Efficacy and safety of rechallenge therapy with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lutetium-177 PSMA radioligand therapy ([¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-RLT) is an effective treatment option for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Prospective studies reported favourable efficacy and safety outcomes of up to 6 cycles of [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA rechallenge therapy in patients with mCRPC who progressed after an initial course of [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA-RLT. METHODS: This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search was performed using relevant keywords in PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus from establishment to March 2025. Primary endpoints included biochemical responses with a decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of more than 50% and any PSA decline. Secondary outcomes included survival outcomes and treatment-related toxicity following rechallenge therapy with [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA. A random-effects model was used to generate pooled proportions through meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 307 patients were included in the final analysis. Of these, 196 received 177Lu-PSMA RLT alone, and 111 received tandem 177Lu/225Ac-PSMA RLT. The pooled proportions of patients with more than a 50% PSA decline and any PSA decline were 0.45 (95% CI: 0.36–0.54) and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61–0.80), respectively. In a total of 102 patients, 44 (43%) showed low-grade 1–2 xerostomia; however, no cases of serious xerostomia (grade ≥ 3) were reported. Moreover, the pooled proportion of patients experiencing grade ≥ 3 toxicity was 0.14 (95% CI: 0.09–0.19). CONCLUSION: Rechallenge therapy with [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA is a feasible and safe treatment option for late/end mCRPC patients. Tandem approaches with [225Ac]Ac-PSMA may help expand understanding of how to optimize outcomes after [¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-PSMA progression. However, these findings require confirmation in prospective, randomized studies comparing different rechallenge strategies to define optimal sequencing and patient selection criteria in advanced prostate cancer.
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 | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.043 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".