Experts praise cooperative groups (e.g., Chartered, Stampede) for conducting large studies and preserving samples for future biomarker research. These publicly funded efforts can address fundamental clinical questions that industry-sponsored trials may not prioritize, ultimately advancing the field.
When a patient has a BRCA2 mutation, clinicians on the panel view it as such a dominant predictive biomarker that they would prioritize a PARP inhibitor-based triplet regimen. This single genetic finding often outweighs other clinical factors or even the potential addition of docetaxel in treatment decisions.
In the AMPLITUDE trial, only 16% of high-risk metastatic prostate cancer patients received docetaxel, despite it being allowed and indicated by disease characteristics. This suggests a real-world "chemophobia" or physician bias towards newer targeted therapies, even within a clinical trial setting.
Experts believe molecular tests like Decipher and PTEN status are superior to simply counting bone lesions for guiding treatment. While not yet standard practice for all decisions, this represents a significant shift towards using underlying tumor biology to determine therapy, like adding docetaxel.
Standard guidelines for treating metastatic prostate cancer are based on conventional imaging (CT/bone scan). The panel argues that PSMA PET-positive biochemical recurrence represents a different, earlier disease state. This necessitates new treatment paradigms, like definitive therapy durations, not covered by current guidelines.
While Lutetium shows promise in hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, experts raise concerns about potential late-effect toxicities for patients surviving many years. This contrasts with docetaxel, where toxicity is acute and resolves after treatment, highlighting an unknown long-term risk-benefit profile for new radioligand therapies.
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.
The panel suggests AKT inhibitor trials in prostate cancer have been disappointing due to suboptimal biomarker selection (e.g., PTEN IHC). A similar drug in breast cancer showed significant survival benefit when using a more precise NGS-based strategy, indicating a potential path forward if the right patient population is identified genetically.