Real-world use of darolutamide, enzalutamide, and apalutamide for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (DEAR).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
332 Background: Second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs) are the preferred treatment for patients (pts) with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In this setting, an important therapeutic goal is to minimize adverse events (AEs) and prolong time on ARI treatment. This is the first study to assess real-world (RW) utilization and outcomes of all currently available ARIs, darolutamide (daro), enzalutamide (enza), and apalutamide (apa) in pts with nmCRPC. Methods: DEAR (NCT05362149) is a retrospective observational chart review using electronic medical records from the Precision Point Specialty network of US urology practices. Eligibility criteria included nmCRPC diagnosis, no previous treatment with a novel hormonal agent, and ARI treatment initiation for the first time from August 2019 to March 2022. Pts were classified into 3 cohorts based on the first prescribed ARI in the nmCRPC stage. We present an interim report including the primary composite endpoint (DIS/MET): proportion of pts who discontinued initial ARI treatment (DIS) or progressed to metastasis (MET); and secondary endpoints: time to DIS/MET and underlying reasons. Results: In total, 666 pts were included (daro/enza/apa, n=276/280/110). The proportion of pts starting treatment with daro increased during the study period relative to enza or apa, which declined or remained stable, respectively. Median age (80/79/80 years), White race (68%/69%/74%) and median PSA doubling time (6.7/6.0/7.8 months) at baseline were similar in the daro/enza/apa cohorts, respectively. Median length of follow-up was similar. Fewer pts had a DIS/MET event during the study in the daro cohort (35.9%), compared with enza or apa (52.1%/50.9%); this trend was seen within 6 to 18 months after ARI start. Median time to DIS/MET was 33.4/20.8/18.5 months for daro/enza/apa, respectively. Most common reasons for DIS/MET in the daro/enza/apa cohorts were AEs (8.3%/15.0%/12.7%), death (3.3%/5.4%/2.7%), and MET (14.9%/22.9%/18.2%). Conclusions: This RW study in the US shows that, despite similar baseline characteristics, fewer nmCRPC pts treated with daro had DIS/MET (especially due to AEs/MET) versus enza and apa, and the time to this event was longer in the daro cohort. These findings may be attributed to daro being a structurally distinct ARI with low potential for blood–brain barrier penetration. [Table: see text]
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".