Abstract
121 Background: In the Phase 3 VISION trial, treatment with the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radioligand therapy [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 ( 177 Lu-PSMA-617) + protocol-permitted standard of care (SoC) significantly improved median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS; 8.7 vs 3.4 months [mo]) and overall survival (OS; 15.3 vs 11.3 mo) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) vs SoC alone. However, it is unclear how the addition of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) affected 177 Lu-PSMA-617 treatment outcomes. Here we compared the efficacy and safety of 177 Lu-PSMA-617 in patients treated with vs without concomitant ARPIs. Methods: In VISION, adult patients with PSMA-positive mCRPC previously treated with ≥1 prior ARPI and 1–2 taxane chemotherapy regimens were randomized 2:1 to receive 177 Lu-PSMA-617 (7.4 GBq Q6W, 4–6 cycles) + SoC (which included ARPIs) vs SoC alone. In this secondary analysis, we assessed baseline characteristics, OS, rPFS, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, duration of PSA response, PSA-PFS, and safety among patients in the intervention arm who were treated with vs without concomitant ARPIs. Results: In total, 289 patients were treated with concomitant ARPIs and 262 patients were not (N=551). Imbalances between the groups were observed in some baseline characteristics: patients treated with concomitant ARPIs were younger, had lower ECOG performance scores, lower mean PSA and lactate dehydrogenase levels, and fewer prior taxane chemotherapy regimens. Baseline mean standardized [ 68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 uptake values and mean hemoglobin levels were well-balanced. A statistically significant difference in median OS was observed in patients treated with concomitant ARPIs vs those without (17.8 vs 12.4 mo; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58–0.89; nominal P=0.001). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed for rPFS, PSA response rate, duration of PSA response or PSA-PFS. The proportion of adverse events reported was similar in patients with or without concurrent ARPI, except for the number of adverse events leading to interruption of best supportive care/SoC, which was higher in patients treated with concurrent ARPIs. Conclusions: OS was significantly different in patients treated with concomitant ARPIs vs those without, while other efficacy endpoints were not. No new safety signals were observed for 177 Lu-PSMA-617 with concomitant ARPI. These findings may be confounded by varied exposure to ARPIs, or differing patient characteristics; patients who received concomitant ARPIs may represent a more favorable treatment population than those who did not. These findings should be considered as hypothesis-generating, and a multivariate analysis has been planned to ascertain the influence of these potential biases. Clinical trial information: NCT03511664 .