Two novel oral drugs that target androgen signaling have recently become available for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Abiraterone acetate inhibits the synthesis of the natural ligands of the androgen receptor, whereas enzalutamide directly inhibits the androgen receptor by several mechanisms. Abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide appear to be equally effective for patients with mCRPC pre- and postchemotherapy. Rational decision making for either one of these drugs is therefore potentially driven by individual patient characteristics. In this review, an overview of the pharmacokinetic characteristics is given for both drugs and potential and proven drug–drug interactions are presented. Additionally, the effect of patient-related factors on drug disposition are summarized and the limited data on the exposure–response relationships are described. The most important pharmacological feature of enzalutamide that needs to be recognized is its capacity to induce several key enzymes in drug metabolism. The potency to cause drug–drug interactions needs to be addressed in patients who are treated with multiple drugs simultaneously. Abiraterone has a much smaller drug–drug interaction potential; however, it is poorly absorbed, which is affected by food intake, and a large interpatient variability in drug exposure is observed. Dose reductions of abiraterone or, alternatively, the selection of enzalutamide, should be considered in patients with hepatic dysfunction. Understanding the pharmacological characteristics and challenges of both drugs could facilitate decision making for either one of the drugs.

AIMSMetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients are generally older patients with several co-morbidities and are therefore at increased risk of complications due to drug-drug interactions (DDIs). We assessed the prevalence of potential DDIs in a cohort of mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide. METHODSWe conducted a retrospective review of pharmacy records to retrieve individual drug histories of mCRPC patients who started enzalutamide therapy in a tertiary care setting. Potential DDIs were analysed using two international drug interaction compendia: Lexicomp ® and Micromedex ® , and the Dutch drug database. Two potential pharmacodynamic DDIs were analysed. RESULTSA total of 105 records were evaluated for potential DDIs with enzalutamide. Of 205 different co-medications, 56 were flagged by at least one of the three compendia: Lexicomp, Micromedex and the Dutch drug database flagged for potential DDIs in 85%, 54% and 32%, respectively. Eighty-five per cent of DDIs were classified as major. The median number of co-medications per patient was 11 (range 1-26). The median (range) number of interactions per patient was 4 (0-10), 1 (0-5) and 0 (0-2) for Lexicomp, Micromedex and the Dutch drug database, respectively. In 23% and 45% of all patients, a potential DDI was found with PPIs and CNS depressants, respectively. CONCLUSIONSA high prevalence of potential DDIs was found. The inclusion and grading of potential DDIs was highly variable between the three drug interaction compendia. Physicians, nurses and pharmacists should be aware of this potential problem, which might require intensive monitoring or alternative treatment strategies to prevent suboptimal treatment of the co-morbidities in patients treated with enzalutamide. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT• Enzalutamide is an inducer of several CYP450 enzymes; a strong inducer of CYP3A4 and a moderate inducer of CYP2C19 and CYP2C9.• mCRPC patients are generally older patients potentially with several co-morbidities and therefore at increased risk of complications due to drug-drug interactions. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS• There is limited awareness of the drug interaction potential of enzalutamide. This is the first study that describes the high prevalence (85%) of potential major DDIs for patients treated with enzalutamide in a real live cohort.• The high prevalence (45%) of CNS interactions in this cohort requires attention, especially as the use of CNS depressants in combination with enzalutamide further increases the risk for cognitive side effects.• Future drug interaction studies with potential victims of enzalutamide are needed to assess the clinical relevance of these potential interactions.

Background Several treatment options were recently added for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, response to therapy is variable, and biomarkers that can guide treatment selection and response evaluation are lacking. Circulating RNAs are a promising source of biomarkers. We explored messenger RNAs (mRNAs), microRNAs (miRNAs), and long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) as potential biomarkers in liquid biopsies of patients with mCRPC treated with enzalutamide. Methods Forty patients were included in this prospective multicenter observational study. Whole blood was drawn at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months after start of therapy. Four mRNAs, 6 miRNAs, and 5 lncRNAs were analyzed by quantitative PCR. RNA levels in 30 healthy individuals were used as controls. RNA expression data were analyzed by Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analyses, and the primary end point was progression-free survival. Clinical factors were included in the multivariable Cox regression analysis. Results Levels of 2 miRNAs, miR-375 and miR-3687, and 1 lncRNA, N-acetylated alpha-linked acidic dipeptidase like 2 antisense RNA 2 (NAALADL2-AS2), were more than 2-fold higher in patients with mCRPC compared with healthy volunteers. Patients with higher levels of miR-375 or miR-3687 showed a shorter time to progression. Patients with higher levels of NAALADL2-AS2 showed a longer time to progression. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, higher miR-375, miR-3687 and serum prostate-specific antigen concentrations were shown to be independent predictors for shorter time to progression. Conclusions We identified miR-3687 as a novel prognostic marker for response in patients with CRPC treated with enzalutamide, and we confirmed the prognostic value of miR-375.

A method was developed and validated to quantify abiraterone in human plasma. During assay development several analytical challenges were encountered: limited stability in patient samples, adsorption to glass, co-elution with metabolites, and carry-over issues. Limited stability (2h) was found for abiraterone in fresh plasma as well as whole blood at ambient temperature. When kept at 2–8°C, abiraterone in plasma was stable for 24h and in whole blood for 8h. Adsorption of abiraterone to glass materials was addressed by using polypropylene throughout the method. Carry-over was reduced to acceptable limits by incorporating a third mobile phase into the gradient. The chromatographic separation of abiraterone with its multiple metabolites was addressed by using a longer analytical column and adjusting the gradient. Abiraterone was extracted by protein precipitation, separated on a C18-column with gradient elution and analyzed with tandem quadrupole mass spectrometry in positive ion mode. A stable deuterated isotope was used as the internal standard. The assay ranges from 1–500 ng/mL. Within–and between day precisions and accuracies were below 13.4% and within 95–102%. This bioanalytical-method was successfully validated and applied to determine plasma concentrations of abiraterone in clinical studies and in regular patient care for patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

No abstract