Age-related efficacy and safety of darolutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC): A subgroup analysis of ARASENS.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
143 Background: In ARASENS, darolutamide (DARO) + ADT + docetaxel (DOC) significantly reduced the risk of death by 32.5% (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.57–0.80; P <0.0001) vs placebo (PBO) + ADT + DOC with similar incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between groups in patients (pts) with mHSPC. DARO + ADT + DOC has become one of the standards of care in mHSPC. We report post-hoc efficacy and safety in pts by age subgroups (<75 y, ≥75 y) in ARASENS. Methods: Pts were randomized to receive DARO 600 mg orally twice daily or PBO, with ADT + DOC. Age subgroups were analyzed for baseline characteristics including ongoing comorbidities, treatment duration, completion of DOC therapy, use of first subsequent therapy, key efficacy outcomes, and safety. Results: Of 1305 pts analyzed in ARASENS, ages ranged from 41–89 y, with 1086 pts <75 y (83%; DARO n=546; PBO, n=540) and 219 pts ≥75 y (17%; DARO n=105; PBO n=114). Baseline characteristics were generally similar in the DARO and PBO groups by age subgroup. The most common comorbidities by system organ class in pts <75 y and ≥75 y were vascular (55%, 67%), musculoskeletal/connective tissue (42%, 42%), and metabolism/nutrition (35%, 43%) disorders. Treatment duration was consistently longer with DARO vs PBO (<75 y: 41.2 vs 16.8 mo; ≥75 y: 38.5 vs 15.0 mo). Most patients completed 6 cycles of DOC (<75 y: 89%, 88%; ≥75 y: 80%, 76%). Among pts who entered follow-up, fewer DARO vs PBO pts initiated subsequent therapy independent of age (<75 y: 57% vs 76%; ≥75 y: 54% vs 73%). The overall survival (OS) benefit of DARO vs PBO was consistent across age subgroups (<75 y: HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58–0.84; ≥75 y: HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41–0.91). Time to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) was longer with DARO vs PBO across age subgroups (<75 y: HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.30–0.43; ≥75 y: HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28–0.64) as was time to initiation of subsequent therapy (<75 y: HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.34–0.48; ≥75 y: HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.22–0.54). TEAEs were generally similar between DARO and PBO, with slightly higher incidence rates in older pts. Few patients discontinued DARO or PBO due to TEAEs in both age subgroups (<75 y: 13.2%, 9.1%; ≥75 y: 15.1%, 17.7%). The most common grade 3/4 TEAEs were generally similar between DARO and PBO across age subgroups and occurred most frequently during overlapping DOC treatment. TEAEs commonly associated with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors occurred at similar incidences between treatment groups in both age subgroups. Conclusions: Pts with mHSPC benefited from DARO + ADT + DOC irrespective of age (<75 y and ≥75 y), with consistent improvements in OS, time to mCRPC, and time to initiation of subsequent therapy. DARO was well tolerated in both age subgroups, with similar incidences of TEAEs vs PBO. Clinical trial information: NCT02799602 .
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".