Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 31, 2025

A Bioluminescent and Fluorescent Orthotopic Syngeneic Murine Model of Androgen-dependent and Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer
Published on: March 6, 2018
An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of First-Line Triplet vs. Doublet Therapies for Metastatic
Akihiro Matsukawa1,2, Giulio Litterio1,3, Angelo Cormio1,4
1Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Abstract:
Purpose: The addition of androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), with or without docetaxel (Doc), is currently recommended for metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Recently, the ARANOTE trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of Darolutamide + ADT in this setting. We aimed to update a network meta-analysis (NMA) of these combination therapies. Methods: We conducted a systematic search for RCTs on systemic therapies for mHSPC using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Web of Science Core Collection in September 2024. An NMA utilizing random-effects models was performed to compare progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse event (AE) incidence (PROSPERO: CRD42024591458). Results: A total of 12 RCTs (n = 11,954) were included in our NMAs. Triplet therapies were associated with significant improvements in PFS compared to ARPI-based doublet therapies (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.93; p = 0.01), but the difference did not reach the conventional levels of statistical significance for OS (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.67-1.01; p = 0.059). In a subset analysis, compared to ARPI-based doublet therapies, triplet therapies showed a significant improvement in PFS in patients with high-volume disease (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.47-0.88; p < 0.01), whereas no significant improvement was observed in those with low-volume disease (HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.45-1.67; p = 0.7). No significant difference in grade ≥ 3 AEs was observed between triplet therapies and ARPI-based doublet therapies. The main limitations include patient heterogeneity and limited follow-up in some studies. Conclusions: Triplet therapies can improve the oncologic outcomes of patients with mHSPC compared to ARPI-based doublet therapies, without significantly increasing severe AEs. These findings warrant further confirmation in a head-to-head trial powered for overall survival.
More Related Videos
08:57Sample Extraction and Simultaneous Chromatographic Quantitation of Doxorubicin and Mitomycin C Following Drug Combination Delivery in Nanoparticles to Tumor-bearing Mice
Published on: October 5, 2017
08:59Looking for Driver Pathways of Acquired Resistance to Targeted Therapy: Drug Resistant Subclone Generation and Sensitivity Restoring by Gene Knock-down
Published on: December 11, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Drugs that Stabilize Microtubules