Comparative outcomes of metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) patients (pts) with DNA damage response gene alterations (DDR-a): A single-center experience.

Authors

Khalid Almunaikh

Khalid Almunaikh

University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Khalid Almunaikh , Michael Paul Kolinsky , Naveen S. Basappa , Scott A. North , Sunita Ghosh , Karen Y. Niederhoffer , Soufiane El Hallani

Organizations

University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada, Cross Cancer Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: DDR-a are prevalent in mPC pts. The clinical behaviour of these pts is not well defined. We sought to investigate how DDR-a affects prognosis and treatment outcomes in mPC pts. Methods: Eligible pts were age ≥18 with mPC who had undergone germline (G) and/or somatic (S) next generation sequencing (NGS) at the Cross Cancer Institute 2016-2021. Pts were considered DDR-a if a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (P/LP-v) in a DDR gene was identified on G or S NGS; patients were considered DDR-p if no P/LP-v was identified on S NGS. Data from electronic medical records were collected. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of mPC. Secondary endpoints included: OS and progression free survival (PFS) from initial diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC); PSA response after 12 weeks, and PFS and OS from the start time of 1st and 2nd line therapies. Time based endpoints were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method, and log-rank statistics were used to compare the KM curves. PSA responses were compared using chi-squared testing. Results: 23 DDR-a and 48 DDR-p pts were identified. The most frequent DDR-a were BRCA2 (n=11) and ATM (n=6). Baseline characteristics including age at diagnosis were similar between the two groups. 1st line systemic therapy was androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone in 73.9% of DDR-a and 77.0% of DDR-p. 2nd line therapy was abiraterone or enzalutamide in 65% of DDR-a and 92% of DDR-p. Olaparib was received by 52% of DDR-a pts. No difference in OS from mPC (65.7 vs 51.0 mos, p=0.487), OS from initial diagnosis (94.1 vs 88.9 mos, p=0.865), PFS on 1st line therapy (33.2 vs 31.0 mos, p=0.847), OS on 1st line therapy (85.6 vs 78.6 mos, (p=0.799) PFS on 2nd line therapy (8.4 vs 13.1 mos, p=0.569) or OS on 2nd line therapy (32.5 vs 35.8 mos, p=0.901) was seen for DDR-a vs DDR-p, respectively. PSA responses to 1st and 2nd line therapies were similar and will be presented as waterfall plots. Conclusions: In this single-center cohort, no difference in clinical characteristics or outcomes were seen in DDR-a compared to DDR-p pts. While this study is limited by small numbers and retrospective nature, it adds to the growing literature characterizing the clinical behaviour of DDR-a mPC. Collaborative efforts are required to better define this molecular cohort of pts.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B: Prostate Cancer and Urothelial Carcinoma

Track

Urothelial Carcinoma,Prostate Cancer - Advanced

Sub Track

Therapeutics

Citation

J Clin Oncol 41, 2023 (suppl 6; abstr 169)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2023.41.6_suppl.169

Abstract #

169

Poster Bd #

E19

Abstract Disclosures