Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 2, 2025
A Bioluminescent and Fluorescent Orthotopic Syngeneic Murine Model of Androgen-dependent and Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer
Published on: March 6, 2018
A Phase Ib Study of Atezolizumab with Radium-223 Dichloride in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate
Lawrence Fong1, Michael J Morris2, Oliver Sartor3
1Department of Urology, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, California. lawrence.fong@ucsf.edu morrism@mskcc.org.
Purpose:
Men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have limited treatment options after progressing on hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. Here, we evaluate the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) + radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) in men with mCRPC.
Patients And Methods:
This phase Ib study evaluated atezolizumab + radium-223 in men with mCRPC and bone and lymph node and/or visceral metastases that progressed after androgen pathway inhibitor treatment. Following safety assessment of concurrent dosing, 45 men were randomized 1:1:1 to concurrent or one of two staggered dosing schedules with either agent introduced one cycle before the other. This was followed by a safety-efficacy expansion cohort (randomized 1:1:1). The primary endpoints were safety and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), PSA responses, and overall survival (OS).
Results:
As of October 4, 2019, 44 of 45 men were evaluable. All 44 had ≥1 all-cause adverse event (AE); 23 (52.3%) had a grade 3/4 AE. Fifteen (34.1%) grade 3/4 and 3 (6.8%) grade 5 AEs were related to atezolizumab; none were related to radium-223. Confirmed ORR was 6.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4-18.7], median rPFS was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8-4.6), median PSA progression was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8-3.3), and median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 10.9-22.3).
Conclusions:
This phase Ib study demonstrated that atezolizumab + radium-223, regardless of administration schedule, had greater toxicity than either drug alone, with no clear evidence of additional clinical benefit for patients with mCRPC and bone and lymph node and/or visceral metastases.
