We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
A meta-analysis of six trials (Poseidon) found no overall survival benefit from adding long-course (24 months) hormone therapy to post-operative radiotherapy. It suggests that a shorter course of 4-6 months is adequate for most men, marking a significant shift towards treatment de-escalation to reduce long-term toxicity without compromising efficacy in this specific setting.
The negative ANSA-RAD trial, when contrasted with the positive STAMPEDE trial, demonstrates that patient selection is paramount in adjuvant therapy. The difference in outcomes was driven by risk definition, not the drug. This reinforces that "negative" trials are clinically vital for defining which patient populations do not benefit, preventing widespread overtreatment.
For an older patient population, the ultimate goal in prostate cancer treatment might not be a traditional cure, but rather turning it into a quiescent, chronic disease manageable with well-tolerated therapy, similar to HIV. This reframes success as long-term control until a patient dies of other causes.
The PRESTO trial evaluated adding apalutamide (APA) and abiraterone (Abby) to a standard LHRH analog. The triplet combination arm demonstrated increased toxicity without any additional efficacy gains compared to the doublet arm (LHRH + APA). This finding reinforces that more intensive combination therapy is not always better and can be detrimental in this setting.
The EMBARK trial showed that enzalutamide monotherapy was superior to standard ADT monotherapy for metastasis-free survival. This suggests potent AR antagonism may be a more effective strategy than simply depleting the testosterone ligand, challenging the long-held dogma of ADT being the fundamental building block for systemic prostate cancer therapy.
After years of successfully intensifying hormonal therapy, the focus in prostate cancer is shifting toward de-intensification. Researchers are exploring intermittent therapy for top responders and developing non-hormonal approaches like radioligands to spare patients the chronic, life-altering side effects of permanent castration.
For patients with oligometastatic disease who achieve a deep PSA response (e.g., to zero), oncologists consider finite treatment durations (e.g., 18-24 months) followed by observation. This "do less harm" approach challenges the standard of continuous therapy until progression, aiming for long-term treatment-free intervals.
For patients with conventionally negative imaging but positive PSMA PET scans (oligometastatic disease), continuous intensified therapy may be overtreatment. A new paradigm involves metastasis-directed therapy followed by a short course of escalated treatment, then stopping to observe. This "time-limited" approach balances efficacy with reducing long-term treatment burden.
The EMBARK trial demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit, yet experts argue this doesn't automatically make treatment mandatory. For asymptomatic patients with a long life expectancy, factors like treatment-free survival and quality of life are critical considerations, challenging the primacy of OS as the sole decision-driver in this population.
For biochemically recurrent (BCR) prostate cancer, which is often indolent, trials should not wait years to study treatment reduction. The NCI group universally agreed that de-escalation strategies—such as intermittent therapy—should be the default design from the outset, prioritizing quality of life and avoiding overtreatment.
The IMbark trial demonstrated that an ARPI (enzalutamide), either alone or with ADT, outperformed ADT monotherapy in high-risk patients. This pivotal finding raises the question of whether giving ADT alone in any setting, such as with radiation for localized disease, is now an outdated and inferior approach.