TY - JOUR
T1 - Health-related quality of life after apalutamide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (TITAN): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study
AU - TITAN Investigators
AU - Agarwal, Neeraj
AU - McQuarrie, Kelly
AU - Bjartell, Anders
AU - Chowdhury, Simon
AU - Pereira de Santana Gomes, Andrea J.
AU - Chung, Byung Ha
AU - Özgüroğlu, Mustafa
AU - Juárez Soto, Álvaro
AU - Merseburger, Axel S.
AU - Uemura, Hirotsugu
AU - Ye, Dingwei
AU - Given, Robert
AU - Cella, David
AU - Basch, Ethan
AU - Miladinovic, Branko
AU - Dearden, Lindsay
AU - Deprince, Kris
AU - Naini, Vahid
AU - Lopez-Gitlitz, Angela
AU - Chi, Kim N.
N1 - Funding Information:
This analysis of prespecified patient-reported outcome endpoints in TITAN showed that HRQOL did not worsen with the addition of apalutamide to ADT versus placebo for a broad population of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, including those with high-volume or low-volume disease, previous docetaxel use, previous treatment for localised disease, and previously or newly diagnosed disease. This maintenance of HRQOL in patients who were mostly asymptomatic at baseline, taken together with the significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival, reduced risk of death, delayed time to disease progression, and delayed time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy in TITAN, as reported previously, 11 and tolerability reported by patients, supports the clinical benefit of apalutamide in a broad patient population with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. 11 Having already initiated ADT before enrolment as required by the protocol, patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer in TITAN had few symptoms at baseline, with low pain and fatigue scores. Patients' pain and fatigue (intensity and interference, per BPI-SF and BFI) remained stable throughout the study or improved and was similar between the treatment groups and across treatment cycles. Because participants were required to have started treatment with ADT before randomisation, patients were possibly benefiting from ongoing ADT and having ADT-associated adverse events, which might have reduced the magnitude of difference in patient-reported outcomes between groups. Most patients who reported no pain at baseline remained stable, and most with pain at baseline either remained stable or improved, with greater proportions of improvement seen in those who reported greater levels of pain severity at baseline. Similarity in mean changes from baseline in FACT-P and EQ-5D-5L results between treatment groups indicated that the addition of apalutamide to ADT did not result in a decrease in overall HRQOL, despite significantly improving survival outcomes. In a post-hoc analysis of responses to the FACT-P (GP5) side-effects bother item, 26 most patients indicated they were “not at all” bothered by adverse effects from the treatment, and few patients indicated they were “very much” or “quite a bit” bothered. This result further supports the observation that apalutamide was well tolerated. This study has several potential limitations. Despite the use of conservative models, missing data over time might have contributed to bias by non-ignorable dropout, and this could have had different effects on the apalutamide and placebo groups. Additionally, clinical study recruitment is subject to selection bias, so the patient population might not be generalisable to the true global population of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Prostate cancer occurs more frequently in black patients than in white patients, 27 and only 1·8% of patients in TITAN were black or African–American. Moreover, 22% of patients in TITAN were Asian and might have had more severe disease; some reports indicate lower screening rates in Asian regions resulting in more frequent initial diagnoses of severe disease compared with western countries. 2 The validity of these results in non-white populations might require further study. Among the strengths of this study were the frequent administration of the patient-reported outcome instruments and the high rate of compliance during the study. Despite compelling findings indicating the stability of overall HRQOL with the addition of apalutamide to ADT, adverse events related to apalutamide exist that might affect patient experience (eg, rash). Although rash was not assessed specifically in this study, high compliance rates and the favourable results of the GP5 analysis address this limitation. Additionally, mood disturbance, cognitive function, and sleep quality should be incorporated in the standardised tool to be assessed in future studies of metastatic prostate cancer. The use of patient-reported outcome instruments to assess symptoms such as pain and fatigue and overall HRQOL is important to help improve the overall understanding of patients' experience with cancer treatments. The Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 recognised the importance of reporting quality of life and patient experience as an important goal for patients with prostate cancer. 28 Guidelines such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence include efficacy, cost, and quality of life in their considerations when assessing the overall value of a particular therapeutic drug. Therefore, the assessment of symptoms and HRQOL of patients in TITAN as well as the previously reported survival benefits was important. The addition of apalutamide did not diminish HRQOL in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer who were enrolled in TITAN. Longer-term assessments are recommended for better precision in measuring preservation of HRQOL. In conclusion, the results of the TITAN study showed substantial benefits for apalutamide plus ADT for overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, and overall HRQOL was maintained with the addition of apalutamide to ADT. These data support the addition of apalutamide to ADT for a broad range of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Contributors NA, AB, SC, AJPdSG, BHC, MO, AJS, ASM, HU, DY, and RG are investigators who participated in the conduct of the study. NA, KNC, KM, BM, LD, KD, VN, and AL-G designed the study. NA led the development of the manuscript. DC and EB provided substantial contributions to the interpretation of the data and critical reviews of the manuscript. All authors participated in data interpretation, manuscript review, and approval of the final version of the manuscript for submission. Declaration of interests NA has received advisory board fees from Astellas Pharma, Argos Therapeutics, Foundation Medicine, Genentech, and Pharmacyclics; grant support and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Clovis Oncology, Eisai, Exelixis, EMD Serono, Eli Lilly, Merck, Medivation, Novartis, Nektar Therapeutics, and Pfizer; and his institution has received grant support from Bavarian Nordic, Calithera, Celldex Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, NewLink Genetics, Prometheus Laboratories, Rexahn Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Takeda, and Tracon Pharmaceuticals. AB has received honoraria, consulting fees, fees for serving on a speakers bureau, and travel support from Janssen and Ipsen; grant support, honoraria, consulting fees, fees for serving on a speakers bureau, and travel support from Astellas Pharma and Bayer; consulting fees and travel support from Incyte; grant support, honoraria, fees for serving on a speakers bureau, and travel support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals; fees for serving as a board member, travel support, and stock options from LIDDS Pharma; grant support, fees for serving as a board member, travel support, and stock options from and serves as cofounder of Glactone Pharma; and stock options from WntResearch. SC has received honoraria, fees for serving on a speakers' bureau, consulting fees, and travel support from Johnson & Johnson, Astellas Pharma, and Sanofi; support, honoraria, fees for serving on a speakers' bureau, consulting fees, and travel support from Clovis Oncology. BHC has received grant support and consulting fees from Janssen; grant support from Bayer, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Myovant Sciences; and consulting fees from Astellas Pharma, Ipsen, JW Pharmaceutical, Takeda, Handok, and Amgen. AJS has received lecture fees and fees for serving on a publication steering committee from Janssen. ASM has received grant support, consulting fees, lecture fees, and fees for serving on a speakers' bureau from Janssen-Cilag, Astellas Pharma, and Roche. HU has received grant support, lecture fees, and fees for serving as a meeting chairman from Janssen and Ono and Bristol-Myers Squibb; grant support from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Astellas Pharma, and Taiho; and lecture fees and fees for serving as a meeting chairman from Pfizer, Bayer, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Novartis. RG has received fees for serving on a speakers' bureau for Janssen. DC is president of FACIT.org ; has received research funding to his institution from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Pfizer; and has received consulting honoraria from Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Pfizer. EB has received fees for serving on the scientific advisory boards for CareVive Systems, Sivan Healthcare, and Self Care Catalysts; fees for serving on the editorial board of the Journal of the American Medical Association ; and fees for consulting on research projects for Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Research Triangle Institute. KM, BM, LD, KD, VN, and AL-G are employed by Janssen Research & Development or Janssen Global Services and hold stock in Johnson & Johnson. KNC has received grant support, consulting fees, and lecture fees from Janssen, Astellas Pharma, and Sanofi; and grant support and consulting fees from Essa Pharma, Bayer, Roche, and AstraZeneca. AJPdsG, MO, and DY declare no competing interests.
Funding Information:
The data sharing policy of Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson is available online . As noted on this website, requests for access to the study data can be submitted through the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) Project online . Acknowledgments The study was funded by Janssen Research & Development. Editorial assistance was provided by Patricia McChesney of Parexel (Hackensack, NJ, USA), with funding from Janssen Global Services (Raritan, NJ, USA). DC receives funding from the US National Institutes of Health.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd
Copyright:
Copyright 2019 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/11
Y1 - 2019/11
N2 - Background: In the phase 3 TITAN study, the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved the primary endpoints of overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We aimed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in TITAN, including pain and fatigue. Methods: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (defined as not receiving ADT at the time of metastatic disease progression) aged 18 years and older, receiving continuous ADT (selected at the investigator's discretion), and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive web response system, to receive oral apalutamide (four 60 mg tablets, once daily) or matching placebo. Previous localised disease treatment or previous docetaxel for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer were allowed. Randomisation was stratified by Gleason score at diagnosis, region, and previous docetaxel treatment. Randomisation was done using randomly permuted blocks (block size of four). Investigators, research staff, sponsor study team, and patients were masked to the identities of test and control treatments. Patient-reported outcomes were prespecified exploratory endpoints and were the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), and EuroQoL 5D questionnaire 5 level (EQ-5D-5L). BPI and BFI were completed for 7 consecutive days (days −6 to 1 inclusive of each cycle visit), then at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. FACT-P and EQ-5D-5L were completed during cycles 1–7, then every other cycle until the end of treatment, and at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Missing patient-reported outcome assessments were calculated as the expected number of assessments for a visit minus the actual number of assessments received for that visit. For time-to-event endpoints, when median values could not be calculated because less than 50% of patients had degradation, 25th percentiles were compared. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02489318, and is ongoing. Findings: Between Dec 9, 2015, and July 25, 2017, 1052 eligible patients were enrolled randomly assigned to apalutamide (n=525) or placebo (n=527). Data cutoff for this analysis of patient-reported outcomes was Nov 23, 2018. Median follow-up for time to pain-related endpoints ranged from 19·4 to 22·1 months. Patients were mostly asymptomatic at baseline: on the BPI-SF pain severity scale of 0–10, median pain scores (indicating worst pain in the past 24 h) were 1·14 (IQR 0–3·17) in the apalutamide group and 1·00 (0–2·86) in the placebo group, and median worst fatigue scores on the BFI were 1·29 (IQR 0–3·29) in the apalutamide group and 1·43 (0·14–3·14) in the placebo group. Patient experience of pain and fatigue (intensity and interference) did not differ between the groups for the duration of treatment. Median time to worst pain intensity progression was 19·09 months (95% CI 11·04–not reached) in the apalutamide group versus 11·99 months (8·28–18·46) in the placebo group (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·75–1·06]; p=0·20). Median time to pain interference progression was not reached in either group (95% CI 28·58–not reached in the apalutamide group; not reached–not reached in the placebo group). 25th percentiles for time to pain interference progression were 9·17 months (5·55–11·96) in the apalutamide group and 6·24 months (4·63–7·43) in the placebo group (HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·73–1·10]; p=0·29). FACT-P total scores and EQ-5D-5L data showed preservation of HRQOL in both groups. The median time to deterioration as determined by FACT-P total score was 8·87 months (95% CI 4·70–11·10) in the apalutamide group and 9·23 months (7·39–12·91) in the placebo group (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·85–1·22]; p=0·85). Interpretation: Apalutamide with ADT is a well-tolerated and effective option for men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. The combination significantly improves survival outcomes compared with ADT alone while maintaining HRQOL despite additive androgen blockade. Funding: Janssen Research & Development.
AB - Background: In the phase 3 TITAN study, the addition of apalutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved the primary endpoints of overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. We aimed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in TITAN, including pain and fatigue. Methods: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (defined as not receiving ADT at the time of metastatic disease progression) aged 18 years and older, receiving continuous ADT (selected at the investigator's discretion), and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive web response system, to receive oral apalutamide (four 60 mg tablets, once daily) or matching placebo. Previous localised disease treatment or previous docetaxel for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer were allowed. Randomisation was stratified by Gleason score at diagnosis, region, and previous docetaxel treatment. Randomisation was done using randomly permuted blocks (block size of four). Investigators, research staff, sponsor study team, and patients were masked to the identities of test and control treatments. Patient-reported outcomes were prespecified exploratory endpoints and were the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), and EuroQoL 5D questionnaire 5 level (EQ-5D-5L). BPI and BFI were completed for 7 consecutive days (days −6 to 1 inclusive of each cycle visit), then at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. FACT-P and EQ-5D-5L were completed during cycles 1–7, then every other cycle until the end of treatment, and at months 4, 8, and 12 in follow-up. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Missing patient-reported outcome assessments were calculated as the expected number of assessments for a visit minus the actual number of assessments received for that visit. For time-to-event endpoints, when median values could not be calculated because less than 50% of patients had degradation, 25th percentiles were compared. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02489318, and is ongoing. Findings: Between Dec 9, 2015, and July 25, 2017, 1052 eligible patients were enrolled randomly assigned to apalutamide (n=525) or placebo (n=527). Data cutoff for this analysis of patient-reported outcomes was Nov 23, 2018. Median follow-up for time to pain-related endpoints ranged from 19·4 to 22·1 months. Patients were mostly asymptomatic at baseline: on the BPI-SF pain severity scale of 0–10, median pain scores (indicating worst pain in the past 24 h) were 1·14 (IQR 0–3·17) in the apalutamide group and 1·00 (0–2·86) in the placebo group, and median worst fatigue scores on the BFI were 1·29 (IQR 0–3·29) in the apalutamide group and 1·43 (0·14–3·14) in the placebo group. Patient experience of pain and fatigue (intensity and interference) did not differ between the groups for the duration of treatment. Median time to worst pain intensity progression was 19·09 months (95% CI 11·04–not reached) in the apalutamide group versus 11·99 months (8·28–18·46) in the placebo group (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·75–1·06]; p=0·20). Median time to pain interference progression was not reached in either group (95% CI 28·58–not reached in the apalutamide group; not reached–not reached in the placebo group). 25th percentiles for time to pain interference progression were 9·17 months (5·55–11·96) in the apalutamide group and 6·24 months (4·63–7·43) in the placebo group (HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·73–1·10]; p=0·29). FACT-P total scores and EQ-5D-5L data showed preservation of HRQOL in both groups. The median time to deterioration as determined by FACT-P total score was 8·87 months (95% CI 4·70–11·10) in the apalutamide group and 9·23 months (7·39–12·91) in the placebo group (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·85–1·22]; p=0·85). Interpretation: Apalutamide with ADT is a well-tolerated and effective option for men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. The combination significantly improves survival outcomes compared with ADT alone while maintaining HRQOL despite additive androgen blockade. Funding: Janssen Research & Development.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074096308&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30620-5
DO - 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30620-5
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 31578173
AN - SCOPUS:85074096308
SN - 1470-2045
VL - 20
SP - 1518
EP - 1530
JO - The Lancet Oncology
JF - The Lancet Oncology
IS - 11
ER -