Secondary outcomes by prior definitive treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (hrBCR) treated with enzalutamide (enza) plus leuprolide (combo): EMBARK post hoc analysis.

e17127 Background: In the phase 3 EMBARK trial, combo vs leuprolide alone meaningfully improved metastasis-free survival (primary endpoint) and secondary efficacy endpoints. Secondary endpoints for combo vs leuprolide alone are reported across prior definitive tx subgroups. Methods: EMBARK enrolled pts with hrBCR, defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of ≤9 months and PSA ≥1 ng/mL post radical prostatectomy (RP) ± radiotherapy (RT) or ≥2 ng/mL above nadir post RT. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to combo, leuprolide alone, or enza monotherapy. Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression, first use of new antineoplastic tx, distant metastasis, resumption of any hormonal therapy after tx suspension, and symptomatic progression. Post hoc subgroup analyses descriptively compared secondary endpoints for combo vs leuprolide alone in pts with prior RP only, RT only, or RP+RT. Results: Half of pts in each tx group (combo and leuprolide alone) had prior RP + RT (Table). All secondary endpoints favored combo vs leuprolide alone in all prior definitive tx subgroups (Table). When testing for interactions, there were no statistically significant differences in the observed tx effects for the key secondary endpoints of time to PSA progression ( P interaction =0.79) and first use of new antineoplastic tx ( P interaction =0.57) across prior definitive tx subgroups. P -interactions for other endpoints will be reported in the presentation. Conclusions: Tx with combo vs leuprolide alone showed improvements in all secondary endpoints by prior definitive tx, which supports the benefits of combo as the new standard of care for pts with hrBCR regardless of prior definitive tx. The small sample sizes of the nonrandomized subgroups and low event numbers should be considered when interpreting results. There were no interactions by prior tx for two key secondary endpoints. Disclosure: A genAI tool (10/01/24; Pfizer; GPT-4o) developed the first draft; authors assume content responsibility. Clinical trial information: NCT02319837 . Secondary endpoints Combo(n=355) Leuprolide alone(n=358) † RP only(n=90) RT only(n=86) RP + RT(n=179) RP only(n=75) RT only(n=104) RP + RT(n=179) Time to: Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n Events, n Events, n PSA progression 1 0.05(0.01, 0.41) 4 0.10(0.03, 0.27) 3 0.06(0.02, 0.21) 17 37 39 First use of new antineoplastic tx 16 0.54(0.28, 1.02) 15 0.28(0.15, 0.52) 27 0.34(0.21, 0.53) 25 48 67 Distant metastasis 5 0.51(0.17, 1.59) 12 0.47(0.22, 1.00) 13 0.34(0.18, 0.67) 9 20 30 Resumption of any hormonal therapy 69 0.74(0.51, 1.08) 64 0.92(0.61, 1.39) 123 0.60(0.46, 0.79) 54 47 116 Symptomatic progression 29 0.76(0.46, 1.28) 27 0.55(0.34, 0.89) 48 0.46(0.32, 0.66) 32 52 85 † Leuprolide alone was the comparator. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.e17127
Primary Topic
Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Secondary outcomes by prior definitive treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (hrBCR) treated with enzalutamide (enza) plus leuprolide (combo): EMBARK post hoc analysis.

Luke T. Nordquist, Yiyun Tang, Stephen J. Freedland, Ruslan Croitoru et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research
article

Secondary outcomes by prior definitive treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (hrBCR) treated with enzalutamide (enza) plus leuprolide (combo): EMBARK post hoc analysis.

Luke T. Nordquist, Yiyun Tang, Stephen J. Freedland, Ruslan Croitoru, Antti Rannikko, Klaus Brasso, Matko Kalac, Martin Gleave, Swetha Sridharan, Antonio Gómez‐Caamaño, Ugo De Giorgi, Henry Hyunshik Woo, Neal D. Shore, Matt Rosales, Fong Wang, Olivier Peraud
article en

Abstract

e17127 Background: In the phase 3 EMBARK trial, combo vs leuprolide alone meaningfully improved metastasis-free survival (primary endpoint) and secondary efficacy endpoints. Secondary endpoints for combo vs leuprolide alone are reported across prior definitive tx subgroups. Methods: EMBARK enrolled pts with hrBCR, defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of ≤9 months and PSA ≥1 ng/mL post radical prostatectomy (RP) ± radiotherapy (RT) or ≥2 ng/mL above nadir post RT. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to combo, leuprolide alone, or enza monotherapy. Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression, first use of new antineoplastic tx, distant metastasis, resumption of any hormonal therapy after tx suspension, and symptomatic progression. Post hoc subgroup analyses descriptively compared secondary endpoints for combo vs leuprolide alone in pts with prior RP only, RT only, or RP+RT. Results: Half of pts in each tx group (combo and leuprolide alone) had prior RP + RT (Table). All secondary endpoints favored combo vs leuprolide alone in all prior definitive tx subgroups (Table). When testing for interactions, there were no statistically significant differences in the observed tx effects for the key secondary endpoints of time to PSA progression ( P interaction =0.79) and first use of new antineoplastic tx ( P interaction =0.57) across prior definitive tx subgroups. P -interactions for other endpoints will be reported in the presentation. Conclusions: Tx with combo vs leuprolide alone showed improvements in all secondary endpoints by prior definitive tx, which supports the benefits of combo as the new standard of care for pts with hrBCR regardless of prior definitive tx. The small sample sizes of the nonrandomized subgroups and low event numbers should be considered when interpreting results. There were no interactions by prior tx for two key secondary endpoints. Disclosure: A genAI tool (10/01/24; Pfizer; GPT-4o) developed the first draft; authors assume content responsibility. Clinical trial information: NCT02319837 . Secondary endpoints Combo(n=355) Leuprolide alone(n=358) † RP only(n=90) RT only(n=86) RP + RT(n=179) RP only(n=75) RT only(n=104) RP + RT(n=179) Time to: Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n HR(95% CI) Events, n Events, n Events, n PSA progression 1 0.05(0.01, 0.41) 4 0.10(0.03, 0.27) 3 0.06(0.02, 0.21) 17 37 39 First use of new antineoplastic tx 16 0.54(0.28, 1.02) 15 0.28(0.15, 0.52) 27 0.34(0.21, 0.53) 25 48 67 Distant metastasis 5 0.51(0.17, 1.59) 12 0.47(0.22, 1.00) 13 0.34(0.18, 0.67) 9 20 30 Resumption of any hormonal therapy 69 0.74(0.51, 1.08) 64 0.92(0.61, 1.39) 123 0.60(0.46, 0.79) 54 47 116 Symptomatic progression 29 0.76(0.46, 1.28) 27 0.55(0.34, 0.89) 48 0.46(0.32, 0.66) 32 52 85 † Leuprolide alone was the comparator. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(16_suppl)
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US), University of Helsinki (FI), University of British Columbia (CA), Pfizer (United States) (US), Sydney Adventist Hospital (AU), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK), Rigshospitalet (DK), Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago (ES), Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IT), Durham VA Medical Center (US), Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital (AU), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Nebraska Cancer Specialists (US), Carolina Urologic Research Center (US), Astellas Pharma (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 80%
Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.