Third-line treatment and 177 Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review.

AIMS: There is a controversy as to the relative efficacy of 177 Lu prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioligand therapy (RLT) and third-line treatment for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The aim of our systematic review was to elucidate whether 177 Lu-PSMA RLT and third-line treatment have similar effects and adverse effects (PROSPERO ID CRD42017067743).

METHODS: The review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Searches in Pubmed and Embase selected articles up to September 2017. A search in ClinicalTrials.gov indicated ongoing studies. The meta-analysis used the random-effects model.

RESULTS: Twelve studies including 669 patients reported 177 Lu-PSMA RLT. Overall, 43% of the patients had a maximum decline of PSA of ≥50% following treatment with 177 Lu-PSMA RLT. The treatment with 177 Lu-PSMA-617 and 177 Lu-PSMA for imaging and therapy (I&T) had mainly transient adverse effects. Sixteen studies including 1338 patients reported third-line treatment. Overall, 21% of the patients had a best decline of PSA of ≥50% following third-line treatment. After third-line treatment with enzalutamide and cabazitaxel, adverse effects caused discontinuation of treatment for 10% to 23% of the patients. 177 Lu-PSMA RLT gave a best PSA decline ≥50% more often than third-line treatment (mean 44% versus 22%, p = 0.0002, t test). 177 Lu-PSMA RLT gave objective remission more often than third-line treatment (overall 31 of 109 patients versus 43 of 275 patients, p = 0.004, χ2 test). Median survival was longer after 177 Lu-PSMA RLT than after third-line treatment, but the difference was not statistically significant (mean 14 months versus 12 months, p = 0.32, t test). Adverse effects caused discontinuation of treatment more often for third-line treatment than for 177 Lu-PSMA RLT (22 of 66 patients versus 0 of 469 patients, p < 0.001, χ2 test).

CONCLUSIONS: As for patients with mCRPC, treatment with 177 Lu-PSMA-617 RTL and 177 Lu-PSMA I&T gave better effects and caused fewer adverse effects than third-line treatment.