Ángel Borque-Fernando, Teresa Alonso-Gordoa, María José Juan-Fita, Fernando Lopez Campos, Daniel Adolfo Pérez-Fentes, Antoni Vilaseca, Cristina Moretones Agut, Paola Usán, Pablo Maroto Rey
{"title":"Multidisciplinary expert consensus on treatment intensification in metastatic androgen pathway modulation-sensitive prostate cancer: a case-based RAND/UCLA analysis.","authors":"Ángel Borque-Fernando, Teresa Alonso-Gordoa, María José Juan-Fita, Fernando Lopez Campos, Daniel Adolfo Pérez-Fentes, Antoni Vilaseca, Cristina Moretones Agut, Paola Usán, Pablo Maroto Rey","doi":"10.7573/dic.2026-6-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Metastatic androgen pathway modulation (mAPM)-sensitive prostate cancer, formerly termed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, is a clinically heterogeneous disease in which treatment intensification decisions are guided by metastatic volume and timing of presentation. However, increasing use of advanced imaging and molecular profiling has revealed prognostic scenarios that are not adequately addressed by current algorithms. This study presents a structured multidisciplinary expert consensus exercise, rather than primary clinical research, applying the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to evaluate systemic treatment intensification strategies in mAPM-sensitive prostate cancer. Four anonymized real-world clinical cases representing key prognostic constellations - metachronous/synchronous disease, low/high metastatic burden - were assessed. Panellists rated the appropriateness of doublet therapy <i>versus</i> triplet therapy, including tailored 'what-if' variations, through two rounds of anonymous voting with structured discussion. The resulting assessments reflect structured expert judgement integrating available evidence with clinical experience. The panel identified metastatic pattern, particularly the presence and type of visceral involvement, disease dynamics, patient fitness and imaging context as dominant drivers of treatment selection. These findings should be interpreted as consensus-based appropriateness assessments rather than evidence-based treatment recommendations. They support a personalized, multidisciplinary approach to mAPM-sensitive prostate cancer management, emphasizing expert integration of prognostic factors beyond volume-based classifications in clinical scenarios where high-level evidence is limited or not directly applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":11362,"journal":{"name":"Drugs in Context","volume":"15 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13574230/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7573/dic.2026-6-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Metastatic androgen pathway modulation (mAPM)-sensitive prostate cancer, formerly termed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, is a clinically heterogeneous disease in which treatment intensification decisions are guided by metastatic volume and timing of presentation. However, increasing use of advanced imaging and molecular profiling has revealed prognostic scenarios that are not adequately addressed by current algorithms. This study presents a structured multidisciplinary expert consensus exercise, rather than primary clinical research, applying the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to evaluate systemic treatment intensification strategies in mAPM-sensitive prostate cancer. Four anonymized real-world clinical cases representing key prognostic constellations - metachronous/synchronous disease, low/high metastatic burden - were assessed. Panellists rated the appropriateness of doublet therapy versus triplet therapy, including tailored 'what-if' variations, through two rounds of anonymous voting with structured discussion. The resulting assessments reflect structured expert judgement integrating available evidence with clinical experience. The panel identified metastatic pattern, particularly the presence and type of visceral involvement, disease dynamics, patient fitness and imaging context as dominant drivers of treatment selection. These findings should be interpreted as consensus-based appropriateness assessments rather than evidence-based treatment recommendations. They support a personalized, multidisciplinary approach to mAPM-sensitive prostate cancer management, emphasizing expert integration of prognostic factors beyond volume-based classifications in clinical scenarios where high-level evidence is limited or not directly applicable.
期刊介绍:
Covers all phases of original research: laboratory, animal and human/clinical studies, health economics and outcomes research, and postmarketing studies. Original research that shows positive or negative results are welcomed. Invited review articles may cover single-drug reviews, drug class reviews, latest advances in drug therapy, therapeutic-area reviews, place-in-therapy reviews, new pathways and classes of drugs. In addition, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are welcomed and may be published as original research if performed per accepted guidelines. Editorials of key topics and issues in drugs and therapeutics are welcomed. The Editor-in-Chief will also consider manuscripts of interest in areas such as technologies that support diagnosis, assessment and treatment. EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines should be followed for each article type. GPP3 Guidelines should be followed for any industry-sponsored manuscripts. Other Editorial sections may include Editorial, Case Report, Conference Report, Letter-to-the-Editor, Educational Section.