Cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer following docetaxel failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Izael Pereira da Silva, Lucas Guimarães Campos Roriz de Amorim, Gabriel Vieira Piredda, Marcelo Mass-Lindenbaum, Francisco Cezar Aquino de Moraes, Pedro F S Freitas, Bárbara Vieira Lima Aguiar Melão, Helisandro Montenegro Brandão, Karine Martins da Trindade
{"title":"Cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer following docetaxel failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Izael Pereira da Silva, Lucas Guimarães Campos Roriz de Amorim, Gabriel Vieira Piredda, Marcelo Mass-Lindenbaum, Francisco Cezar Aquino de Moraes, Pedro F S Freitas, Bárbara Vieira Lima Aguiar Melão, Helisandro Montenegro Brandão, Karine Martins da Trindade","doi":"10.1007/s12094-025-03851-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) includes chemotherapy and inhibition of the androgen receptor pathway. However, the optimal treatment sequence in this scenario is not yet fully understood. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for efficacy and safety outcomes as second-line therapy in mCRPC patients after docetaxel failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for interventional studies comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for patients with mCRPC who have experienced treatment failure with docetaxel as their first-line therapy. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies, comprising 1,897 patients were included, of whom 548 (28.8%) received cabazitaxel. Mean follow-up time ranged from 3 to 16.4 months. Median age ranged from 68.1 to 73.9 years in the cabazitaxel group, and 68.0 to 73.1 years in the abiraterone or enzalutamide group. In our meta-analysis, cabazitaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) rates (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.47-0.78; p < 0.001) compared to abiraterone or enzalutamide. There were no differences between groups in overall survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.46-1.24; p = 0.27), therapy-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) (OR 3.00; 95% CI 0.72-12.40; p = 0.12), and PSA decline ≥ 50% (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.51-2.80; p = 0.67).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this systematic review and meta-analysis of men with mCRPC after docetaxel failure, second-line therapy with cabazitaxel was associated with a longer PFS compared with abiraterone or enzalutamide, though without a significant difference in OS.</p>","PeriodicalId":50685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical & Translational Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical & Translational Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-025-03851-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) includes chemotherapy and inhibition of the androgen receptor pathway. However, the optimal treatment sequence in this scenario is not yet fully understood. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for efficacy and safety outcomes as second-line therapy in mCRPC patients after docetaxel failure.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for interventional studies comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for patients with mCRPC who have experienced treatment failure with docetaxel as their first-line therapy. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Eight studies, comprising 1,897 patients were included, of whom 548 (28.8%) received cabazitaxel. Mean follow-up time ranged from 3 to 16.4 months. Median age ranged from 68.1 to 73.9 years in the cabazitaxel group, and 68.0 to 73.1 years in the abiraterone or enzalutamide group. In our meta-analysis, cabazitaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) rates (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.47-0.78; p < 0.001) compared to abiraterone or enzalutamide. There were no differences between groups in overall survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.46-1.24; p = 0.27), therapy-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) (OR 3.00; 95% CI 0.72-12.40; p = 0.12), and PSA decline ≥ 50% (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.51-2.80; p = 0.67).
Conclusions: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of men with mCRPC after docetaxel failure, second-line therapy with cabazitaxel was associated with a longer PFS compared with abiraterone or enzalutamide, though without a significant difference in OS.
期刊介绍:
Clinical and Translational Oncology is an international journal devoted to fostering interaction between experimental and clinical oncology. It covers all aspects of research on cancer, from the more basic discoveries dealing with both cell and molecular biology of tumour cells, to the most advanced clinical assays of conventional and new drugs. In addition, the journal has a strong commitment to facilitating the transfer of knowledge from the basic laboratory to the clinical practice, with the publication of educational series devoted to closing the gap between molecular and clinical oncologists. Molecular biology of tumours, identification of new targets for cancer therapy, and new technologies for research and treatment of cancer are the major themes covered by the educational series. Full research articles on a broad spectrum of subjects, including the molecular and cellular bases of disease, aetiology, pathophysiology, pathology, epidemiology, clinical features, and the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of cancer, will be considered for publication.