An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of First-Line Triplet vs. Doublet Therapies for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

Matsukawa, Akihiro; Litterio, Giulio*; Cormio, Angelo; Miszczyk, Marcin; Parizi, Mehdi Kardoust; Fazekas, Tamas [Fazekas, Tamás (Urológia), author] Department of Urology (SU / FM / C); Tsuboi, Ichiro; Mancon, Stefano; Schulz, Robert J.; Laukhtina, Ekaterina; Rajwa, Pawel; Mori, Keiichiro; Chlosta, Piotr; Marchioni, Michele; Schips, Luigi; Miki, Jun; Kimura, Takahiro; Shariat, Shahrokh F. ✉ [Shariat, Shahrokh François (Urológia), author] Department of Urology (SU / FM / C); Yanagisawa, Takafumi

English Survey paper (Journal Article) Scientific
Published: CANCERS 2072-6694 17 (2) Paper: 205 , 16 p. 2025
  • SJR Scopus - Oncology: Q1
Identifiers
Subjects:
  • Urology
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.
Citation styles: IEEEACMAPAChicagoHarvardCSLCopyPrint
2025-04-02 01:14