Safety Results with Cabazitaxel Support Wider Use in mCRPC

News
Article

In the second article of a 2-part series, Mehmet A. Bilen, MD, explains how further findings from the phase 3 CARD trial support the wider role cabazitaxel should have in treating patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Case Summary

  • A 75-year-old man presented with intermittent left hip pain​.
  • Physical exam: unremarkable except for a prostate nodule on rectal exam​
  • ECOG performance status: 1​

Clinical workup 

  • Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level: 16.2 ng/mL​
  • Gleason score 5 + 4, grade group 5​ per transrectal ultrasound–guided biopsy
  • Bone scan and abdominal/pelvic CT scan​ were negative.
  • X-ray of the pelvis indicated osteoarthritis.
  • The patient was diagnosed with category cT2N0M0​ prostate cancer.
  • Germline and somatic genetic testing were negative for pathogenic alterations​.

Treatment and follow-up

  • External beam radiation therapy plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was initiated (planned for 24 months). Six months after initiation of therapy, PSA was undetectable, and the patient was asymptomatic​.
  • Unfortunately, the patient did not return for regularly scheduled PSA follow-ups, and​ 36 months later, he experienced progression.
  • The patient received ADT plus enzalutamide (Xtandi) 160 mg once daily before noon; his initial PSA (nadir, 3.9 ng/mL) and symptom response​ were good.
  • Because of a busy travel schedule, the patient did not return for routine PSA monitoring​.
  • He developed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and was started on docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks plus prednisone 10 mg once a day.
  • The patient responded clinically to treatment (ie, resolution of pain, improved energy, and declining PSA)​.
  • He completed 4 cycles of treatment but developed worsening bilateral digital neuropathy throughout therapy. Therapy was stopped, and cycle 5 was not administered.​
  • Three months later, the patient showed rising PSA, new back pain, and shortness of breath on exertion​.
  • Abdominal/pelvic CT showed enlargement of known pelvic lymph nodes and 1 new liver lesion (< 2 cm).

Targeted OncologyTM: What were the secondary endpoints of the CARD trial (NCT02485691) and what were the results?

MEHMET A. BILEN, MD: [This trial evaluated patients with mCRPC] PSA response to cabazitaxel [Jevtana] vs abiraterone or enzalutamide, favoring [the 115 evaluable patients on cabazitaxel vs 111 on either abiraterone or enzalutamide] with a PSA response rate of 35.7% (n = 41) vs 13.5% (n = 15), respectively.1 Objective tumor response favored [the group of patients on] cabazitaxel vs the comparator arm who had measurable disease [at 36.5% (n = 23) vs 11.5% (n = 6), respectively]. Pain improvement and time to a symptomatic skeletal event, also favored patients on cabazitaxel, with a HR of 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35-1.01; P = .05].1

Mehmet A. Bilen,

Associate Professor, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology

Director, Genitourinary Medical Oncology Program

Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University​

Atlanta, GA

Mehmet A. Bilen,

Associate Professor, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology

Director, Genitourinary Medical Oncology Program

Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University​

Atlanta, GA

What were the safety findings of this study?

Safety is important, especially with these patients, but the rate of [patients who had] any grade 3 or greater adverse event [AE] was similar between the cabazitaxel [56.3%] arm compared with the abiraterone or enzalutamide arm [52.4%].2 Sometimes we have an impression that novel hormone agents are without AEs, but we can see more AEs [with them], especially fatigue and others with enzalutamide. Looking at the percentage of patients who experienced serious AEs, [they are closer in both arms] at about 39%. The number of patients with an AE leading to treatment discontinuation was higher on the chemotherapy vs either novel hormone agent [19.8% vs 8.9%, respectively].2

The patient-reported health-related quality of life outcomes were also important, as there is no big deterioration with chemotherapy.3 We saw some pain improvement with cabazitaxel [compared with the hormone agents at (P < .001)], but overall, the prostate-specific concerns well-being were similar between cabazitaxel vs androgen receptor-targeted therapy [P = .11].

How does dosing impact the use of cabazitaxel in these patients?

Now, we have…a trial comparing [a reduced dose of] cabazitaxel at 20 mg/m2 with [the approved dose of] 25 mg/m2 after docetaxel.4 [Events of grade 3 or higher] febrile neutropenia were higher in the 25 mg/m2 group [at 9.2%], but we see very little febrile neutropenia in patients on 20 mg/m2. I think clearly 20 mg/m2 is much better, as overall grade 3 or 4 toxicity is 39.7% [in the reduced dose group] vs 54.5% in the 25 mg/m2.

References

1. Fizazi K, Kramer G, Eymard J, et al. Pain response and health-related quality of life (HRQL) analysis in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving cabazitaxel (CBZ) versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in the CARD study. J Clin Oncol. 2020;6(16);16-16. doi:10.1200/JCO.2020.38.6_suppl.16

2. de Wit R, de Bono J, Sternberg CN, et al; CARD Investigators. Cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(26):2506-2518. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1911206

3. Fizazi K, Kramer G, Eymard JC, et al. Quality of life in patients with metastatic prostate cancer following treatment with cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide (CARD): an analysis of a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(11):1513-1525. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30449-6

4. Eisenberger M, Hardy-Bessard AC, Kim CS, et al. Phase III study comparing a reduced dose of cabazitaxel (20 mg/m2) and the currently approved dose (25 mg/m2) in postdocetaxel patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer-PROSELICA. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(28):3198-3206. doi:10.1200/JCO.2016.72.1076

Related Videos
Experts on prostate cancer
Daniel J. George, MD, an expert on prostate cancer
Daniel J. George, MD, an expert on prostate cancer
Daniel J. George, MD, an expert on prostate cancer
Daniel J. George, MD, an expert on prostate cancer
Daniel J. George, MD, an expert on prostate cancer
Related Content