1.Pharmacotherapy plan for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer:a network meta-analysis
Haichi SONG ; Zongwei TANG ; Wanyi CHEN
China Pharmacy 2024;35(1):84-89
OBJECTIVE To determine the optimal therapeutic plan for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), and to provide reference for clinical decision-making. METHODS Retrieved from Medline, Embase, BIOSIS preview, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials. gov systematically, randomized controlled trials about mHSPC therapy, with overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) as efficacy outcomes and the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) as safety outcome, were collected during the inception-Mar. 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias for the included study before conducting a Bayesian network meta-analysis. RESULTS Eight studies with 9 437 patients were finally included. The effectiveness and safety of 7 therapy plans were compared [abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, darolutamide+docetaxel, docetaxel, enzalutamide, standard non-steroidal antiandrogen (SNA) in addition to ADT, and ADT alone]. In terms of efficacy index, the most beneficial regimen (except for ADT+SNA) for OS was ADT+darolutamide+docetaxel (HR=0.54, 95%CI of 0.44-0.66), followed by ADT+abiraterone acetate (HR=0.64,95%CI of 0.57- 0.71), apalutamide (HR=0.65, 95%CI of 0.53-0.79), enzalutamide (HR=0.66, 95%CI of 0.53-0.82); the least beneficial regimen for OS was ADT+docetaxel (HR=0.79, 95%CI of 0.71-0.88). The most beneficial regimen (except for ADT+SNA) for rPFS was ADT+enzalutamide (HR=0.39, 95%CI of 0.30-0.50), followed by ADT+apalutamide (HR=0.48, 95%CI of 0.39- 0.60), abiraterone acetate (HR=0.57, 95%CI of 0.51-0.64), docetaxel (HR=0.62, 95%CI of 0.56-0.69). The results of the tumor- loading subgroup analysis were the same. In terms of safety, ADT+darolutamide+docetaxel (OR=25.86, 95%CI of 14.08-51.33), and ADT+docetaxel (OR=23.35, 95%CI of 13.26-44.81) were associated with markedly increased SAEs; the incidence of SAEs caused by ADT+abiraterone acetate (OR=1.42,95%CI of 1.10-1.82) was slightly increased, and those of other therapy plans had no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS Compared with ADT alone, ADT+ darolutamide+docetaxel may provide the most significant OS benefit, but the incidence of SAEs is increased greatly; compared with ADT+docetaxel, ADT+abiraterone acetate, apalutamide or enzalutamide provide more OS benefits. ADT+enzalutamide provide optimal rPFS benefits with no increased SAEs.