This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

No abstract

Purpose Generalizable, updated, and easy‐to‐use prognostic models for patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are lacking. We developed a nomogram predicting the overall survival (OS) of mCRPC patients receiving standard chemotherapy using data from five randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods Patients enrolled in the control arm of five RCTs (ASCENT 2, VENICE, CELGENE/MAINSAIL, ENTHUSE 14, and ENTHUSE 33) were randomly split between training (n = 1636, 70%) and validation cohorts (n = 700, 30%). In the training cohort, Cox regression tested the prognostic significance of all available variables as a predictor of OS. Independent predictors of OS on multivariable analysis were used to construct a novel multivariable model (nomogram). The accuracy of this model was tested in the validation cohort using time‐dependent area under the curve (tAUC) and calibration curves. Results Most of the patients were aged 65–74 years (44.5%) and the median (interquartile range) follow‐up time was 13.9 (8.9–20.2) months. At multivariable analysis, the following were independent predictors of OS in mCRPC patients: sites of metastasis (visceral vs. bone metastasis, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.24), prostate‐specific antigen (HR: 1.00), aspartate transaminase (HR: 1.01), alkaline phosphatase (HR: 1.00), body mass index (HR: 0.97), and hemoglobin (≥13 g/dl vs. <11 g/dl, HR: 0.41; all p < 0.05). A nomogram based on these variables was developed and showed favorable discrimination (tAUC at 12 and 24 months: 73% and 72%, respectively) and calibration characteristics on external validation. Conclusion A new prognostic model to predict OS of patients with mCRPC undergoing first line chemotherapy was developed. This can help urologists/oncologists in counseling patients and might be useful to better stratify patients for future clinical trials.

Background It is unknown whether the addition of anti-androgen therapy (AAT) to late salvage radiation therapy (sRT) can lead to oncological outcomes equivalent to that of early sRT in men with recurrent prostate cancer (CaP) after surgery. Methods Data on 670 men who participated in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)-9601 trial and who experienced biochemical recurrence were extracted using the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) data archive platform. Patients were stratified into four treatment groups: early sRT (pre-sRT prostate-specific antigen [PSA] < 0.7 ng/mL) and late sRT (pre-sRT PSA ≥ 0.7 ng/mL) with/without concomitant AAT, based on cut-offs reported in the original trial. Time-varying Cox proportional hazards and Fine–Gray competing-risk regression analyses assessed the adjusted hazards of overall mortality, CaP-specific mortality, and metastasis among the four treatment groups. Results At 15-years (median follow-up of 14.7 years), for patients treated with early sRT, early sRT with AAT, late sRT, and late sRT with AAT, the overall mortality, CaP-specific mortality, and metastasis rates were 22.9, 22.8, 40.1, and 22.9% (log-rank p = 0.0039), 12.1, 3.9, 22.7, and 8.0% (Gray’s p = 0.0004), and 18.8, 14.6, 35.9, and 19.5% (Gray’s p = 0.0004), respectively. Time-varying multivariable adjusted analysis demonstrated increased hazards of overall mortality in patients receiving delayed sRT versus early sRT (hazards ratio [HR] 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.17); however, no difference remained after the addition of concomitant AAT to late sRT (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55–1.32, referent early sRT). Likewise, the hazards of cancer-specific mortality and metastatic progression were worse for late sRT when compared with early sRT, but were no different after the addition of AAT to late sRT. Conclusions Poorer outcomes associated with late sRT in men with recurrent CaP may be rescued by delivery of concomitant AAT.

No abstract