Comparison of Systemic Treatments for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer After Docetaxel Failure: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 4, 2025

A Bioluminescent and Fluorescent Orthotopic Syngeneic Murine Model of Androgen-dependent and Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer
Published on: March 6, 2018
Junru Chen1, Yaowen Zhang1, Xingming Zhang1
1Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Abstract:
Background: Lacking head-to-head trial, the optimal treatment for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after docetaxel failure is unclear. This study is to compare the efficacy and safety of systemic treatments in patients who progressed after docetaxel to aid clinical decision-making. Methods: Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to June 15th, 2021. The outcomes of interest include overall survival (OS), biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), and serious adverse events (SAEs). The Cochrane risk of bias tools were used to assess study quality. Indirect comparisons of competing treatments were performed via Bayesian network meta-analysis. Results: Five trials with 3,862 patients comparing four treatments (abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel, and radium-223) were identified. All the four treatments were associated with improved OS and bPFS relative to best supportive care. Among them, enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58, 95% credible interval [Crl]: 0.49-0.69) had the highest probability of ranking first in terms of OS, followed by cabazitaxel (HR = 0.70, 95% Crl: 0.59-0.83), radium-223 (HR = 0.71, 95% Crl: 0.56-0.90) and abiraterone (HR = 0.73, 95% Crl: 0.63-0.84). Similarly, enzalutamide (HR = 0.25, 95% Crl: 0.20-0.31) showed the greatest improvement of bPFS, followed by abiraterone (HR = 0.60, 95% Crl: 0.51-0.71) and cabazitaxel (HR = 0.75, 95% Crl: 0.63-0.89). In terms of safety, treatments ranked from the safest to the least safe were radium-223 (OR = 0.58, 95% Crl: 0.20-1.68), enzalutamide (OR = 0.80, 95% Crl: 0.28-2.29), abiraterone (OR = 0.94, 95% Crl: 0.39-2.27) and cabazitaxel (OR = 2.50, 95% Crl: 0.84-7.44). Conclusion: For patients with mCRPC who progressed after docetaxel, enzalutamide may offer the most significant survival benefits and satisfying safety. Cabazitaxel is effective in post-docetaxel settings but associated with a high risk of SAEs. Although network meta-analysis provides indirect comparisons and ranking probabilities, the results should be treated with caution as it cannot replace randomized direct comparison. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020223040, identifier CRD42020223040.
Insights
For metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after docetaxel, enzalutamide shows the best survival and safety profile. Cabazitaxel is effective but has higher serious adverse events, requiring cautious interpretation of network meta-analysis results.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Pharmacology
- Clinical Trials
Background:
- Optimal treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) post-docetaxel remains unclear due to a lack of head-to-head trials.
- Systemic therapies including abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel, and radium-223 are used after docetaxel failure.
- Comparative efficacy and safety data are crucial for informed clinical decision-making.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for mCRPC patients who have progressed after docetaxel.
- To provide an indirect comparison of abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel, and radium-223 using Bayesian network meta-analysis.
- To aid clinicians in selecting the most appropriate treatment strategy post-docetaxel.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library up to June 15th, 2021.
- Bayesian network meta-analysis to indirectly compare treatments for overall survival (OS), biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), and serious adverse events (SAEs).
- Cochrane risk of bias tools were employed to assess the quality of included trials.
Main Results:
- Five trials involving 3,862 patients were analyzed.
- All four treatments improved OS and bPFS compared to best supportive care.
- Enzalutamide demonstrated the highest probability for superior OS and bPFS, while radium-223 showed the best safety profile, followed by enzalutamide.
Conclusions:
- Enzalutamide may offer the most significant survival benefits and favorable safety profile for mCRPC patients post-docetaxel.
- Cabazitaxel is effective but associated with a higher risk of serious adverse events.
- Network meta-analysis results provide valuable indirect comparisons but should be interpreted cautiously, as they cannot replace direct randomized trials.
Related Concept Videos
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Cancer Survival Analysis
Cancer Therapies
However, cancer treatments can pose several challenges, as therapies used to kill cancer cells are generally also toxic to normal cells. Moreover, cancer cells mutate rapidly and can develop resistance to chemical agents or radiation therapy. Besides, all types of cancer cells may not respond to the same therapy. Some cancer cells respond to one...

