Online Poster Portal

  • Author
    Vishnu Murthy
  • Co-Author

    Andrew F. Voter, Kathleen Nguyen, Martin Allen-Auerbach, Lucia Chen, Sydney Caputo, Elisa Ledet, Abraham Akerele, Abuzar Moradi Tuchayi, Courtney Lawhn-Heath, Tingchang Wang, Michael A. Carducci, Martin G. Pomper, Channing J. Paller, Johannes Czernin, Lilja B. Solnes, Thomas A. Hope, Oliver Sartor, Jeremie Calais and Andrei Gafita

  • Abstract Title

    Efficacy and Toxicity of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Results from the U.S. Expanded-Access Program and Comparisons with Phase 3 VISION Data

  • Abstract Description

    Specialty: Nuclear Medicine 

    Key Words: PSMA PET; mCRPC; EAP; VISION

    Background: The phase 3 VISION trial demonstrated that [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) in prostate-specific membrane antigen [PSMA]–positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients who progressed on taxane-based chemotherapy and androgen receptor–signaling inhibitors (ARSIs). The U.S. expanded-access program (EAP; NCT04825652) was opened to provide access to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 for eligible patients until regulatory approval was obtained.

    Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 within the EAP and compare the results with those from the VISION trial. 

    Methods: Patients enrolled in the EAP at 4 institutions in the United States with available toxicity and outcome data were included. Outcome measures included OS, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (RR) of at least 50%, and incidences of toxicity according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Differences in baseline characteristics, outcome data, and toxicity between the EAP and VISION were evaluated using t testing of proportions and survival analyses. 

    Results: In total, 117 patients with mCRPC who received [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 within the EAP between May 2021 and March 2022 were eligible and included in this analysis. Patients enrolled in the EAP were more heavily pretreated with ARSI (≥2 ARSI regimens: 70% vs. 46%; P < 0.001) and had worse performance status at baseline (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score ≥ 2: 19% vs. 7%; P < 0.001) than VISION patients. EAP and VISION patients had similar levels of grade 3 or higher anemia (18% vs. 13%; P = 0.15), thrombocytopenia (13% vs. 8%; P = 0.13), and neutropenia (3% vs. 3%; P = 0.85) and similar PSA RRs (42% vs. 46%; P = 0.50) and OS (median: 15.1 vs. 15.3 mo; P > 0.05). 

    Conclusion: Patients with PSMA-positive mCRPC who received [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 within the EAP were later in their disease trajectory than VISION patients. Patients enrolled in the EAP achieved similar PSA RRs and OS and had a safety profile similar to that of the VISION trial patients.

  • Project Specialty (Please select one)

    Surgical Subspecialties