Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Opinion statement The management of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has evolved in the past decade due to substantial advances in understanding the genomic landscape and biology underpinning this form of prostate cancer. The implementation of various therapeutic agents has improved overall survival but despite the promising advances in therapeutic options, mCRPC remains incurable. The focus of treatment should be not only to improve survival but also to preserve the patient’s quality of life (QoL) and ameliorate cancer-related symptoms such as pain. The choice and sequence of therapy for mCRPC patients are complex and influenced by various factors, such as side effects, disease burden, treatment history, comorbidities, patient preference and, more recently, the presence of actionable genomic alterations or biomarkers. Docetaxel is the first-line treatment for chemo-naïve patients with good performance status and those who have yet to progress on docetaxel in the castration-sensitive setting. Novel androgen agents (NHAs), such as abiraterone and enzalutamide, are effective treatment options that are utilized as second-line options. These medications can be considered upfront in frail patients or patients who are NHA naïve. Current guidelines recommend genetic testing in mCRPC for mutations in DNA repair deficiency genes to inform treatment decisions, as for example in breast cancer gene mutation testing. Other potential biomarkers being investigated include phosphatase and tensin homologues and homologous recombination repair genes. Despite a growing number of studies incorporating biomarkers in their trial designs, to date, only olaparib in the PROFOUND study and lutetium-177 in the VISION trial have improved survival. This is an unmet need, and future trials should focus on biomarker-guided treatment strategies. The advent of novel noncytotoxic agents has enhanced targeted drug delivery and improved treatment responses with favourable toxicity profiling. Trials should continue to incorporate and report health-related QoL scores and functional assessments into their trial designs.
Kulasegaran et al. (Mon,) studied this question.