Immunogenomic landscape of neuroendocrine small cell prostate cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 217-217
Author(s):  
Lucia Nappi ◽  
Claudia Kesch ◽  
Sepideh Vahid ◽  
Ladan Fazli ◽  
Bernhard J. Eigl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Expression Intensity ◽  
Whole Exome ◽  
Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cd56 Expression ◽  
Castrate Resistant ◽  
Benign Prostate

217 Background: Neuroendocrine small cell prostate cancer (NEPC) is a lethal variant of prostate cancer (PCa) unresponsive to hormone therapy and associated with poor prognosis. Cisplatin induces short-lived responses and therefore alternative novel therapeutic options are urgently needed. Methods: Prostate specimens from radical prostatectomy or transurethral resection (benign prostate specimens n = 4, primary untreated or neoadjuvant hormone-treated adenocarcinoma n = 30, castrate-resistant prostate cancer-CRPC n = 38 and NEPC n = 16) were evaluated for PD-L1 (SpringBio, M4420), AR, chromogranin A, synaptophysin, NSE and CD56 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Archival tissue from liver, lymph nodes and prostate from 30 additional patients with de novo and treatment emergent NEPC were analyzed for PD-L1 expression by IHC. The intensity was assessed as percentage of positive cells / mm2 of tissue. Targeted and whole exome sequencing of the high-density tumor areas were performed and correlated to the PD-L1 status (PD-L1+ve: > 1% of positive cells). OS was calculated from the date of diagnosis of NEPC to death. We set out to define PD-L1 expression and immunogenomic characteristics of NEPC. Results: PD-L1 was expressed in 0%, 5%, 10% and 41% of benign, adenocarcinoma, CRPC and NEPC specimens, respectively. The PD-L1 expression intensity was significantly higher in patients with NEPC (mean: 40%, range: 5-100%) compared to benign, adenocarcinoma and CRPC samples (mean: 0%, 2% and 8%, respectively, P < 0.0001). There was a higher prevalence of biallelic DNA Repair Defects (DRD) in the PD-L1+ve vs PD-L1-ve patients (65% vs 0%, P = 0.005). The median OS of the NEPC patients was 8.5 months vs 10.5 months in PD-L1+ve vs PD-L1-ve tumors (HR 1.24, 95% CI: 0.59-2.75, p = 0.55). Conclusions: NEPC have greater PD-L1 expression than adenoCa and CRPC. Biallelic DRD was exclusively observed in PD-L1+ve patients. Since PD-L1 expression and DRD have been associated to response to PARP and PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors in prostate and other cancers, further studies evaluating the activity of those agents in NEPC patients are warranted.

scholarly journals Genetics of Prostate Carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Božo Krušlin ◽  
Lucija Škara ◽  
Tonći Vodopić ◽  
Borna Vrhovec ◽  
Jure Murgić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prostate Carcinoma ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Genetically Engineered ◽  
Genetically Engineered Mouse Models ◽  
Genomic Studies ◽  
Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Castrate Resistant

<p>The aim of this review is to provide a brief overview of some current approaches regarding diagnostics, pathologic features, treatment, and genetics of prostate carcinoma (PCa). Prostate carcinoma is the most common visceral tumor and the second most common cancer-related cause of death in males. Clinical outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer are excellent, but despite advances in prostate cancer treatments, castrate-resistant prostate cancer and metastatic prostate cancer patients have a poor prognosis. Advanced large-scale genomic studies revealed a large number of genetic alterations in prostate cancer. The meaning of these alterations needs to be validated in the specific prostate cancer molecular subtype context. Along these lines, there is a critical need for establishing genetically engineered mouse models, which would include speckle type BTB/POZ protein and isocitrate Dehydrogenase (NADP (+)) 1 mutant, as well as androgen receptor neuroendocrine subtypes of prostate cancer. Another urgent need is developing highly metastatic prostate cancer models, as only up to 17% of available models dis- play bone metastases and exhibit a less typical neuroendocrine prostate cancer or sarcomatoid carcinoma. Moreover, androgen deprivation and relapse should be mimicked in the genetically engineered mouse models, as androgen independence may yield a better model for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. The development of such refined animal models should be guid- ed by comparative genomics of primary versus corresponding metastatic tumors. Such an approach will have the potential to illuminate the key genetic events associated with specific molecular prostate cancer subsets and indicate directions for effective therapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion</strong>. Despite excellent results in the treatment of localized prostatic carcinoma, castrate-resistant prostate can- cer and metastatic prostate cancer have a poor prognosis. Advanced large-scale genomic studies revealed a large number of ge- netic alterations in PCa. Experimental models of prostate carcinoma in genetically modified mice could provide new data about the genetic changes in such cancers and help in developing better animal models for treatment resistant prostate carcinomas.</p>

Why Chemotherapy Should be Given Early for Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer

2015 ◽  
pp. e263-e269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonel F. Hernandez-Aya ◽  
Maha Hussain
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
De Novo ◽  
High Volume ◽  
High Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Incurable Disease ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Hormone Sensitive ◽  
Castrate Resistant

Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) is an incurable disease, and despite a high response rate to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), outcomes have not significantly changed for many decades. Earlier attempts at multitargeted strategies with the addition of cytotoxic chemotherapy to ADT did not affect survival. As more effective therapies are emerging, including cytotoxic therapy for patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), there is increasing interest for testing these drugs earlier in the disease course. The premise is that agents with clinical benefit in advanced mCRPC may have a better effect if used preemptively before the development of significant resistance and to attack earlier de novo androgen resistant/independent clones. The recent results of the phase III clinical trial E3805 investigating ADT with or without docetaxel in mHSPC provide compelling support for this strategy. Docetaxel combined with ADT significantly improved overall survival from 44 to 57.6 months (p = 0.0003), particularly in patients with high-volume disease (from 32.2 to 49.2 months; p = 0.0006). Longer follow-up is needed to assess the effect on patients with low disease burden. Further studies are needed to further maximize the antitumor effect in patients with mHSPC and to investigate the effects of advancing therapy to this disease setting on the efficacy of respective agents in the castration-resistant setting.

Phase Ib Trial With Birabresib, a Small-Molecule Inhibitor of Bromodomain and Extraterminal Proteins, in Patients With Selected Advanced Solid Tumors

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30) ◽  
pp. 3007-3014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Lewin ◽  
Jean-Charles Soria ◽  
Anastasios Stathis ◽  
Jean-Pierre Delord ◽  
Solange Peters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Phase Ib ◽  
Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Castrate Resistant ◽  
Recommended Phase Ii Dose ◽  
Dose Proportional

Purpose Birabresib (MK-8628/OTX015) is a first-in-class bromodomain inhibitor with activity in select hematologic tumors. Safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of birabresib were evaluated in patients with castrate-resistant prostate cancer, nuclear protein in testis midline carcinoma (NMC), and non–small-cell lung cancer in this phase Ib study. Patients and Methods Forty-seven patients were enrolled to receive birabresib once daily at starting doses of 80 mg continuously (cohort A) or 100 mg for 7 consecutive days (cohort B) in 21-day cycles using a parallel dose escalation 3 + 3 design. The primary objective was occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and determination of the recommended phase II dose. Results Of 46 treated patients, 26 had castrate-resistant prostate cancer, 10 NMC, and 10 non–small-cell lung cancer. For cohort A, four of 19 (21%) evaluable patients had DLTs at 80 mg once daily (grade 3 thrombocytopenia [n = 3], ALT/hyperbilirubinemia [n = 1]) and two of three had DLTs at 100 mg once daily (grade 2 anorexia and nausea with treatment delay > 7 days [n = 1], grade 4 thrombocytopenia [n = 1]). No DLTs occurred in cohort B. Of 46 patients, 38 (83%) had treatment-related adverse events (diarrhea, 17 [37%]; nausea, 17 [37%]; anorexia, 14 [30%]; vomiting, 12 [26%]; thrombocytopenia 10 [22%]). Three patients with NMC (80 mg once daily) had a partial response (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] version 1.1) with duration of 1.4 to 8.4 months. Pharmacokinetic analysis indicated a dose-proportional increase in birabresib exposure and rapid absorption. Conclusion The recommended phase II dose of birabresib in patients with select solid tumors is 80 mg once daily with continuous dosing. Birabresib has dose-proportional exposure and a favorable safety profile, with clinical activity observed in NMC. Future studies of birabresib must consider intermittent scheduling to possibly mitigate the toxicities of chronic dosing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document