Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: How should it be treated?

Abstract

The number of treatment options for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer has increased substantially in recent years. The classic treatment approach for these patients—androgen-deprivation therapy alone—is now considered suboptimal. Several randomized phase III clinical trials have demonstrated significant clinical benefits—including significantly better overall survival and quality of life—for treatments that combine androgen-deprivation therapy with docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and/or radiotherapy to the primary tumour. As a result, these approaches are now included in treatment guidelines and considered standard of care. However, the different treatment strategies have not been directly compared, and thus treatment selection remains at the discretion of the individual physician or, ideally, a multidisciplinary team. Given the range of available treatment approaches with varying toxicity profiles, treatment selection should be individualized based on the patient’s clinical characteristics and preferences, which implies active patient participation in the decision-making process. In the present document, we discuss the changing landscape of the management of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in the context of several recently-published landmark randomized trials. In addition, we discuss several unresolved issues, including the optimal sequencing of systemic treatments and the incorporation of local treatment of the primary tumour and metastases.

Keywords: Metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer; Androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors; Abiraterone acetate; Enzalutamide; Apalutamide; Docetaxel

Core Tip: Due to advances in the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in recent years, multiple options are now available. The emergence of androgen receptor inhibitors provides patients with an alternative to chemotherapy. Given the increasingly important role of these novel treatments, a comprehensive review of the available data is needed. In addition, there are several unresolved questions and controversies surrounding these treatments, which can only be resolved by in-depth analysis and consensus among the specialists who treat these patients.