Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Germline genetic testing (GT) is important for prostate cancer (PCA) management, clinical trial eligibility, and hereditary cancer risk. However, GT is underutilized and there is a shortage of genetic counselors. To address these gaps, a patient-driven, pretest genetic education webtool was designed and studied compared with traditional genetic counseling (GC) to inform strategies for expanding access to genetic services. METHODS:Technology-enhanced acceleration of germline evaluation for therapy (TARGET) was a multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04447703) comparing a nine-module patient-driven genetic education webtool versus pretest GC. Participants completed surveys measuring decisional conflict, satisfaction, and attitudes toward GT at baseline, after pretest education/counseling, and after GT result disclosure. The primary end point was noninferiority in reducing decisional conflict between webtool and GC using the validated Decisional Conflict Scale. Mixed-effects regression modeling was used to compare decisional conflict between groups. Participants opting for GT received a 51-gene panel, with results delivered to participants and their providers. RESULTS:= .01), suggesting the patient-driven webtool was noninferior to GC. Overall, 145 (89.5%) GC and 120 (78.4%) in the webtool arm underwent GT, with pathogenic variants in 15.8% (8.7% in PCA genes). Satisfaction did not differ significantly between arms; knowledge of cancer genetics was higher but attitudes toward GT were less favorable in the webtool arm. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The results of the TARGET study support the use of patient-driven digital webtools for expanding access to pretest genetic education for PCA GT. Further studies to optimize patient experience and evaluate them in diverse patient populations are warranted.

BACKGROUND:Dickkopf-related protein 1 (DKK1) is a Wingless-related integrate site (Wnt) signaling modulator that is upregulated in prostate cancers (PCa) with low androgen receptor expression. DKN-01, an IgG4 that neutralizes DKK1, delays PCa growth in pre-clinical DKK1-expressing models. These data provided the rationale for a clinical trial testing DKN-01 in patients with metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC). METHODS:(combination) for men with mCRPC who progressed on ≥1 AR signaling inhibitors. DKK1 status was determined by RNA in-situ expression. The primary endpoint of the phase 1 dose escalation cohorts was the determination of the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). The primary endpoint of the phase 2 expansion cohorts was objective response rate by iRECIST criteria in patients treated with the combination. RESULTS:18 pts were enrolled into the study-10 patients in the monotherapy cohorts and 8 patients in the combination cohorts. No DLTs were observed and DKN-01 600 mg was determined as the RP2D. A best overall response of stable disease occurred in two out of seven (29%) evaluable patients in the monotherapy cohort. In the combination cohort, five out of seven (71%) evaluable patients had a partial response (PR). A median rPFS of 5.7 months was observed in the combination cohort. In the combination cohort, the median tumoral DKK1 expression H-score was 0.75 and the rPFS observed was similar between patients with DKK1 H-score ≥1 versus H-score = 0. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:DKN-01 600 mg was well tolerated. DKK1 blockade has modest anti-tumor activity as a monotherapy for mCRPC. Anti-tumor activity was observed in the combination cohorts, but the response duration was limited. DKK1 expression in the majority of mCRPC is low and did not clearly correlate with anti-tumor activity of DKN-01 plus docetaxel.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Somatic mutations in the Wnt signaling gene Adenomatous Polyposis Coli (APC) promote metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) progression. Less is known regarding the impact of germline APC mutations on PCa outcomes. We sought to investigate the prevalence of aggressive variant PCa (AVPC) and treatment-emergent neuroendocrine PCa (t-NEPC) in patients with the germline APC I1307K variant, an alteration found in 7% of Ashkenazi Jewish men. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We report a retrospective cohort study comparing patients with PCa and either APC I1307K germline mutation, APC somatic mutations, or unselected patients. Proportions of patients with AVPC among all the cases were estimated along with 95% Clopper-Pearson exact confidence intervals (CI). Odds ratios with 95% CI were provided for the prevalence of t-NEPC and AVPC in patients with germline APC I1307K compared to patients with frameshift alterations in APC. RESULTS:From 2016-2022, 18 patients with PCa at 3 institutions with the germline APC (I1307K) mutation were identified. Clinically-defined AVPC was found in 8 of the 15 cases with metastatic disease (53%; 95% CI: 26%-79%). Combined somatic alterations in two or more of RB1, TP53 or PTEN (molecularly-defined AVPC) were found in 5/18 cases (28%; 95% CI: 10%-54%). When compared to 20 patients with APC somatic frameshift mutations, patients with the germline APC I1307K variant had a significantly increased risk of AVPC (OR 7.2; 95% CI 1.27, 40.68). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:PCa that develops in the presence of the germline APC I1307K mutation appear to be enriched for clinically-defined and molecularly-defined AVPC and in particular, for t-NEPC.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Modern literature has demonstrated improvements in long-term biochemical outcomes with the use of prophylactic pelvic nodal irradiation followed by a brachytherapy boost in the management of high-risk prostate cancer. However, this comes at the cost of increased treatment-related toxicity. In this study, we explore the outcomes of the largest cohort to date, which uses a stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) boost following pelvic nodal radiation for exclusively high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS/UNASSIGNED:A large institutional database was interrogated to identify all patients with high-risk clinical node-negative prostate cancer treated with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy to the pelvis followed by a robotic SBRT boost to the prostate and seminal vesicles. The boost was uniformly delivered over three fractions. Toxicity was measured using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0. Oncologic outcomes were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were created to evaluate associations between pretreatment characteristics and clinical outcomes. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 440 patients with a median age of 71 years were treated, the majority of whom were diagnosed with a grade group 4 or 5 disease. Pelvic nodal irradiation was delivered at a total dose of 4,500 cGy in 25 fractions, followed by a three-fraction SBRT boost. With an early median follow-up of 2.5 years, the crude incidence of grade 2+ genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 13% and 11%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed grade 2+ GU toxicity was associated with older age and a higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage. Multivariate analysis revealed overall survival was associated with patient age and posttreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Utilization of an SBRT boost following pelvic nodal irradiation in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer is oncologically effective with early follow-up and yields minimal high-grade toxicity. We demonstrate a 5-year freedom from biochemical recurrence (FFBCR) of over 83% with correspondingly limited grade 3+ GU and GI toxicity measured at 3.6% and 1.6%, respectively. Long-term follow-up is required to evaluate oncologic outcomes and late toxicity.

Prostate cancers adapt to androgen receptor (AR) pathway inhibitors and progress to castration resistance due to ongoing AR expression and function. To counter this, we developed a new approach to modulate the AR and inhibit castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) using multivalent peptoid conjugates (MPC) that contain multiple copies of the AR-targeting ligand ethisterone attached to a peptidomimetic scaffold. Here, we investigated the antitumor effects of compound MPC309, a trivalent display of ethisterone conjugated to a peptoid oligomer backbone that binds to the AR with nanomolar affinity. MPC309 exhibited potent antiproliferative effects on various enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer models, including those with AR splice variants, ligand-binding mutations, and noncanonical AR gene expression programs, as well as mouse prostate organoids harboring defined genetic alterations that mimic lethal human prostate cancer subtypes. MPC309 is taken up by cells through macropinocytosis, an endocytic process more prevalent in cancer cells than in normal ones, thus providing an opportunity to target tumors selectively. MPC309 triggers a distinct AR transcriptome compared with DHT and enzalutamide, a clinically used antiandrogen. Specifically, MPC309 enhances the expression of differentiation genes while reducing the expression of genes needed for cell division and metabolism. Mechanistically, MPC309 increases AR chromatin occupancy and alters AR interactions with coregulatory proteins in a pattern distinct from DHT. In xenograft studies, MPC309 produced significantly greater tumor suppression than enzalutamide. Altogether, MPC309 represents a promising new AR modulator that can combat resistant disease by promoting an AR antiproliferative gene expression program.

BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer (PCa) patients with pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in cancer predisposition genes may be eligible for U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted therapies, clinical trials, or enhanced screening. Studies suggest that eligible patients are missing genetics-informed care due to restrictive testing criteria. OBJECTIVE:To establish the prevalence of actionable PGVs among prospectively accrued, unselected PCa patients, stratified by their guideline eligibility. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Consecutive, unselected PCa patients were enrolled at 15 sites in the USA from October 2019 to August 2021, and had multigene cancer panel testing. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Correlates between the prevalence of PGVs and clinician-reported demographic and clinical characteristics were examined. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:Among 958 patients (median [quartiles] age at diagnosis 65 [60, 71] yr), 627 (65%) had low- or intermediate-risk disease (grade group 1, 2, or 3). A total of 77 PGVs in 17 genes were identified in 74 patients (7.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.2-9.6%). No significant difference was found in the prevalence of PGVs among patients who met the 2019 National Comprehensive Cancer Network Prostate criteria (8.8%, 43/486, 95% CI 6.6-12%) versus those who did not (6.6%, 31/472, 95% CI 4.6-9.2%; odds ratio 1.38, 95% CI 0.85-2.23), indicating that these criteria would miss 42% of patients (31/74, 95% CI 31-53%) with PGVs. The criteria were less effective at predicting PGVs in patients from under-represented populations. Most PGVs (81%, 60/74) were potentially clinically actionable. Limitations include the inability to stratify analyses based on individual ethnicity due to low numbers of non-White patients with PGVs. CONCLUSIONS:Our results indicate that almost half of PCa patients with PGVs are missed by current testing guidelines. Comprehensive germline genetic testing should be offered to all patients with PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY:One in 13 patients with prostate cancer carries an inherited variant that may be actionable for the patient's current care or prevention of future cancer, and could benefit from expanded testing criteria.

BACKGROUND:Evading immune surveillance is a hallmark for the development of multiple cancer types. Whether immune evasion contributes to the pathogenesis of high-grade prostate cancer (HGPCa) remains an area of active inquiry. METHODS:Through single-cell RNA sequencing and multicolor flow cytometry of freshly isolated prostatectomy specimens and matched peripheral blood, we aimed to characterize the tumor immune microenvironment (TME) of localized prostate cancer (PCa), including HGPCa and low-grade prostate cancer (LGPCa). RESULTS: TILs. The PCa TME was infiltrated by macrophages but these did not clearly cluster by M1 and M2 markers. CONCLUSIONS:T cell exhaustion in localized PCa, a finding enriched in HGPCa relative to LGPCa. These studies suggest a possible link between the clinical-pathologic risk of PCa and the associated TME. Our results have implications for our understanding of the immunologic mechanisms of PCa pathogenesis and the implementation of immunotherapy for localized PCa.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Preclinical data suggest that poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have synergistic activity when combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); however, it is unknown which tumor types or molecular subtypes may benefit from this combination. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To investigate responses associated with the combination of avelumab and talazoparib in different tumor types and/or molecular subtypes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:In this phase 1b and 2 basket nonrandomized controlled trial, patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in the following cohorts: non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); DNA damage response (DDR)-positive NSCLC; triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC); hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-negative, DDR-positive breast cancer; recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (OC); recurrent, platinum-sensitive, BRCA1/2-altered OC; urothelial cancer; metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC); DDR-positive mCRPC; and BRCA1/2- or ATM-altered solid tumors. Data were analyzed between June 17, 2021, and August 6, 2021. INTERVENTIONS/UNASSIGNED:All patients in phases 1b and 2 received avelumab plus talazoparib. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:The phase 1b primary end point was dose-limiting toxic effects. The phase 2 primary end point was objective response, measured as objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included safety, time to response, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival, time to prostate-specific antigen progression and PSA response of 50% or greater (for mCRPC), cancer antigen 125 response (for OC), pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and biomarkers. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 223 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.2 [11.0] years; 117 [52.5%] men) were treated, including 12 patients in phase 1b and 211 patients in phase 2. The recommended phase 2 dose was avelumab 800 mg every 2 weeks plus talazoparib 1 mg once daily. In phase 2, the ORR was 18.2% (95% CI, 5.2%-40.3%) in patients with TNBC; 34.8% (95% CI, 16.4%-57.3%) in patients with HR-positive, ERBB2-negative, and DDR-positive BC; and 63.6% (95% CI, 30.8%-89.1%) in patients with platinum-sensitive, BRCA1/2-altered OC. Responses occurred more frequently in patients with BRCA1/2-altered tumors. Durable responses were observed in patients with TNBC (median [range] DOR, 11.1 [3.4-20.4] months); HR-positive, ERBB2-negative, and DDR-positive BC (median [range] DOR, 15.7 [3.9 to ≥20.6] months); and BRCA1/2-altered OC (median DOR not reached; range, 5.6 to ≥18.4 months). The most common grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events were anemia (75 patients [33.6%]), thrombocytopenia (48 patients [21.5%]), and neutropenia (31 patients [13.9%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:This nonrandomized controlled trial found that ORRs for avelumab plus talazoparib were comparable with those with PARP inhibitor or ICI monotherapy. Prolonged DOR in patients with TNBC; HR-positive, ERBB2-negative, and DDR-positive BC; and BRCA1/2-altered OC warrant further investigation in randomized clinical trials. These data highlight the importance of prospective patient selection in future studies of ICI and PARP-inhibitor combinations. TRIAL REGISTRATION/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03330405.

BACKGROUND:Germline testing has an increasingly important role in prostate cancer care. However, a relative shortage of genetic counselors necessitates alternate strategies for delivery of pre-test education for germline testing. This study, funded by the Prostate Cancer Foundation, seeks to address the need for novel methods of delivery of pre-test germline education beyond traditional germline counseling to facilitate informed patient decision-making for germline testing. METHODS:This is a two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a target enrollment of 173 participants with prostate cancer per study arm (total anticipated n = 346). Patients who meet criteria for germline testing based on tumor features, family history or Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry are being recruited from 5 US sites including academic, private practice and Veterans healthcare settings. Consenting participants are randomized to the interactive pretest webtool or germline counseling with assessment of key patient-reported outcomes involved in informed decision-making for germline testing. RESULTS:Participants complete surveys at baseline, after pretest education/counseling, and following disclosure of germline results. The primary outcome of the study is decisional conflict for germline testing. Secondary outcomes include genetic knowledge, satisfaction, uptake of germline testing, and understanding of results. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our hypothesis is that the web-based genetic education tool is non-inferior to traditional genetic counseling regarding key patient-reported outcomes involved in informed decision-making for germline testing. If proven, the results would support deploying the webtool across various practice settings to facilitate pre-test genetic education for individuals with prostate cancer and developing collaborative care strategies with genetic counseling. CLINICALTRIALS/RESULTS:gov Identifier: NCT04447703.