A Phase II Trial of Abiraterone Combined with Dutasteride for Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose: Despite the efficacy of abiraterone, a CYP17A1 inhibitor, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), nearly all patients develop resistance. The purpose of this phase II study was to evaluate mechanisms of resistance to more complete androgen synthesis inhibition with abiraterone and dutasteride. Experimental Design: Eligible patients with metastatic CRPC underwent a baseline metastasis biopsy. Patients received abiraterone and prednisone for two 4-week cycles. After this time, high-dose dutasteride (3.5 mg daily) was added. Patients continued therapy until study withdrawal or radiographic progression. Repeat metastasis biopsy was obtained at progression. The primary endpoint was to assess mechanisms of resistance. Serum hormone and abiraterone levels were assessed. Tissue was assessed for androgen receptor (AR) and AR splice variant-7 (ARV7) expression. Results: Forty patients were enrolled. Sixty percent (n = 24) achieved a ≥50% reduction in prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The median time to radiographic progression was 11 months. Nearly all baseline (n = 29 of 31) and posttreatment (n = 16 of 16) tumors tested for AR nuclear expression were positive. Of those tested, ARV7 expression was present in 48% (n = 10 of 21) of baseline and 42% (n = 5 of 12) of treatment discontinuation specimens. Compared with patients with higher serum abiraterone levels at treatment discontinuation, patients with lower levels had higher circulating androgens. Conclusions: Despite increased androgen synthesis inhibition, we demonstrate that tumor AR axis remains important in disease progression. We highlight that abiraterone metabolism and pharmacokinetics may play a role in resistance. The noncomparative design limits conclusions on the efficacy of dual therapy with abiraterone and dutasteride, but the results support development of further multifaceted approaches toward AR inhibition. Clin Cancer Res; 23(4); 935–45. ©2016 AACR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".