Evidence Hub

Association of race and survival in patients treated with apalutamide: Pooled analysis of two phase 3 trials

Gebrael G, Agarwal N, Morgans AK, Vince R, Swami U, Jia AY, Zaorsky N, Chehade CH et al.

Cancer, 2026

2,190 participants

Abstract

Background: Clinical studies have shown that outcomes of patients with prostate cancer could vary depending on race. In this study, the authors sought to determine if the treatment effect of apalutamide, an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI), on overall survival (OS) varies depending on the race of the patient.

Methods: This pooled analysis includes individual patient data from two phase 3 trials, TITAN and SPARTAN, which randomized patients to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) ± apalutamide in metastatic hormone-sensitive and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, respectively. Race was self-identified and categorized as Asian, Black, White, and Others categories. The authors applied a stratified (stratification for the trial) multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model to determine heterogeneity of treatment effect on OS after adjustment for age, performance status, body mass index, T- and N-stage, Gleason score, comorbidities, and exposure to statins and metformin.

Results: Overall, 2190 patients were included: 16.9% patients were Asian, 3.7% were Black, 67.4% were White, and 12.0% were from the Others category. The authors did not find any significant heterogeneity of treatment effect from apalutamide on OS across racial groups (interaction-p = .46). Among ADT plus apalutamide-treated patients, there was no association of race with OS (hazard ratio for Asian, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.56-1.06]; Black, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.49-1.37]; and Others, 1.00…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, 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: 2,190 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