Skip to main content
. 2024 Oct 17;28(3):672–683. doi: 10.1038/s41391-024-00906-z

Table 2.

Guideline-recommended therapies in mCRPC and their pivotal trials.

Drug Clinical trial name Comparator Study population Results for primary endpoint(s)
Abiraterone COU-AA-301 (NCT00638690) Placebo mCRPC with prior docetaxel

OS, median 15.8 months (abiraterone) vs 11.2 months (placebo), HR 0.74;

95% CI 0.64–0.86;

p < 0.0001 [101]

COU-AA-302 (NCT00887198) Placebo mCRPC without prior docetaxel

OS, median 34.7 months (abiraterone) vs 30.3 months (placebo); HR 0.81;

95% CI 0.70–0.93;

p = 0.003 [102]

Enzalutamide AFFIRM (NCT00974311) Placebo mCRPC with prior docetaxel

OS, median 18.4 months (enzalutamide) vs 13.6 months (placebo); HR 0.63;

95% CI 0.53–0.75;

p < 0.001 [21]

PREVAIL (NCT01212991) Placebo mCRPC without prior docetaxel

OS, median 32.4 months (enzalutamide) vs 30.2 months (placebo); HR 0.71;

95% CI 0.60–0.84;

p < 0.0001 [103]

Docetaxel TAX 327 (NCT00675545) Mitoxantrone mCRPC

OS, median 19.2 months (docetaxel) vs 16.3 months (mitoxantrone); HR 0.79;

95% CI 0.67–0.93;

p = 0.004 [92]

Cabazitaxel TROPIC (NCT00417079) Mitoxantrone mCRPC with prior docetaxel

OS, 15.1 months (cabazitaxel) vs 12.7 months (mitoxantrone); HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.59–0.83;

p < 0.001 [22]

CARD (NCT02485691) ARPI (abiraterone or enzalutamide) mCRPC with prior ARPI and docetaxel

OS, 13.6 months (cabazitaxel) vs 11.0 months (ARPI); HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.46–0.89;

p = 0.008 [104]

Radium-223 ALSYMPCA (NCT00699751) Placebo mCRPC with ≥2 bone metastases and no visceral metastases; received prior docetaxel if able

OS, median 14.0 months (radium-223) vs 11.2 months (placebo); HR 0.70;

95% CI 0.55–0.88;

p < 0.001 [23]

Sipuleucel-T IMPACT (NCT00065442) Placebo Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC with no visceral metastases

OS, median 25.8 months (sipuleucel-T) vs 21.7 months (placebo); HR 0.78;

95% CI 0.61–0.98;

p = 0.03 [24]

[177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (plus BSOCa) VISION (NCT03511664) Best SOC alone, including, second ARPI or glucocorticoids PSMA-positive mCRPC with ≥1 prior ARPI and ≥1 taxane

Imaging-based PFS, median 8.7 months ([177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617) vs 3.4 months (BSOC);

HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.29–0.57;

p < 0.001 [25]

OS, median 15.3 months ([177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617) vs 11.3 months (BSOC); HR 0.62;

95% CI 0.52–0.74;

p < 0.001 [25]

PSMAfore (NCT04689828) Change of ARPI, plus best SOC PSMA-positive mCRPC with progression after 1 prior ARPI and no prior taxane in the CRPC or mHSPC settings

Imaging-based PFS, median

12.0 months ([177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617) vs 5.6 months (ARPI); HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.29–0.56; p < 0.001 [81, 82]

Olaparib (monotherapy or in combination with abiraterone) PROfound (NCT02987543) Second ARPI (abiraterone or enzalutamide) mCRPC that is HRR-deficient; prior ARPI ± prior taxane

Imaging-based PFS (in cohort with BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration): median 7.4 months (olaparib) vs 3.6 months (ARPI); HR 0.34;

95% CI 0.25–0.47;

p < 0.001 [58]

PROpel (NCT03732820) Placebo (with abiraterone) mCRPC unselected by HRR status

ITT group:

Imaging-based PFS: median 24.8 months (olaparib + abiraterone) vs 16.6 months (abiraterone); HR 0.66;

95% CI 0.54–0.81;

p < 0.001 [60]

OS: median 42.1 months (olaparib + abiraterone) vs 34.7 months (abiraterone); HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67–1.00;

p = 0.054 [26]

HRR+ group:

Imaging-based PFS: HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.34–0.73

OS: HR 0.66;

95% CI 0.45–0.95 [26]

BRCA subgroup:

Imaging-based PFS: HR 0.23; 95% CI 0.12–0.43

OS: HR 0.29;

95% CI 0.14–0.56 [26]

Rucaparib TRITON-3 (NCT02975934) Physician’s choice (abiraterone, enzalutamide or docetaxel) mCRPC that is HRR-deficient (BRCA1/2 or ATM alteration only) with prior ARPI

Imaging-based PFS,

BRCA subgroup: median 11.2 months (rucaparib) vs 6.4 months (physician’s choice); HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36–0.69 [57]

ITT group: median 10.2 months (rucaparib) vs 6.4 months (physician’s choice); HR 0.61;

95% CI 0.47–0.80; p < 0.001 for both comparisons [57]

Talazoparib (in combination with enzalutamide) TALAPRO-2 (NCT03395197) Placebo (with enzalutamide) mCRPC with genetic alterations to HRR genes

Imaging-based PFS:

ITT group: median not reached (talazoparib + enzalutamide) vs 21.9 months (enzalutamide); HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51–0.78; p < 0.001 [28]

HRR+ group: HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.33–0.61 [105]

BRCA subgroup: HR 0.20; 95% CI 0.11–0.36 [105]

Niraparib (in combination with abiraterone) MAGNITUDE Placebo (with abiraterone) mCRPC with genetic alterations to HRR genes

Imaging-based PFS,

BRCA subgroup: median 16.6 months (niraparib + abiraterone) vs 10.9 months (abiraterone); HR 0.53;

95% CI 0.36–0.79; p = 0.001 [29]

Overall HRR+ group, median 16.5 months (niraparib + abiraterone) vs 13.7 months (abiraterone); HR 0.73;

95% CI 0.56–0.96; p = 0.022 [29]

Pembrolizumab Data pooled from five clinical trials No comparator Any advanced solid tumor that is MSI-H OR dMMR with no satisfactory alternative treatment options

ORR 39.6%;

95% CI 31.7–47.9% [69]

ARPI androgen receptor pathway inhibitor, ATM ataxia–telangiectasia mutated, BRCA breast cancer gene, BSOC best standard of care, CRPC castration-resistant prostate cancer, dMMR deficient mismatch repair, HRR homologous recombination repair, HHR+ homologous recombination repair positive, ITT intention-to-treat, Lu lutetium, mCRPC metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, mHSPC metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, MSI-H microsatellite instability-high, OR objective response, ORR objective response rate, OS overall survival, PFS progression-free survival, PSMA prostate-specific membrane antigen.

aBSOC could include an ARPI in VISION but not in PSMAfore.