Skip to content

Cabazitaxel Versus the Switch to Alternative AR-targeted Agent (Enzalutamide or Abiraterone) in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) Patients Previously Treated With Docetaxel and Who Rapidly Failed a Prior AR-targeted Agent

A Randomized, Open Label, Multicenter Study of Cabazitaxel Versus an Androgen Receptor (AR)-Targeted Agent (Abiraterone or Enzalutamide) in mCRPC Patients Previously Treated With Docetaxel and Who Rapidly Failed a Prior AR-targeted Agent (CARD)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02485691
Acronym
CARD
Enrollment
255
Registered
2015-06-30
Start date
2015-11-09
Completion date
2021-03-15
Last updated
2022-05-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Prostate Cancer Metastatic

Brief summary

Primary Objective: To compare the radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) (using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors \[RECIST\] 1.1 for tumor lesions and Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 (PCWG2) criteria for bone scan lesions or death due to any cause) with chemotherapy (cabazitaxel plus prednisone, Arm A) versus Androgen Receptor (AR)-targeted therapy (enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone, Arm B) in mCRPC participants who have been treated with docetaxel and who had disease progression while receiving AR-targeted therapy within 12 months of AR treatment initiation (less than or equal to \[\<=\]12 months, either before or after docetaxel). Secondary Objective: * To compare efficacy for: * Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate and time to PSA progression (TTPP). * Progression-free survival (PFS). * Overall survival (OS). * Tumor response rate and duration of tumor response. * Pain response and time to pain progression. * Symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) rate and time to occurrence of any SSE. * Health status and Health-related Quality of Life (HRQOL). * To evaluate the correlation of a signature of resistance to AR-targeted agents with clinical outcome via the analysis of circulating tumor cell (CTC) phenotypes as well as expression and localization of proteins including AR isoforms in CTCs. * To evaluate safety in the 2 treatment arms.

Detailed description

The duration of the study per participant was approximately 2 years. Each participant was treated until radiographic disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or participant's refusal of further study treatment, and each participant was followed after completion of study treatment until death, study cut-off date, or withdrawal of participant consent.

Interventions

Pharmaceutical form: solution Route of administration: intravenous

DRUGenzalutamide

Pharmaceutical form: capsule Route of administration: oral

DRUGabiraterone acetate

Pharmaceutical form: tablet Route of administration: oral

DRUGprednisone

Pharmaceutical form: tablet Route of administration: oral

Sponsors

Sanofi
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

: Histologically confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma. * Metastatic disease. * Effective castration with serum testosterone levels less than (\<)0.5 ng/mL. If the participant has been treated with Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRH) agonists or antagonist (i.e., without orchiectomy), then this therapy should be continued. * Progressive disease defined by at least one of the following: * Progression in measurable disease (RECIST 1.1 criteria). * Appearance of 2 or more new bone lesions (PCWG2). * Rising Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) (PCWG2). * Having received prior docetaxel for at least 3 cycles (before or after an AR-targeted therapy). Docetaxel administration in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in metastatic hormone-sensitive disease was considered a prior exposure. Docetaxel rechallenge was allowed. * Having progressive disease (PD) while receiving AR-targeted therapy with abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide within 12 months of AR treatment initiation (\<=12 months), even if treatment duration was longer than 12 months. Participants treated with Abiraterone Acetate + ADT in metastatic hormone-sensitive setting were eligible in the study if they have progressed within 12 months with the AR-targeted agent. Participants having PSA progression only (as per PCWG2) within 12 months were eligible. * A PSA value of at least 2 ng/mL was required at study entry. * Prior AR-targeted therapy (abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide) must be stopped at least 2 weeks before study treatment. * Signed informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

* Prior chemotherapy other than docetaxel for prostate cancer, except estramustine and except adjuvant/neoadjuvant treatment completed \>3 years ago. * Less than 28 days elapsed from prior treatment with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery to the time of randomization. * Adverse events (excluding alopecia and those listed in the specific

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Radiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS)From randomization until tumor progression or bone lesion progression, death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Radiographic progression-free survival: time (in months) from randomization to occurrence of any one of following: radiological tumor progressions using response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1), progression of bone lesions using Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 (PCWG2) criteria or occurrence of death due to any cause. Progression as per RECIST 1.1: at least a 20 percent (%) increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Progression of bone lesions (PCWG2 criteria): first bone scan with \>= 2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed less than (\<) 12 weeks from randomization and confirmed by a second bone scan performed \>=6 weeks; first bone scan with \>=2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed \>=12 weeks from randomization. In accordance with protocol, data cut-off date for final analysis of this endpoint was the date when 196 rPFS events had occurred. Analysis done by Kaplan-Meier method.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Duration of Tumor ResponseFrom the date of the first response to the date of first documented tumor progression, or death due to any cause or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Duration of tumor response was defined as the time (in months) from date of first response (CR or PR) until date of first documentation of tumor progression or death, whichever occurs first. As per RECIST 1.1 CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to \<10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Progression was defined as at least a 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.
Progression Free Survival (PFS)From randomization until tumor progression or bone lesion progression, pain progression, death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)PFS:time duration (in months) from date of randomization to date of first occurrence of any of following events: radiological tumor progression (RECIST 1.1); progression of bone lesions (PCWG2); symptomatic progression (developing urinary or bowel symptoms; need to change anti-cancer therapy), pain progression or death due to any cause. Tumor Progression(RECIST 1.1): at least 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Progression of bone lesion (PCWG2 criteria): first bone scan with \>=2 new lesions compared to Baseline and confirmed by second bone scan performed \>=6 weeks later; pain progression: increase by \>=30% from Baseline in pain intensity score (calculated using scale ranged from 0=no pain to 5=extreme pain) or increase in analgesic usage score \>=30% (calculated from analgesic use data, non-narcotic medications assigned value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned 4 points). Analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.
Percentage of Participants With Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) ResponseBaseline up to PSA response, death due to any cause or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)PSA response was defined as \>= 50% decrease from baseline in serum PSA levels, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks later.
Percentage of Participants With Overall Objective Tumor ResponseFrom randomization until disease progression, death due to any cause or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Overall objective tumor response was defined as having a partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) according to the RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to \<10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.
Time to PSA Progression (TTPP)From time from randomization until PSA progression, death due to any cause or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)TTPP was defined as the time duration (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of first documented PSA progression. PSA progression (as per PCWG 2) was defined as: 1) If decline from Baseline value: an increase of \>=25% (at least 2 ng/mL) over the nadir value, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks apart; 2) If no decline from Baseline value: an increase of \>=25% (at least 2 ng/mL) over the baseline value after 12 weeks of treatment, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks apart. Analysis performed by Kaplan-Meier method.
Percentage of Participants Achieving Pain Response Assessed Using Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) Pain Intensity ScoreBaseline until pain progression, first further anticancer therapy, or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Pain response as per BPI-SF was defined as a decrease of at least 30% from Baseline in the average of BPI-SF pain intensity score observed at 2 consecutive evaluations \>=3 weeks apart without increase in analgesic usage score (calculated from analgesic use data, with non-narcotic medications assigned value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned 4 points). The BPI-SF is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain on a 0-10 categorical scale where 0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. Higher scores indicated worst outcomes. Percentage of Participants Achieving Pain Response assessed using BPI-SF Pain Intensity Score were reported.
Overall Survival (OS)From randomization to death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Overall survival was defined as the time interval (in months) from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored at the last date participant was known to be alive, or at the cut-off date whichever comes first. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.
Number of Symptomatic Skeletal Events (SSE)Baseline until occurrence of first SSE or data cut-off, whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)SSE was defined as occurrence of a new symptomatic pathological fracture, use of external beam radiation to relieve bone pain, occurrence of spinal cord compression or tumor- related orthopedic surgical intervention.
Time to Symptomatic Skeletal EventFrom date of randomization until first SSE, or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Time to SSE was defined as the time duration (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of occurrence of the first SSE. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentBaseline, Day 1 of each Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4, Cycle 5, Cycle 6, Cycle 7, Cycle 8 and at End of Treatment (any time up to 141 weeks)Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) evaluation was performed using the FACT-P questionnaire (Version 4). FACT-P was a 39-item participant rated questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consisted of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). FACT-P total score was the sum of all 5 subscale scores. It ranged from 0 to156 with higher score indicated better quality of life with fewer symptoms. Baseline corresponded to last evaluable assessment before treatment administration.
Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentBaseline, Day 1 of each Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4, Cycle 5, Cycle 6, Cycle 7, Cycle 8 and at End of Treatment (any time up to: 141 weeks)EQ-5D was a standardized HRQOL questionnaire consisting of EQ-5D descriptive system and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). EQ-5D descriptive system comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression measured on 3 levels (no problem, some problems & severe problems) within a particular EQ-5D dimension. 5 dimensional 3-level system was converted into single index utility score. Possible values for single index utility score ranged from -0.594 (severe problems in all dimensions) to 1.0 (no problem in all dimensions) on scale where 1 represented best possible health state. EQ-5D VAS was used to record a participant's rating for his/her current health-related quality of life state and captured on a vertical VAS scale ranging from 0-100, where 0=worst imaginable health state and 100=best imaginable health state, where higher states indicated better outcomes. Baseline corresponded to last evaluable assessment before treatment administration.
Radiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerFrom randomization until tumor progression or bone lesion progression, death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts were considered as biomarker in a liquid biopsy. rPFS in participants with presence and absence of subtypes of CTC biomarker i.e. chromosomal instability (CIN) and neuroendocrine (NE) was reported in this outcome measure. rPFS was defined as: time (in months) from randomization to the first occurrence of any one of following: radiological tumor progressions (RECIST1.1), progression of bone lesions (PCWG2 criteria) or death due to any cause. Progression (RECIST1.1): at least a 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Progression of bone lesions (PCWG2 criteria): first bone scan with \>= 2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed \<12 weeks from randomization and confirmed by a second bone scan performed \>=6 weeks later; first bone scan with \>=2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed \>=12 weeks from randomization and new lesions were verified on next bone scan \>= 6 weeks later.
Time to Pain ProgressionBaseline until pain progression or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)Time to pain progression was defined as the time duration (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of first documented pain progression. Pain progression, in participants with no pain or stable pain at Baseline was defined as increase of \>=30% from baseline in the BPI-SF pain intensity score observed at 2 consecutive evaluations \>=3 weeks apart without decrease in analgesic usage score or increase in analgesic usage score (calculated from analgesic use data, with non-narcotic medications assigned value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned 4 points) \>=30%. The BPI-SF is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain on a 0-10 categorical scale where 0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. Higher scores indicated worst outcomes. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Countries

Austria, Belgium, Czechia, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, United Kingdom

Participant flow

Recruitment details

The study was conducted at 66 active centers in 13 countries. A total of 255 participants were randomized between 09 November 2015 to 13 November 2018, out of which 250 participants received treatment with the study drug.

Pre-assignment details

Participants were randomized to receive either cabazitaxel or Androgen receptor (AR) targeted therapy (abiraterone or enzalutamide were assigned based on previous AR targeted treatment in which participants previously treated with abiraterone were treated with enzalutamide and vice versa due to resistance).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Cabazitaxel
Participants received Cabazitaxel 25 mg/m\^2 IV infusion for over 1 hour on Day 1 of each 3 week treatment cycle in combination with Prednisone 10 mg orally once daily and primary prophylactic G-CSF as per investigator decision, until radiographic disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or participant's refusal of further study treatment (median duration = 22 weeks).
129
Abiraterone Acetate or Enzalutamide
Participants received either abiraterone acetate 1000 mg orally once daily from Day 1 to Day 21 of each 3 week treatment cycle in combination with prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily; or enzalutamide 160 mg orally once daily continuously from Day 1 to Day 21 of each 3 week treatment cycle, until radiographic disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or participant's refusal of further study treatment (median duration = 12.5 weeks).
126
Total255

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event2511
Overall StudyDisease progression5792
Overall StudyInvestigator's decision235
Overall StudyOther reason89
Overall StudyParticipant's request136
Overall StudyPoor compliance to protocol01
Overall StudyRandomized and not treated32

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicCabazitaxelAbiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideTotal
Age, Continuous69.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.3
69.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.9
69.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.1
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
129 Participants126 Participants255 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
96 / 129103 / 126
other
Total, other adverse events
114 / 126104 / 124
serious
Total, serious adverse events
49 / 12650 / 124

Outcome results

Primary

Radiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS)

Radiographic progression-free survival: time (in months) from randomization to occurrence of any one of following: radiological tumor progressions using response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1), progression of bone lesions using Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 (PCWG2) criteria or occurrence of death due to any cause. Progression as per RECIST 1.1: at least a 20 percent (%) increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Progression of bone lesions (PCWG2 criteria): first bone scan with \>= 2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed less than (\<) 12 weeks from randomization and confirmed by a second bone scan performed \>=6 weeks; first bone scan with \>=2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed \>=12 weeks from randomization. In accordance with protocol, data cut-off date for final analysis of this endpoint was the date when 196 rPFS events had occurred. Analysis done by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: From randomization until tumor progression or bone lesion progression, death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on ITT population.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS)8.0 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS)3.7 months
Comparison: Hazard ratio was estimated using a Cox Proportional Hazards regression model. The Cox proportional hazard model was stratified by ECOG performance status, time from AR- targeted agent initiation progression, timing of AR targeted agent as specified at the time of randomization.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [0.4, 0.73]Log Rank
Secondary

Change From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of Treatment

EQ-5D was a standardized HRQOL questionnaire consisting of EQ-5D descriptive system and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). EQ-5D descriptive system comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression measured on 3 levels (no problem, some problems & severe problems) within a particular EQ-5D dimension. 5 dimensional 3-level system was converted into single index utility score. Possible values for single index utility score ranged from -0.594 (severe problems in all dimensions) to 1.0 (no problem in all dimensions) on scale where 1 represented best possible health state. EQ-5D VAS was used to record a participant's rating for his/her current health-related quality of life state and captured on a vertical VAS scale ranging from 0-100, where 0=worst imaginable health state and 100=best imaginable health state, where higher states indicated better outcomes. Baseline corresponded to last evaluable assessment before treatment administration.

Time frame: Baseline, Day 1 of each Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4, Cycle 5, Cycle 6, Cycle 7, Cycle 8 and at End of Treatment (any time up to: 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on Health status population which included participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and with an evaluable EQ-5D-5L at baseline and with at least one post-baseline evaluable EQ-5D-5L. Here 'Number analyzed' signifies participants with available data for each specified category.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 2: VAS3.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.4
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 3: VAS4.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 4: VAS4.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.5
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 5: VAS0.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.1
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 6: VAS-1.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.8
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 7: VAS2.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.1
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 8: VAS2.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentEnd of treatment: VAS-3.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.3
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 2: Utility Index Score0.026 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.179
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 3: Utility Index Score0.041 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.183
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 4: Utility Index Score0.051 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.176
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 5: Utility Index Score0.027 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.209
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 6: Utility Index Score0.015 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.191
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 7: Utility Index Score0.029 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.182
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 8: Utility Index Score0.008 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.213
CabazitaxelChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentEnd of treatment: Utility Index Score-0.048 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.188
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentEnd of treatment: Utility Index Score-0.079 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.2
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 2: VAS0.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.6
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 2: Utility Index Score-0.010 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.178
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 3: VAS1.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.4
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 6: Utility Index Score-0.000 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.176
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 4: VAS-1.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.2
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 3: Utility Index Score-0.011 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.182
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 5: VAS3.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 8: Utility Index Score-0.014 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.138
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 6: VAS-1.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.1
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 4: Utility Index Score-0.002 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.188
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 7: VAS-0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.1
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 7: Utility Index Score0.024 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.153
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 8: VAS1.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.6
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 5: Utility Index Score-0.035 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.185
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideChange From Baseline in European Quality of Life Working Group Health Status Measure 5 Dimensions, 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Single Index and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Scores at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentEnd of treatment: VAS-5.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.1
Secondary

Duration of Tumor Response

Duration of tumor response was defined as the time (in months) from date of first response (CR or PR) until date of first documentation of tumor progression or death, whichever occurs first. As per RECIST 1.1 CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to \<10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters. Progression was defined as at least a 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: From the date of the first response to the date of first documented tumor progression, or death due to any cause or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of participants with overall objective tumor response.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelDuration of Tumor Response6.5 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideDuration of Tumor Response8.0 months
Secondary

Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of Treatment

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) evaluation was performed using the FACT-P questionnaire (Version 4). FACT-P was a 39-item participant rated questionnaire that measures the concerns of participants with prostate cancer. It consisted of 5 sub-scales assessing physical well-being (7 items), social/family well-being (7 items), emotional well-being (6 items), functional well-being (7 items), and prostate-specific concerns (12 items). FACT-P total score was the sum of all 5 subscale scores. It ranged from 0 to156 with higher score indicated better quality of life with fewer symptoms. Baseline corresponded to last evaluable assessment before treatment administration.

Time frame: Baseline, Day 1 of each Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4, Cycle 5, Cycle 6, Cycle 7, Cycle 8 and at End of Treatment (any time up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on HRQOL population which included participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and with an evaluable FACT-P questionnaire at baseline and at least one post-baseline evaluable FACT-P. Here 'Number analyzed' signifies participants with available data for each specified category.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 22.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.3
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 32.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.1
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 42.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.8
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 52.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.9
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 6-3.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 7-2.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.3
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 8-4.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.4
CabazitaxelHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentEnd of treatment-6.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.1
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentEnd of treatment-7.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.7
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 2-0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.4
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 60.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.6
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 3-1.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.8
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 80.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 4-0.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.8
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 72.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.9
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideHealth-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL): Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) Total Score at Cycle 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and End of TreatmentCycle 5-1.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.1
Secondary

Number of Symptomatic Skeletal Events (SSE)

SSE was defined as occurrence of a new symptomatic pathological fracture, use of external beam radiation to relieve bone pain, occurrence of spinal cord compression or tumor- related orthopedic surgical intervention.

Time frame: Baseline until occurrence of first SSE or data cut-off, whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on ITT population.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
CabazitaxelNumber of Symptomatic Skeletal Events (SSE)24 events
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideNumber of Symptomatic Skeletal Events (SSE)35 events
Secondary

Overall Survival (OS)

Overall survival was defined as the time interval (in months) from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. In the absence of confirmation of death, survival time was censored at the last date participant was known to be alive, or at the cut-off date whichever comes first. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: From randomization to death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on ITT population.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelOverall Survival (OS)13.6 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideOverall Survival (OS)11.0 months
Comparison: Hazard ratio was estimated using a Cox Proportional Hazards regression model. The Cox proportional hazard model was stratified by ECOG performance status, time from AR- targeted agent initiation progression, timing of AR targeted agent as specified at the time of randomization.p-value: 0.007895% CI: [0.46, 0.89]Log Rank
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Achieving Pain Response Assessed Using Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) Pain Intensity Score

Pain response as per BPI-SF was defined as a decrease of at least 30% from Baseline in the average of BPI-SF pain intensity score observed at 2 consecutive evaluations \>=3 weeks apart without increase in analgesic usage score (calculated from analgesic use data, with non-narcotic medications assigned value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned 4 points). The BPI-SF is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain on a 0-10 categorical scale where 0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. Higher scores indicated worst outcomes. Percentage of Participants Achieving Pain Response assessed using BPI-SF Pain Intensity Score were reported.

Time frame: Baseline until pain progression, first further anticancer therapy, or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of ITT population (any participant who had been allocated to a randomized treatment, analyzed according to group allocated) with baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment before any further anti-cancer therapy for specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
CabazitaxelPercentage of Participants Achieving Pain Response Assessed Using Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) Pain Intensity Score45.9 percentage of participants
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamidePercentage of Participants Achieving Pain Response Assessed Using Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) Pain Intensity Score19.3 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Overall Objective Tumor Response

Overall objective tumor response was defined as having a partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) according to the RECIST version 1.1. CR was defined as disappearance of all target and non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or non-target) must have reduction in short axis to \<10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the baseline sum diameters.

Time frame: From randomization until disease progression, death due to any cause or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of ITT population (any participant who had been allocated to a randomized treatment, analyzed according to group allocated) with measurable disease at baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment before any further anti-cancer therapy for specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
CabazitaxelPercentage of Participants With Overall Objective Tumor Response36.5 percentage of participants
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamidePercentage of Participants With Overall Objective Tumor Response11.5 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.0004Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response

PSA response was defined as \>= 50% decrease from baseline in serum PSA levels, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks later.

Time frame: Baseline up to PSA response, death due to any cause or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of ITT population (any participant who had been allocated to a randomized treatment, analyzed according to group allocated) with PSA level \>2 ng/mL at baseline, and with at least two post-baseline assessments before any further anti-cancer therapy for specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
CabazitaxelPercentage of Participants With Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response36.3 percentage of participants
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamidePercentage of Participants With Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Response14.3 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.0003Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary

Progression Free Survival (PFS)

PFS:time duration (in months) from date of randomization to date of first occurrence of any of following events: radiological tumor progression (RECIST 1.1); progression of bone lesions (PCWG2); symptomatic progression (developing urinary or bowel symptoms; need to change anti-cancer therapy), pain progression or death due to any cause. Tumor Progression(RECIST 1.1): at least 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Progression of bone lesion (PCWG2 criteria): first bone scan with \>=2 new lesions compared to Baseline and confirmed by second bone scan performed \>=6 weeks later; pain progression: increase by \>=30% from Baseline in pain intensity score (calculated using scale ranged from 0=no pain to 5=extreme pain) or increase in analgesic usage score \>=30% (calculated from analgesic use data, non-narcotic medications assigned value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned 4 points). Analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: From randomization until tumor progression or bone lesion progression, pain progression, death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on ITT population.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelProgression Free Survival (PFS)4.4 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideProgression Free Survival (PFS)2.7 months
Comparison: Hazard ratio was estimated using a Cox Proportional Hazards regression model. The Cox proportional hazard model was stratified by ECOG performance status, time from AR- targeted agent initiation progression, timing of AR targeted agent as specified at the time of randomization.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [0.4, 0.68]Log Rank
Secondary

Radiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of Biomarker

Circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts were considered as biomarker in a liquid biopsy. rPFS in participants with presence and absence of subtypes of CTC biomarker i.e. chromosomal instability (CIN) and neuroendocrine (NE) was reported in this outcome measure. rPFS was defined as: time (in months) from randomization to the first occurrence of any one of following: radiological tumor progressions (RECIST1.1), progression of bone lesions (PCWG2 criteria) or death due to any cause. Progression (RECIST1.1): at least a 20% increase in sum of diameters of target lesions, unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. Progression of bone lesions (PCWG2 criteria): first bone scan with \>= 2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed \<12 weeks from randomization and confirmed by a second bone scan performed \>=6 weeks later; first bone scan with \>=2 new lesions compared to Baseline observed \>=12 weeks from randomization and new lesions were verified on next bone scan \>= 6 weeks later.

Time frame: From randomization until tumor progression or bone lesion progression, death due to any cause, or data cut-off date whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of participants analyzed according to the treatment group allocated by randomization with evaluable samples.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerPresence of CIN4.2 months
CabazitaxelRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerAbsence of CIN8.5 months
CabazitaxelRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerPresence of NE3.0 months
CabazitaxelRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerAbsence of NE8.2 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerAbsence of NE3.5 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerPresence of CIN4.2 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerPresence of NE3.9 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideRadiographic Progression-Free Survival (rPFS) in Participants With Presence and Absence of BiomarkerAbsence of CIN3.4 months
Secondary

Time to Pain Progression

Time to pain progression was defined as the time duration (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of first documented pain progression. Pain progression, in participants with no pain or stable pain at Baseline was defined as increase of \>=30% from baseline in the BPI-SF pain intensity score observed at 2 consecutive evaluations \>=3 weeks apart without decrease in analgesic usage score or increase in analgesic usage score (calculated from analgesic use data, with non-narcotic medications assigned value of 1 point and narcotic medications assigned 4 points) \>=30%. The BPI-SF is a self-administered questionnaire developed to assess the severity of pain on a 0-10 categorical scale where 0=no pain, 10=pain as bad as you can imagine. Higher scores indicated worst outcomes. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: Baseline until pain progression or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of ITT population (any participant who had been allocated to a randomized treatment, analyzed according to group allocated) with baseline assessment and at least one post-baseline assessment before any further anti-cancer therapy for BPI-SF pain intensity score.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelTime to Pain ProgressionNA months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideTime to Pain Progression8.5 months
Secondary

Time to PSA Progression (TTPP)

TTPP was defined as the time duration (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of first documented PSA progression. PSA progression (as per PCWG 2) was defined as: 1) If decline from Baseline value: an increase of \>=25% (at least 2 ng/mL) over the nadir value, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks apart; 2) If no decline from Baseline value: an increase of \>=25% (at least 2 ng/mL) over the baseline value after 12 weeks of treatment, confirmed by a second PSA value at least 3 weeks apart. Analysis performed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: From time from randomization until PSA progression, death due to any cause or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on subset of ITT population (any participant who had been allocated to a randomized treatment, analyzed according to group allocated) with PSA level \> 2ng/mL at baseline, and with at least two post-baseline assessments before any further anti-cancer therapy for specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelTime to PSA Progression (TTPP)6.3 months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideTime to PSA Progression (TTPP)2.1 months
Secondary

Time to Symptomatic Skeletal Event

Time to SSE was defined as the time duration (in months) between the date of randomization and the date of occurrence of the first SSE. Analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier method.

Time frame: From date of randomization until first SSE, or data cut-off whichever comes first (maximum duration: up to 141 weeks)

Population: Analysis was performed on ITT population.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
CabazitaxelTime to Symptomatic Skeletal EventNA months
Abiraterone Acetate or EnzalutamideTime to Symptomatic Skeletal Event16.7 months

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 26, 2026