Elderly men with prostate cancer + ADT
Background and Rationale
ADT and Osteoporosis
Proportion of Patients With Fractures 1-5 Yrs After Cancer Diagnosis +6.8%; P < .001 No ADT (n = 20,035)
21
ADT (n = 6650) 18
19.4
Frequency (%)
15
12
12.6
9
+2.8%; P < .001
6 5.2 3 2.4 0
Any Fracture Shahinian VB, et al. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:154-164.
Fracture Resulting in Hospitalization
Bone metastases
Bone metastases
• > 90% of patients with metastatic CRPC have radiologic evidence of bone metastases1 • Skeletal-related events (SREs) include spinal cord compression, pathological fracture, and need for surgery or EBRT2 • Bone metastases are a major cause of death, disability, decreased quality of life, and increased treatment cost3
1. Tannock et al. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1502-1512. 2. Lipton. Semin Oncol. 2010;37:S15-S29. 3. Lange and Vasella. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1999;17:331-336.
Lumbar spine MRI
Bone Metastases: The Clinical Problems • Replacement of hematopoietic tissues in the bone marrow by the prostate cancer cells may lead to – Anemia
– Increased susceptibility to infection
• Damage caused by bone metastases overgrowth may lead to – Pain – Fractures – Spinal cord compression that may lead to hemiparesis or paresis
Logothetis CJ, Lin S-H. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5(1):21-28.
Incidence of bone complications
Outcome Disease
Observation time, mos Total SREs, % Radiation to bone, % Pathologic fractures, % Hypercalcemia of malignancy, % Surgery to bone, % Spinal cord compression, %
Placebo Arms Pamidronate Trials ZA Trials Lung/ Breast[1] Myeloma[2] Prostate[3] Other[4] 24 21 24 21 64 51 49 46 43 34 33 34 52 37 25 22 13
9
1
4
11 3
5 3
4 8
5 4
1. Lipton A. Cancer. 2000;88:1082. 2. Berenson JR, et al. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:593. 3. Saad F, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:879. 4. Rosen LS, et al. Cancer. 2004;100:2613.
Patients (%)
Skeletal-related events in metastatic prostate cancer
Total SREs
Pathologic fracture
Radiation therapy
24-month data of the placebo arm of a randomized trial; n=208 Saad F, et al. J Urol, 2003. Abstract 1472.
Surgical intervention
Spinal cord compression
Bone lesions are associated with worse survival No bone lesions 6 bone lesions
1.0
Cumulative survival
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 0
20
40
60
80
Months Pezaro C et al. Eur Urology 2013. In press Attard G, Multidisciplinary approach to castration-resistant prostate cancer. Presented at ECC 2013.
MDT approach Urologist
Radiotherapist
Medical oncologist
Surgeon
Nuclear medicine physician
Normal Bone Remodeling Relies on the Balance Between the Activities of Osteoblasts and Osteoclasts
Normal bone remodeling Resting
Reversal Resorption New bone
Osteoblasts Osteoclasts Mononuclear cells
Mineralized bone matrix
Adapted from Coxon JP, et al. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2004;7:99-104.
The “Vicious Cycle” of Bone Metastases in CRPC Prostate cancer cells Growth factors (ALP, PINP, Unknown GFs)
CTXI, ICTP, Bone-derived growth factors (TGF-β) Osteolytic factors (PTHrP/IL-6)
Osteoblastic factors (ET-1, BMP, IGFs, FGF, uPA, TGF-β) RANKL RANKL RANKL
New bone Osteoblasts Osteoclasts
Mineralized bone matrix
CRPC bone metastases are predominantly osteoblastic
ET, endothelin; ICTP, C-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen; PTHrP, parathyroid hormone–related protein; uPA, urokinase-type plasminogen activator. Adapted from Kingsley LA, et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2007;6:2609-2617.
The Ability of CRPC Cells to Induce Bone Formation is Essential for Metastatic Growth Osteoblastic factors secreted from tumor cells • Promote osteoblast proliferation • Stimulate osteoblasts to produce factors that trigger proliferation of prostate cancer cells • Promote the secretion of growth factors that trigger deposition of new bone matrix
1. Logothetis CJ, Lin S-H. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5(1):21-28. 2. Loriot Y, et al. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(5):1085-1094. 3. Adapted from Kingsley LA, et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2007;6:2609-2617.
Bone Metastasis–Targeted Therapies: Capitalizing on the Altered Microenvironment Existing therapies for bone metastasis γ-Rays: EBRT
Bisphosphonates
β-Emitters: Strontium-89, samarium-153
Denosumab
α-Emitter: Radium 223
Interfere with deregulated signaling pathways to/from the bone
Target the bone and actively kill the tumor cells
1. Saad F, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(19):1458-1468. 2. Saad F, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(11):879-882. 3. Horwich A, et al. Ann Oncol. 2013;Jun 27[Epub ahead of print].
Radium-223 Has a Targeted Mechanism of Action
Tumor cells
Bone marrow
Osteoblast Radium-223 deposition
Osteoclast
α-particle radiation
Newly formed bone
Targets new bone, e.g. bone metastases
Irradiates adjacent tumor cells leading to highly localized tumor cell killing
Bruland et al. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:6250s.
Therapies That Interfere With Deregulated Signaling Pathways to/From the Bone Denosumab
Bisphosphonates Bisphosphonates
RANKL
Denosumab RANK
Binds to RANKL and prevents it from binding to RANK on the surface of cells
Bind to bone mineral and are taken up by mature osteoclasts at sites of bone resorption
Loss of osteoclast formation, function, and survival
Loss of resorptive function
Baron R, et al. Bone. 2011;48(4):677-692.
•
Provides palliative effect
•
No survival benefit has been demonstrated
Elderly men with prostate cancer
Pamidronate vs Placebo in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Skeletal Event by Study Week 27, n (%)
Pamidronate (n = 169)
Placebo (n = 181)
Any SRE
42 (25)
46 (25)
Radiation to bone for pain relief
25 (15)
29 (16)
Radiation to bone to prevent fracture
8 (5)
7 (4)
Nonvertebral fractures
14 (8)
12 (7)
Vertebral fractures
11 (7)
10 (6)
Spinal cord compression
5 (3)
3 (2)
Surgery to bone
5 (3)
6 (3)
Hypercalcemia
1 (< 1)
2 (1)
Small EJ, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:4277-4284.
ZA vs Placebo: Time to First On-Study SRE
Patients Without Event (%)
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30
ZA 4 mg
ZA 8/4 mg
20
Placebo
10 0 0
Patients at Risk, n ZA 4 mg 214 ZA 8/4 mg 221 Placebo 208
90
163 155 149
180 270 360 Days After Start of Study Drug 113 102 103
Saad F, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1458-1468.
92 68 69
70 46 43
450
540
5 4 1
0 0 0
Denosumab vs ZA: Time to First On-Study SRE Median Mos (95% CI) Denosumab 20.7 (18.8-24.9) ZA 17.1 (15.0-19.4)
Proportion of Patients Without SRE
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25 HR: 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71-0.95; P = .0002 for noninferiority analysis; P = .008 for superiority analysis) 0 0
Patients at Risk, n Denosumab 950 ZA 951
3
6
9
758 733
582 544
472 407
Fizazi K, et al. Lancet. 2011;377:813-822.
12 15 18 Number of Months 361 299
259 207
168 140
21
24
27
115 93
70 64
39 47
Time to First and Subsequent On-Study SRE (Multiple Event Analysis)*
Cumulative Mean Number of SREs per Patient
2.0
Rate ratio: 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71-0.94; P = .004; adjusted P = .008)
1.8 1.6 1.4
1.2 1.0
0.8 0.6 0.4
Events, n Denosumab (n = 950) 494 ZA (n = 951) 584
0.2 0 0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
Number of Months *Events occurring at least 21 days apart. Fizazi K, et al. Lancet. 2011;377:813-822.
27
30
33
36
Comparison of First SRE After Starting BoneDirected Therapy Events, n (%)
ZA (n = 951)
Denosumab (n = 950)
Total confirmed events
386 (41)
341 (36)
Radiation to bone
203 (21)
177 (19)
Pathologic fracture
143 (15)
137 (14)
Spinal cord compression
36 (4)
26 (3)
Surgery to bone
4 (< 1)
1 (< 1)
Fizazi K, et al. Lancet. 2011;377:813-822.
Comparison of Bone-Directed Therapies
Zoledronic Acid
Denosumab
Intravenous
Subcutaneous
Acute phase reactions
Yes
No
Renal toxicity
Yes
No
Hypocalcemia
Rare
Not rare
ONJ
Yes
Yes
Survival benefit
No
No
Usually not
Regional
Route
Reimbursement concerns
Abiraterone and SRE
C. Logethetis et al. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13: 1210–17
Beta emitters: long range increases bone marrow exposure Beta Range in tissue (μm)
50–12 000
Relative particle mass
1
DNA hits for cell kill
Marrow Bone
>1000
Beta emitter
Range of beta particle (10–1000 cell diameters2)
Henriksen G et al. Cancer Res 2002;62:3120–5; Brechbiel M. Dalton Trans 2007;43:4918–28