Evidence Hub

Comparison of prostate-specific antigen response in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer initiated on apalutamide or abiraterone acetate: A retrospective cohort study

B. Lowentritt, D. Pilon, D. Waters, C. Rossi, E. Muser, S. Kurteva, Aditi Shah, I. Khilfeh et al.

Urologic oncology, 2023

364 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Deep prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥90% reduction in PSA [PSA90]) is an important early response indicator of radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). This study compared PSA90 responses by 6 months between patients with mCSPC at first use of apalutamide or abiraterone acetate, both androgen receptor signaling inhibitors.

METHODS

Clinical data from 77 community urology practices in the United States were analyzed. Patients with mCSPC were classified into treatment cohorts based on their first filled prescription (index date) for apalutamide or abiraterone acetate on or after September 17, 2019 (approval date of apalutamide for mCSPC). Patients were followed from the index date until the earliest of index treatment discontinuation, treatment switch, end of clinical activity, or end of data availability (September 17, 2021). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to ensure similarity in distribution of baseline characteristics between cohorts. PSA90 was defined as the earliest attainment of ≥90% reduction in PSA relative to baseline (most recent value within 13 weeks pre-index). Time to PSA90 between cohorts was compared by weighted Kaplan-Meier analysis and with Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 364 patients treated with apalutamide and 147 treated with abiraterone acetate met the study criteria. Patient characteristics were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 364 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free