Skip to main content
Latest news
Browse specialties
Breast cancer Genitourinary cancers Lung & thoracic cancers
In focus
Next-generation sequencing: Emerging biomarkers in thyroid and NSCLCs ctDNA and bladder cancer: Current understanding and beyond ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC NSCLC driver mutations: Discussing the importance of RET, ALK and ROS1 alterations in NSCLC Early-stage NSCLC management: Surgery, targeted treatment and immunotherapy ALK fusion-positive NSCLC: International approaches to management RET fusion-positive NSCLC: Informing on the use of pralsetinib for patients with RET fusion-positive, advanced NSCLC COVID-19 & cancer
Conferences
SABCS 2022 ESMO 2022 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
About us
Medicine Matters Oncology
EXTENDED SEARCH

Medicine Matters oncology

So my name is Dr. Maha Hussain, I am a medical oncologist and Professor of Medicine, Deputy Director for the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center at Northwestern Medicine in Chicago. I am delighted to be here to present the results of PROfound, which is a randomized phase III clinical trial evaluating olaparib compared to a standard hormonal agent, such as abiraterone, prednisone, or enzalutamide in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer and whose tumors harbor DNA repair damage response defects.



PROfound is the first biomarker preselected trial applying precision medicine therapy in prostate cancer. And we are hoping for even more progress in the field.



What proportion of men do these results apply to?

I'm going to say, in general, from practicality as it relates to the positivity of the genes and eligibility and what have you, I'm going to say somewhere about the 25% to 30% of men will be eligible for these treatments.



How easy is it to assess the presence of these defects?

A lot of these assays are routine now, however, it's going to depend on which country is the assay approved for, and what the agency, like the FDA, requires in terms of companion diagnostic. So for example, right now we go to with Tempus, Foundation, and so on if we're trying to screen patients for genomics. And then use the findings to actually prescribe a drug recognizing fully that in prostate cancer, none of these drugs are approved by say, in the US, by the FDA, and I'm sure the European agency, same story. So it's going to be driven by what they will-- what companion diagnostic will be. My guess is that the Foundation Medicine is going to be the assay that they will tie it to.



Does liquid biopsy have a role in detecting these alterations?

I think liquid biopsy is emerging as a very promising technology. I have to say, I'm a bit conservative. I would like to see a prospective validation of at least, I'm not going to say equivalence, but comparability, and more important outcomes. So not just that it matches, but that actually what you're measuring, and you're pre-selecting patients for based on when you test it prospectively, it's translating to potential benefits.