Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. Its incidence is rising as the population ages. In the localized stage, the 5-year overall survival rate (OS) is 98%. Metastatic progression and resistance to castration have a negative impact on prognosis. Despite recent advances in management, the 5-year OS is around 30%. Therapeutic advances in this indication have been made mainly by the use of taxanes and second-generation hormone therapy. These treatments have improved OS and progression-free survival (PFS). They are now used as standard therapy. More recently, the Phase III VISION trial confirmed the improvement in OS and radiological PFS achieved by treatment with the radioligand 177Lutetium-PSMA-617 (Lu-PSMA) in patients with advanced metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This treatment is currently available in early access in France. Despite encouraging results, 40% of patients will not respond to Lu-PSMA, and there are currently no validated predictive factors. Studies are currently on going, but the identification of biomarkers seems necessary to better stratify risk in these patients. Numerous tissue prognostic tests based on molecular characteristics or cell proliferation are emerging with this in mind. At present, molecular profiling is not a routine technique for prostate cancer, as it is for other solid cancers. At an early stage, the Decipher® Genomic classification tool has shown prognostic utility independently of therapeutic and clinico-pathological data. According to recent studies, methylome analysis would enable the subdivision of mCRPCs and could help identify new therapeutic targets. In the metastatic phase, certain molecular abnormalities involving DNA repair genes are predictive of response to PARP inhibitors. Molecular analysis (mutations, copy number alterations, gene expression, DNA methylation) could therefore be useful in optimizing the management of mCRPC patients treated with Lu-PSMA. If reliable molecular abnormalities are identified on tissue, a diagnostic technique based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis will be useful in decision-making for these patients. A biological collection will therefore be created during the course of this study, with a view to using ctDNA analysis in subsequent research.
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. Its incidence is rising as the population ages. In the localized stage, the 5-year overall survival rate (OS) is 98%. Metastatic progression and resistance to castration have a negative impact on prognosis. Despite recent advances in management, the 5-year OS is around 30%. Therapeutic advances in this indication have been made mainly by the use of taxanes and second-generation hormone therapy. These treatments have improved OS and progression-free survival (PFS). They are now used as standard therapy. More recently, the Phase III VISION trial confirmed the improvement in OS and radiological PFS achieved by treatment with the radioligand 177Lutetium-PSMA-617 (Lu-PSMA) in patients with advanced metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This treatment is currently available in early access in France. Despite encouraging results, 40% of patients will not respond to Lu-PSMA, and there are currently no validated predictive factors. Studies are currently on going, but the identification of biomarkers seems necessary to better stratify risk in these patients. Numerous tissue prognostic tests based on molecular characteristics or cell proliferation are emerging with this in mind. At present, molecular profiling is not a routine technique for prostate cancer, as it is for other solid cancers. At an early stage, the Decipher® Genomic classification tool has shown prognostic utility independently of therapeutic and clinico-pathological data. According to recent studies, methylome analysis would enable the subdivision of mCRPCs and could help identify new therapeutic targets. In the metastatic phase, certain molecular abnormalities involving DNA repair genes are predictive of response to PARP inhibitors. Molecular analysis (mutations, copy number alterations, gene expression, DNA methylation) could therefore be useful in optimizing the management of mCRPC patients treated with Lu-PSMA. If reliable molecular abnormalities are identified on tissue, a diagnostic technique based on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis will be useful in decision-making for these patients. A biological collection will therefore be created during the course of this study, with a view to using ctDNA analysis in subsequent research. This is an interventional, multi-center study. The study is prospective, single-arm, open-label and non-randomized. Its primary objective is to identify biomarkers of interest, in primary tissue, predictive of response to Lu-PSMA treatment in patients with mCRPC, through the detection of molecular abnormalities in DNA/RNA and methyloma.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
120
A total of 3 blood samples (2 tubes of 9mL each) are added. The first sample will be taken at the inclusion visit, the 2nd at the end of the 2nd treatment cycle and the last at the end of Lu-PSMA treatment.
Centre Jean PERRIN
Clermont-Ferrand, France
RECRUITINGCHU de Grenoble
La Tronche, France
NOT_YET_RECRUITINGHospices Civiles de Lyon
Pierre-Bénite, France
NOT_YET_RECRUITINGHôpital privé de la Loire
Saint-Etienne, France
NOT_YET_RECRUITINGCentre Paul STRAUSS
Strasbourg, France
NOT_YET_RECRUITINGMolecular abnormalities retained on primary tumor sample predicting response to Lu-PSMA in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer patients assessed according to RECIST 1.1 and/or PCWG3 criteria
Biological interpretation and response to Lu-PSMA treatment on bone scan and CT scan according to RECIST 1.1 and/or PCWG3 criteria
Time frame: From enrollment to 24 months after Lu-PSMA treatment
Correlation between biomarker(s) (molecular abnormalities retained on primary tumor sample for the first outcome measure) and survival without radiological progression
Radiological progression free survival defined as the duration between the start date of treatment and the date of the first progression of the disease according to criteria RECIST V1.1 and criteria PCWG3; or the date of death whatever the cause.
Time frame: From enrollment to 24 months after Lu-PSMA treatment
Correlation between biomarker(s) (molecular abnormalities retained on primary tumor sample for the first outcome measure) and survival without biological progression
Biological progression free survival defined as the duration between the start date of treatment and the date of the first PSA progression
Time frame: From enrollment to 24 months after Lu-PSMA treatment
Correlation between biomarker(s) (molecular abnormalities retained on primary tumor sample for the first outcome measure) and survival without clinical progression
Clinical progression free survival, definieds as the duration between the treatment start date and the date of the first clinical progression
Time frame: From enrollment to 24 months after Lu-PSMA treatment
Correlation between biomarker(s) (molecular abnormalities retained on primary tumor sample for the first outcome measure) and overall survival
Overall survival definied as the time interval between the start date of treatment and the date of death whatever the cause
Time frame: From enrollement to the end of the study, up to 58 months
Correlation between the biomarker(s) (molecular abnormalities retained on primary tumor sample for the first outcome measure) and adverse effects during treatment.
Toxicities related to treatment of grade 3 or higher according to CTCAE v. 5.0 and any EIG
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of Lu-PSMA treatment, up to 58 months
Assess whether consideration of clinical characteristics improves biomarker performance
Performance status (0 to 4), pain and adverse events evaluations as assessed by CTCAE v4.0
Time frame: From enrollement to end of Lu-PSMA treatment, up to 58 months
Assess whether consideration of radiological characteristics improves biomarker performance
Radiological evaluation as assessed by RECIST criteria V1.1 and PCWG3 criteria
Time frame: From enrollement to end of Lu-PSMA treatment, up to 58 months
Assess whether consideration of biological characteristics improves biomarker performance
Biological evaluation as assessed with PSA level
Time frame: From enrollement to end of Lu-PSMA treatment, up to 58 months
Biological interpretation and response to Lu-PSMA treatment on PET scan
Radiological progression free survival defined as the duration between the start date of treatment according to RECIP 1.0 criteria for patients who underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET scans
Time frame: From enrollment to 24 months after Lu-PSMA treatment
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.