it had reached its primary objective.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?