Skip to content

Trial · Interventional

CompletedPhase 2Results postedRegistry data

Study of Enzalutamide (Formerly MDV3100) as a Neoadjuvant Therapy for Patients Undergoing Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer

NCTNCT01547299 (opens ClinicalTrials.gov in a new tab)Other idMDV3100-07Other idC3431019

Overview

Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 2
Enrollment
52 participants (actual)
Sponsor
Pfizer · Industry
Design
Randomized · Open label (no masking)
Countries
2 countries

United States, Canada

Start
31 Mar 2012
Primary completion
30 Nov 2013
Completion
30 Nov 2013
First posted
7 Mar 2012 (estimated)
Last update posted
23 Oct 2018
Conditions
Prostate Cancer

Timeline

1 trial · 1 completed · 1 with posted results

  • Completed
  • Ongoing
  • Not yet recruiting
  • Stopped
  • Estimated dates (est.)
  • Results posted
201220132014
  1. Ph 2

    Study of Enzalutamide (Formerly MDV3100) as a Neoadjuvant Therapy for Patients Undergoing Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer

    NCT01547299

    31 Mar 2012 to 30 Nov 2013

Registry summary

Text and fields below are the sponsor's entries at ClinicalTrials.gov, shown as posted.

The purpose of this study is to determine if enzalutamide is an effective therapy in treating localized prostate cancer prior to prostatectomy.

Interventions

  • EnzalutamideDrug
  • LeuprolideDrug
  • DutasterideDrug

Arms2

  • Experimental

    Enzalutamide alone

    Enzalutamide 160 mg, orally, once daily

  • Experimental

    Enzalutamide & Leuprolide & Dutasteride

    Enzalutamide 160 mg, orally, once daily and leuprolide 22.5 mg, intramuscular injection, every 3 months, and dutasteride, 0.5 mg, orally, once daily

Primary outcomes1

Outcomes the sponsor listed as primary.

  1. Pathologic Complete Response Rate

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    Pathologic complete response rate was defined as percentage of participants with pathologic complete response. Pathologic complete response rate following triplet therapy (enzalutamide in combination with leuprolide and dutasteride) and enzalutamide alone when administered as neoadjuvant therapy for 180 days prior to prostatectomy in participants with localized prostate cancer. Pathologic complete response was defined as the absence of morphologically identifiable carcinoma in the prostatectomy specimen, as assessed by the local and central pathologist.

Secondary outcomes(20)
  1. Percentage of Participants With Positive Surgical Margins

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine the percentage of participants with positive surgical margins at prostatectomy as assessed by the local and central pathologist. Surgical margin, also known as tumor free margin referred to the visible normal tissue or skin margin that was removed with the surgical excision of a tumor, growth, or malignancy. The margin was described as positive when the pathologist finds cancer cells at the edge of the tissue, suggesting that all of the cancer has not been removed.

  2. Percentage of Participants With Extracapsular Extension: Local Review

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine the percentage of participants with extracapsular extension at prostatectomy as assessed by the local pathologist. Extracapsular extension was defined as prostate cancer cells when extended into the prostate capsule or outer lining of the prostate gland.

  3. Percentage of Participants With Extracapsular Extension: Central Review

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine the percentage of participants with extracapsular extension at prostatectomy as assessed by the central pathologist. Extracapsular extension was defined as prostate cancer cells when extended into the prostate capsule or outer lining of the prostate gland.

  4. Percentage of Participants With Positive Seminal Vesicles

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine the percentage of participants with positive seminal vesicles at prostatectomy as assessed by the local and central pathologist. Seminal vesicles or seminal glands, were defined as a pair of simple tubular glands located within the pelvis. They secrete fluid that partly composes the semen. Seminal vesicles with cancer cells in them were called positive seminal vesicles.

  5. Percentage of Participants With Positive Lymph Nodes

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine the percentage of participants with positive lymph nodes at prostatectomy as assessed by the local and central pathologist. Lymph nodes were small clumps of immune cells that act as filters for the lymphatic system. Lymph nodes with cancer cells in them were called positive lymph nodes.

  6. Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Nadir

    Time frame · Day 195

    Registry description

    To determine the effects on PSA as measured by the lowest post baseline PSA value prior to prostatectomy. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was a protein produced by normal, as well as malignant, cells of the prostate gland. The PSA nadir was the participant's lowest observed post baseline PSA value.

  7. Time to Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Nadir

    Time frame · Day 195

    Registry description

    To determine the effects on PSA as measured by the time to the lowest post baseline PSA value prior to prostatectomy. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was a protein produced by normal, as well as malignant, cells of the prostate gland. The PSA nadir was the participant's lowest observed post baseline PSA value.

  8. Percentage of Participants With Reduction in Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)

    Time frame · Day 195

    Registry description

    To determine the effects on PSA as measured by the percentage of participants with PSA less than (\<) 0.2 nanogram per milliliter (ng/mL), and a 50 percent (%) and 90% decrease in PSA value prior to prostatectomy. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was a protein produced by normal, as well as malignant, cells of the prostate gland.

  9. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Sexual Domain Summary Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    EPIC sexual domain was HRQoL instrument that measured the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a participant's sexual function and sexual satisfaction. Sexual domain summary score was measured on a scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with higher scores representing better sexual function and satisfaction. Best change from baseline category in EPIC sexual domain summary score ranged from worsened to improved where worsened indicated decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference, stable indicated changed by less than 1 minimally important difference and improved indicated increase of at least 1 minimally important difference. Minimally important difference was defined as one-half of the standard deviation of baseline score. Number of participants within each category are reported below.

  10. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Sexual Function Subscale Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    EPIC sexual function subscale was HRQoL instrument that measured the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a participant's sexual function and sexual satisfaction. EPIC sexual function subscale was a component of sexual domain that was evaluated on a distinct set of questions. It was measured on a scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with higher scores representing better sexual function. Best change from baseline category in EPIC sexual function subscale score ranged from worsened to improved where worsened indicated decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference, stable indicated changed by less than 1 minimally important difference and improved indicated increase of at least 1 minimally important difference. Minimally important difference was defined as one-half of the standard deviation of baseline score. Number of participants within each category are reported below.

  11. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Sexual Bother Subscale Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    EPIC sexual bother subscale was HRQoL instrument that measured the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a participant's sexual function and sexual satisfaction. EPIC sexual bother subscale was a component of sexual domain that was evaluated on a distinct set of questions. It was measured on a scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with higher scores representing less sexual bother and difficulty. Best change from baseline category in EPIC sexual bother subscale score ranged from worsened to improved where worsened indicated decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference, stable indicated changed by less than 1 minimally important difference and improved indicated increase of at least 1 minimally important difference. Minimally important difference was defined as one-half of the standard deviation of baseline score. Number of participants within each category are reported below.

  12. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Hormonal Domain Summary Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    EPIC Hormonal Domain was HRQoL instrument that measured the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a participant's hormonal function. It was measured on a scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) scale with higher scores representing better hormonal function. Best change from baseline category in EPIC hormonal domain summary score ranged from worsened to improved where worsened indicated decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference, stable indicated changed by less than 1 minimally important difference and improved indicated increase of at least 1 minimally important difference. Minimally important difference was defined as one-half of the standard deviation baseline score. Number of participants within each category are reported below.

  13. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Hormonal Function Subscale Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    EPIC hormonal function subscale score was HRQoL instrument that measured the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a participant's hormonal function. EPIC hormonal function subscale was a component of hormonal domain that was evaluated on a distinct set of questions. It was measured on a scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) scale with higher scores representing better hormonal function. Best change from baseline category in EPIC hormonal function subscale score ranged from worsened to improved where worsened indicated decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference, stable indicated changed by less than 1 minimally important difference and improved indicated increase of at least 1 minimally important difference. Minimally important difference was defined as one-half of the standard deviation baseline score. Number of participants within each category are reported below.

  14. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) Hormonal Bother Subscale Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    EPIC hormonal bother subscale score was HRQoL instrument that measured the effects of prostate cancer treatment on a participant's hormonal function. EPIC hormonal bother subscale was a component of hormonal domain that was evaluated on a distinct set of questions. It was measured on a scale ranged from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) scale with higher scores representing less hormonal bothering. Best change from baseline category in EPIC hormonal bother subscale score ranged from worsened to improved where worsened indicated decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference, stable indicated changed by less than 1 minimally important difference and improved indicated increase of at least 1 minimally important difference. Minimally important difference was defined as one-half of the standard deviation baseline score. Number of participants within each category are reported below.

  15. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 General Health Domain Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 was HRQoL instrument that measured general health and well-being across physical and mental components. The general health domain score contained 1 item scored on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1=excellent to 5=poor health, where higher score indicated worse health status. Best change from baseline category in general health domain score ranged from worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference was defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.

  16. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 Physical Functioning Domain Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 was HRQoL instrument that measured general health and well-being across physical and mental components. The physical functioning domain score contained 2 items each scored on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1=excellent physical functioning to 5=poor physical functioning. Physical functioning domain total score ranged from 1 to 10, where higher scores indicated poor physical functioning. Best change from baseline category in physical functioning domain score ranged from worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference was defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.

  17. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 Role-Emotional Domain Score

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 was HRQoL instrument that measured general health and well-being across physical and mental components. The mental health domain score had 2 items scored on a scale of 1 to 5, where higher scores indicated worse mental status. The total score ranged from 1 to 10, where higher scores indicated worse mental status. Best change from baseline category in mental component summary ranged from worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference was defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.

  18. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL): Number of Participants With Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 Mental Component Summary

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    The Twelve-Item Short Form Version 2 was HRQoL instrument that measured general health and well-being across physical and mental components. The mental health domain score had 2 items scored on a scale of 1 to 5 where for 1 item 1=all of the time person felt calm and peaceful to 5=none of the time person felt calm and peaceful. The score ranged from 1 to 5, where higher scores meant worse mental status. For other item 1=all of the time person felt downhearted and blue to 5=none of the time person felt downhearted and blue. The score ranged from 1 to 5, where higher scores meant better mental status. Best change from baseline category in mental component summary ranged from worsened (decrease of at least 1 minimally important difference), stable (changed by less than 1 minimally important difference), or improved (increase of at least 1 minimally important difference). Minimally important difference was defined as one-half the standard deviation of the score of interest at baseline.

  19. Pharmacodynamic Effects: Tissue Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine pharmacodynamic effects as measured by the amount of tissue DHT in prostatectomy specimens following radical prostatectomy.

  20. Pharmacodynamic Effects: Tissue Testosterone

    Time frame · Day 180

    Registry description

    To determine pharmacodynamic effects as measured by the amount of tissue testosterone in prostatectomy specimens following radical prostatectomy.

Posted results

Values are shown as posted at ClinicalTrials.gov, with their units. PepBank has not converted, pooled or compared them.

Primary outcome results

Primary outcomeNumber· Day 180

Pathologic Complete Response Rate

GroupValue (percentage of participants)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride8.7
Enzalutamide0.0
Secondary and other outcome results(7)
Secondary outcomeNumber· Day 180

Percentage of Participants With Positive Surgical Margins

GroupValue (percentage of participants)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride4.3
Enzalutamide12.0
Secondary outcomeNumber· Day 180

Percentage of Participants With Extracapsular Extension: Local Review

GroupValue (percentage of participants)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride26.1
Enzalutamide36.0
Secondary outcomeNumber· Day 180

Percentage of Participants With Extracapsular Extension: Central Review

GroupValue (percentage of participants)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride56.5
Enzalutamide70.8
Secondary outcomeNumber· Day 180

Percentage of Participants With Positive Seminal Vesicles

GroupValue (percentage of participants)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride30.4
Enzalutamide36.0
Secondary outcomeNumber· Day 180

Percentage of Participants With Positive Lymph Nodes

GroupValue (percentage of participants)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride26.1
Enzalutamide4.0
Secondary outcomeMedian· Day 195

Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Nadir

GroupValue (microgram per liter (mcg/L))
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride0.04
Enzalutamide0.51
Secondary outcomeMedian· Day 195

Time to Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Nadir

GroupValue (days)
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + Dutasteride5.09
Enzalutamide6.01

Adverse events, as posted

Adverse events as posted: participants affected out of participants at risk, by group
GroupDeathsSerious eventsOther events
Enzalutamide + Leuprolide + DutasterideParticipants were administered 160 mg of Enzalutamide orally once daily, 22.5 mg of Leuprolide every 3 months through intramuscular injection and 0.5 mg of Dutasteride orally once daily for up to 180 days.–3 / 2525 / 25
EnzalutamideParticipants were administered 160 mg of Enzalutamide orally once daily for up to 180 days.–2 / 2727 / 27

Each cell reads participants affected / participants at risk, as the registry posted them.

Registry data comes from ClinicalTrials.gov. Study results come from studies, not from the registry. How PepBank works

Studies0

Studies that cite this trial.

No study cites this trial.

Eligibility

Who could join, as posted.

Sex
Male
Age
from 18 Years
Healthy volunteers
Not accepted
Inclusion and exclusion criteria, as posted
Inclusion Criteria: * Willing to provide informed consent * 18 years of age or older * Histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate * Must be a candidate for radical prostatectomy and considered surgically resectable Exclusion Criteria: * Stage T4 prostate cancer by clinical or radiologic evaluation * Treatment with an investigational agent within 4 weeks prior to randomization * Received therapy for other neoplastic disorders within 5 years * Hypogonadism or severe androgen deficiency

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.