scholarly journals Canadian consensus forum of key controversial areas in the management of advanced prostate cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Saad ◽  
Sebastien J Hotte ◽  
Antonio Finelli ◽  
Shawn Malone ◽  
Tamim Niazi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Consensus Conference ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Medical Oncologists ◽  
Research And Education ◽  
Research Consortium ◽  
High Level ◽  
Management Choice

Introduction: Rapid progress in diagnostics and therapeutics for the management of prostate cancer (PCa) have created areas where high-level evidence to guide practice is lacking. The Genitourinary Research Consortium (GURC) conducted its second Canadian consensus forum to address areas of controversy in the management of PCa and provide recommendations to guide treatment. Methods: A panel of PCa specialists discussed topics related to the management of PCa. The core scientific committee finalized the design, questions and the analysis of the consensus results. Attendees then voted to indicate their management choice regarding each statement/topic. Questions for voting were adapted from the 2019 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference. The thresholds for agreement were set at ≥ 75% for ‘consensus agreement’, > 50% for “near-consensus”, and ≤ 50% for “no consensus”. Results: The panel was comprised of 29 PCa experts including urologists (n=12), medical oncologists (n= 12), and radiation oncologists (n= 5). Voting took place for 65 pre-determined questions and three ad hoc questions. Consensus was reached for 34 questions, spanning a variety of areas including biochemical recurrence, treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive PCa, management of non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant PCa, bone health, and molecular profiling. Conclusions: The consensus forum identified areas of consensus or near-consensus in more than half of the questions discussed. Areas of consensus typically aligned with available evidence, and areas of variability may indicate a lack of high-quality evidence and point to future opportunities for further research and education.

scholarly journals A A Canadian consensus forum on the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Saad ◽  
Christina Canil ◽  
Antonio Finelli ◽  
Sebastien J. Hotte ◽  
Shawn Malone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Medical Oncologists ◽  
Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Scientific Group ◽  
High Level

Introduction: The management of advanced prostate cancer (PCa) continues to evolve with the emergence of new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. As a result, there are multiple areas in this landscape with a lack of high-level evidence to guide practice. Consensus initiatives are an approach to establishing practice guidance in areas where evidence is unclear. We conducted a Canadian-based consensus forum to address key controversial areas in the management of advanced PCa. Methods: As part of a modified Delphi process, a core scientific group of PCa physicians (n=8) identified controversial areas for discussion and developed an initial set of questions, which were then reviewed and finalized with a larger group of 29 multidisciplinary PCa specialists. The main areas of focus were non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), oligometastatic prostate cancer, genetic testing in prostate cancer, and imaging in advanced prostate cancer. The predetermined threshold for consensus was set at 74% (agreement from 20 of 27 participating physicians). Results: Consensus participants included uro-oncologists (n=13), medical oncologists (n=10), and radiation oncologists (n=4). Of the 64 questions, consensus was reached in 30 questions (n=5 unanimously). Consensus was more common for questions related to biochemical recurrence, sequencing of therapies, and mCRPC. Conclusions: A Canadian consensus forum in PCa identified areas of agreement in nearly 50% of questions discussed. Areas of variability may represent opportunities for further research, education, and sharing of best practices. These findings reinforce the value of multidisciplinary consensus initiatives to optimize patient care.

Genomic analysis of circulating tumor DNA in 3,334 patients with advanced prostate cancer to identify targetable BRCA alterations and AR resistance mechanisms.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 25-25
Author(s):  
Hanna Tukachinsky ◽  
Russell Madison ◽  
Jon Chung ◽  
Lucas Dennis ◽  
Bernard Fendler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Acquired Resistance ◽  
Genomic Analysis ◽  
Circulating Tumor Dna ◽  
Resistance Mechanisms ◽  
Cancer Tissue ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Level ◽  
Tumor Dna

25 Background: Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) by next-generation sequencing (NGS) of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from plasma provides a minimally invasive method to identify targetable genomic alterations (GAs) and resistance mechanisms in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The circulating tumor fraction in patients with mCRPC and the clinical validity of GAs detected in plasma remain unknown. We evaluated the landscape of GAs using ctDNA-based CGP and assessed concordance with tissue-based CGP. Methods: Plasma from 3,334 patients with advanced prostate cancer (including 1,674 mCRPC screening samples from the TRITON2/3 trials and 1,660 samples from routine clinical CGP) was analyzed using hybrid-capture-based gene panel NGS assays. Results were compared with CGP of 2,006 metastatic prostate cancer tissue biopsies. Concordance was evaluated in 837 patients with both tissue (archival or contemporaneous) and plasma NGS results. Results: 3,127 patients [94%] had detectable ctDNA. BRCA1/2 were mutated in 295 patients [8.8%]. In concordance analysis, 72/837 [8.6%] patients had BRCA1/2 mutations detected in tissue, 67 [93%] of whom were also identified by ctDNA, and 20 patients were identified using ctDNA but not tissue [23% of all patients identified using ctDNA]. ctDNA detected subclonal BRCA1/2 reversions in 10 of 1,660 [0.6%] routine clinical CGP samples. AR alterations, including amplifications and hotspot mutations, which were detected in 940/2,213 patients [42%]. Rare AR compound mutations, rearrangements, and novel in-frame deletions were identified. Altered pathways included PI3K/AKT/mTOR [14%], WNT/β-catenin [17%], and RAS/RAF/MEK [5%]. Microsatellite instability was detected in 31/2,213 patients [1.4%]. Conclusions: In the largest study of mCRPC plasma samples conducted to date, CGP of ctDNA recapitulated the genomic landscape detected in tissue biopsies, with a high level of agreement in detection of BRCA1/2 alterations. It also identified patients who may have gained somatic BRCA1/2 alterations since archival tissue was collected. ctDNA detected more acquired resistance GAs than tissue, including novel AR-activating variants. The large percentage of patients with rich genomic signal from ctDNA, and the sensitive, specific detection of BRCA1/2 alterations position liquid biopsy as a compelling clinical complement to tissue CGP for patients with mCRPC.

The evolution of the education module for men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) in the prostate cancer supportive care (PCSC) program.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 279-279
Author(s):  
Jennifer Marie Rauw ◽  
Sunil Parimi ◽  
Nikita Ivanov ◽  
Jessica Noble ◽  
Eugenia Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Primary Therapy ◽  
Oncology Nurse ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Medical Oncologists ◽  
Hormone Sensitive ◽  
Virtual Platform ◽  
Satisfaction Surveys

279 Background: The PCSC Program was initiated in 2013 at the Vancouver Prostate Centre to provide a comprehensive program for patients and partners with prostate cancer. This program provides educational sessions (ES) and clinical services, including decision-making for primary therapy, sexual health, pelvic floor physiotherapy, hormone therapy, counseling, exercise, and nutrition for patients in BC, Canada. In 2016, the PCSC Program expanded to BC Cancer Victoria and in 2017 to other BC Cancer sites. In 2018, medical oncologists (MDs) in Victoria (JR, SP) developed an Education Module addressing treatment options for men with metastatic hormone sensitive (mHSPC) and metastatic castration resistant (mCRPC) disease. MDs delivered in-person ES in Victoria in 2018 and, in 2019, added a virtual platform (VP) option. From 3-5/2020, the ESs were on hold due to the COVID pandemic and parental leaves. In 6/2020, the ESs resumed only on VP, and the PCSC Oncology Nurse Practitioner (NP), NI, gave the presentations for the MDs on leave. In 10/2020, due to a changing standard of care for mHSPC, the PCSC team consolidated the two ESs into one. We report on the evolution of this Education Module in response to both the changing standard of care and the COVID pandemic. Methods: We prospectively collected attendance and patient characteristic metrics from all ES for men with mPC. We tracked presenter type (MD vs. NP) and prospectively collected anonymous patient satisfaction questionnaires. Results: From 1/2018 to 1/2021, 100 men registered for 27 ES; 81 men, 41 partners, and 2 family members actually attended. 48/75 (64%) men were white, 39/75 (52%) retired, and 56/75 (74.7%) married. 47 men attended 12 mHSPC ES, 13 men attended ten mCRPC ES, and 17 attended four consolidated ES. MDs presented 15 ES, and the NP presented 12 ES. Responses to questions on 70 satisfaction surveys were similar for MD vs. NP presenters. 9 responders to the recently added VP-specific questions said they agreed (4) or strongly agreed (5) that it was beneficial to watch the ES at home on a computer. The Table below shows attendance per site per year. Conclusions: The ESs for men with mPC were well-received. Although there was a VP option before COVID, attendance increased significantly after the lockdown as patients and providers became more familiar with VPs. Satisfaction surveys confirmed that an NP could deliver the ES rather than MD. Consolidation of the mHSPC and mCRPC ES reflected the changing standard of care and resulted in more efficient use of presenter time. Virtual delivery of the sessions provided greater access to those living in distant or remote areas of the province and those in lockdown during the COVID pandemic. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals The Current Landscape of Treatment in Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 117955491983392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joelle El-Amm ◽  
Jeanny B Aragon-Ching
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Drug Administration ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Early Data ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Fda Approval ◽  
Variable Potential

Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is a heterogeneous disease with variable potential in developing into overt metastases. It is an area of increased unmet need in advanced prostate cancer and for which there had been no great treatments until recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of 2 novel anti-androgens apalutamide and enzalutamide, which were both approved given benefit in metastasis-free survival. Early data on the use of darolutamide, another novel anti-androgen, are also explored. This review discusses the pivotal trials that led to the approval of apalutamide and enzalutamide in the nmCRPC setting and discusses the key promises and challenges with the use of these agents.

Therapeutic Approach to Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 05 (01) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Fred Saad ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Therapeutic Approach ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Resistant Form ◽  
Near Future ◽  
The Continuum

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been and continues to be the most common treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer and is now used earlier in the continuum of care for prostate cancer. Unfortunately, the majority of prostate cancer patients on ADT will develop a castration-resistant form of the disease that is responsible for the majority of the morbidity and mortality related to prostate cancer. Given recent advances, there are now therapeutic options available that can reduce the morbidity and improve survival in patients with castrationresistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Research is intensifying in this area and further improvements can be expected in the near future. This review will briefly summarize what is currently available and propose strategies for the management of CRPC.

Patterns of prostate cancer management across Canadian prostate cancer treatment specialists.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 321-321
Author(s):  
Bobby Shayegan ◽  
Alan I. So ◽  
Shawn Malone ◽  
Sebastien J. Hotte ◽  
Antonio Finelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Patterns Of Care ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Prostate Cancer Treatment ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Cancer Management ◽  
Radiation Oncologists ◽  
Medical Oncologists

321 Background: The Canadian GU Research Consortium (GURC) was recently established to bring comprehensive prostate cancer centres together to collaborate on research, education, and adoption of best practices. As an initial step to inform the work of the GURC, an electronic questionnaire was designed to assess management of advanced prostate cancer care in Canada and better understand patterns of care. Methods: A 59-item online questionnaire was developed by a multidisciplinary scientific committee to measure physician practices, patterns of care, treatment sequencing, and management of mCRPC. After pre-testing, the online questionnaire was sent to 93 urologists, uro-oncologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and general practitioner oncologists who are actively involved in the treatment of prostate cancer. Results: A total of 49 (53%) respondents completed the questionnaire between April 17, 2017 to May 17, 2017. Although all respondents indicated a role in initiating life-prolonging oral therapy for mCRPC and monitoring treatment and side effects, chemotherapy initiation was mainly a medical oncologist role compared to other specialties (p < 0.05, chi-square). Symptom management such as palliative care and end-of-life care were provided mainly by radiation oncologists (100%) and medical oncologists (81%) compared to urologists (33%) and uro-oncologists (50%), p < 0.05, chi-square). Patient mix varied across the disciplines. Urologist practices were composed primarily of non-metastatic prostate cancer patients (73%), as were radiation oncologist practices (77%), while uro-oncologist practices included both non-metastatic (58%) and metastatic (40%) patients. Medical oncologists practices were mainly (91%) metastatic patients. Referral patterns also varied by discipline. Conclusions: In Canada, prostate cancer treatment involves multiple disciplines providing a range of care at different points across the treatment continuum. We plan to do further research to better understand variation in practice and improve multidisciplinary coordination for patients with advanced prostate cancer.

Real-world management of advanced prostate cancer: A Canadian comparison of academic specialists and community-based prostate cancer physicians.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 29-29
Author(s):  
Sebastien J. Hotte ◽  
Antonio Finelli ◽  
Kim N. Chi ◽  
Christina M. Canil ◽  
Neil Fleshner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Education Practice ◽  
Consensus Recommendations ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Research Consortium

29 Background: The Canadian GU Research Consortium recently conducted a consensus development conference with 27 academic prostate cancer (PC) specialists leading to 31 consensus recommendations. We conducted a survey to compare community-based practice with the consensus recommendations on the management of metastatic castration sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Methods: An 87-item online questionnaire was sent to 600 Canadian community urologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and general practitioner oncologists involved in the treatment of PC. Results: Seventy-two physicians responded to the questionnaire (12% response). A discordance of >25% was observed in 15 of 31 recommendations (48%). Among the areas of discordance were treatment approach for patients with nmCRPC and PSADT < 10 months who are negative for metastases on conventional imaging but metastatic on PET-based imaging. Of the academic physicians, 89% indicated treating with agents approved for nmCRPC compared to 50% of community physicians (p=0.0005). Important discrepancies were also observed across academic and community physicians for radiation to the prostate for low-volume mCSPC which was 74% vs 27%, (p<0.0001) respectively; criteria for stopping therapy in mCRPC in which 78% of academic physicians favored continuation of therapy in the event of PSA progression only, compared to 24% of community physicians. Sequencing of therapy after prior apalutamide for nmCRPC using subsequent docetaxel treatment was observed in 81% of academic physicians vs 35% of community physicians, (p<0.0001), and use of genetic testing was favored by 74% of academics vs 36% of community physicians, (p<0.0001) for newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. Conclusions: The areas of discordance between a national sample of community-based PC physicians and academic consensus recommendations represent potential areas for education, practice tools and future research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document