Eduardo Pons-Fuster, Celia Maria Gonzalez-Ponce, Silverio Ros-Martinez, Juan José Fernández-Ávila, María Sacramento Díaz-Carrasco, Alberto Espuny-Miró
{"title":"Real-world clinical outcomes of apalutamide versus abiraterone with androgen deprivation therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.","authors":"Eduardo Pons-Fuster, Celia Maria Gonzalez-Ponce, Silverio Ros-Martinez, Juan José Fernández-Ávila, María Sacramento Díaz-Carrasco, Alberto Espuny-Miró","doi":"10.1007/s11096-025-01920-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) is an aggressive disease with a poor prognosis. Current treatment guidelines recommend combining androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies (ARATs) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for mHSPC. While individual ARATs have shown success, few studies directly compare their effects.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the safety and clinical outcomes of abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) and apalutamide in chemotherapy-naïve mHSPC patients, focusing on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, safety, and survival outcomes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective, single-centre study included 107 chemotherapy-naïve mHSPC patients treated with abiraterone or apalutamide plus ADT. PSA levels were measured at baseline and during treatment. Primary outcomes were PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS) and overall survival (OS). Adverse events were recorded. Inverse probability treatment weighting adjusted baseline differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median PSA-PFS significantly favoured apalutamide (log-rank p = 0.015). Achieving PSA ≤ 0.02 ng/mL was strongly associated with delayed progression (HR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.28; p < 0.001). OS did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.504). Apalutamide achieved lower median nadir PSA (0.02 ng/mL vs. 0.23 ng/mL, p < 0.001) and shorter mean time to nadir (4.5 vs. 7.2 months, p = 0.001), with more patients reaching ultralow PSA levels (≤ 0.02 ng/mL) during follow-up. Adverse events occurred more frequently with apalutamide (71.2% vs. 46.5%, p = 0.015), with fatigue and rash being the most common.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Apalutamide demonstrated deeper and more sustained PSA reductions, translating into delayed disease progression compared to abiraterone. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, though adverse events were more prevalent with apalutamide.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-025-01920-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) is an aggressive disease with a poor prognosis. Current treatment guidelines recommend combining androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies (ARATs) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for mHSPC. While individual ARATs have shown success, few studies directly compare their effects.
Aim: To compare the safety and clinical outcomes of abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) and apalutamide in chemotherapy-naïve mHSPC patients, focusing on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, safety, and survival outcomes.
Method: A retrospective, single-centre study included 107 chemotherapy-naïve mHSPC patients treated with abiraterone or apalutamide plus ADT. PSA levels were measured at baseline and during treatment. Primary outcomes were PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS) and overall survival (OS). Adverse events were recorded. Inverse probability treatment weighting adjusted baseline differences.
Results: Median PSA-PFS significantly favoured apalutamide (log-rank p = 0.015). Achieving PSA ≤ 0.02 ng/mL was strongly associated with delayed progression (HR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.28; p < 0.001). OS did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.504). Apalutamide achieved lower median nadir PSA (0.02 ng/mL vs. 0.23 ng/mL, p < 0.001) and shorter mean time to nadir (4.5 vs. 7.2 months, p = 0.001), with more patients reaching ultralow PSA levels (≤ 0.02 ng/mL) during follow-up. Adverse events occurred more frequently with apalutamide (71.2% vs. 46.5%, p = 0.015), with fatigue and rash being the most common.
Conclusion: Apalutamide demonstrated deeper and more sustained PSA reductions, translating into delayed disease progression compared to abiraterone. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, though adverse events were more prevalent with apalutamide.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences.
IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy.
IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor.
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy .
Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.