David Olmos

Dr. David Olmos


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
10 May 2013 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Elena CastroElena Castro
Elena Castro
CGChee Goh
Chee Goh
DODavid Olmos
David Olmos
ESEd Saunders
Ed Saunders
DLDaniel Leongamornlert
Daniel Leongamornlert
RERosalind Eeles
Rosalind Eeles
Purpose: To analyze the baseline clinicopathologic characteristics of prostate tumors with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations and the prognostic value of those mutations on prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes. Patients and Methods: This study analyzed the tumor features and outcomes of 2,019 patients with PCa (18 BRCA1 carriers, 61 BRCA2 carriers, and 1,940 noncarriers). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the associations between BRCA1/2 status and other PCa prognostic factors with overall survival (OS), cause-specific OS (CSS), CSS in localized PCa (CSS_M0), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and CSS from metastasis (CSS_M1). Results: PCa with germline BRCA1/2 mutations were more frequently associated with Gleason ≥ 8 (P = .00003), T3/T4 stage (P = .003), nodal involvement (P = .00005), and metastases at diagnosis (P = .005) than PCa in noncarriers. CSS was significantly longer in noncarriers than in carriers (15.7 v 8.6 years, multivariable analyses [MVA] P = .015; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.8). For localized PCa, 5-year CSS and MFS were significantly higher in noncarriers (96% v 82%; MVA P = .01; HR = 2.6%; and 93% v 77%; MVA P = .009; HR = 2.7, respectively). Subgroup analyses confirmed the poor outcomes in BRCA2 patients, whereas the role of BRCA1 was not well defined due to the limited size and follow-up in this subgroup. Conclusion: Our results confirm that BRCA1/2 mutations confer a more aggressive PCa phenotype with a higher probability of nodal involvement and distant metastasis. BRCA mutations are associated with poor survival outcomes and this should be considered for tailoring clinical management of these patients.

20 June 2023 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
KCKim N Chi
Kim N Chi
DRDana Rathkopf
Dana Rathkopf
MSMatthew R Smith
Matthew R Smith
EEEleni Efstathiou
Eleni Efstathiou
GAGerhardt Attard
Gerhardt Attard
MIMAGNITUDE Principal Investigators
MAGNITUDE Principal Investigators
PURPOSE: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease with current standard-of-care therapies. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, including BRCA1/2 alterations, can sensitize cancer cells to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition, which may improve outcomes in treatment-naïve mCRPC when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibition.METHODS: MAGNITUDE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03748641 ) is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded study that evaluates niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (niraparib + AAP) in patients with (HRR+, n = 423) or without (HRR−, n = 247) HRR-associated gene alterations, as prospectively determined by tissue/plasma-based assays. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib + AAP or placebo + AAP. The primary end point, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) assessed by central review, was evaluated first in the BRCA1/2 subgroup and then in the full HRR+ cohort, with secondary end points analyzed for the full HRR+ cohort if rPFS was statistically significant. A futility analysis was preplanned in the HRR− cohort.RESULTS: Median rPFS in the BRCA1/2 subgroup was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.6 v 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79; P = .001). In the overall HRR+ cohort, rPFS was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.5 v 13.7 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .022). These findings were supported by improvement in the secondary end points of time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In the HRR− cohort, futility was declared per the prespecified criteria. Treatment with niraparib + AAP was tolerable, with anemia and hypertension as the most reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events.CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with niraparib + AAP significantly lengthened rPFS in patients with HRR+ mCRPC compared with standard-of-care AAP.[Media: see text]

1 August 2015 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Elena CastroElena Castro
Elena Castro
CGChee Goh
Chee Goh
DLDaniel Leongamornlert
Daniel Leongamornlert
ESEd Saunders
Ed Saunders
MTMalgorzata Tymrakiewicz
Malgorzata Tymrakiewicz
RERosalind Eeles
Rosalind Eeles

20 December 2024 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Fred SaadFred Saad
Fred Saad
EVEgils Vjaters
Egils Vjaters
NSNeil Shore
Neil Shore
DODavid Olmos
David Olmos
NXNianzeng Xing
Nianzeng Xing
AIARANOTE Study Investigators
ARANOTE Study Investigators
PURPOSE: For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), delaying progression to castration-resistant disease is important not only for overall survival (OS) but also for patients' quality of life. Darolutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with docetaxel improved OS versus ADT and docetaxel in patients with mHSPC. The ARANOTE trial evaluated darolutamide and ADT without chemotherapy in patients with mHSPC. METHODS: In this global phase III trial, patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, with concomitant ADT. The primary end point was radiological progression-free survival (rPFS). RESULTS: From March 2021 to August 2022, 669 patients were randomly assigned (darolutamide n = 446; placebo n = 223). At the primary cutoff date (June 7, 2024), darolutamide plus ADT significantly improved rPFS, reducing the risk of radiological progression or death by 46% versus placebo plus ADT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71]; P < .0001), with consistent benefits across subgroups, including high- and low-volume disease. OS results were suggestive of benefit with darolutamide versus placebo (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12]), and clinical benefits were seen across all other secondary end points, including delayed time to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.51]) and time to pain progression (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.96]). Adverse events were similar in the two groups. Notably, the incidence of fatigue was lower in patients receiving darolutamide (5.6%) versus those receiving placebo (8.1%), and fewer patients receiving darolutamide (6.1%) versus placebo (9.0%) discontinued treatment because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: These results confirm the efficacy and tolerability of darolutamide plus ADT in patients with mHSPC, demonstrating clinically and statistically significant improvement in rPFS and a favorable safety profile consistent with prior phase III darolutamide trials.

10 February 2024 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JMJoaquin Mateo
Joaquin Mateo
JBJohann S. de Bono
Johann S. de Bono
KFKarim Fizazi
Karim Fizazi
Fred SaadFred Saad
Fred Saad
NSNeil Shore
Neil Shore
MHMaha Hussain
Maha Hussain
Olaparib improved PFS and OS across subgroups of BRCA1/2mut #prostatecancer patients in the PROFOUND phase III trial.

27 October 2020 in British Journal of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RLRebeca Lozano
Rebeca Lozano
ECElena Castro
Elena Castro
IAIsabel M. Aragón
Isabel M. Aragón
Ylenia Cendón FlórezYlenia Cendón Flórez
Ylenia Cendón Flórez
CCCarlo Cattrini
Carlo Cattrini
DODavid Olmos
David Olmos
Over the past years, several studies have demonstrated that defects in DNA damage response and repair (DDR) genes are present in a significant proportion of patients with prostate cancer. These alterations, particularly mutations in BRCA2, are known to be associated with an increased risk of developing prostate cancer and more aggressive forms of the disease. There is growing evidence that certain DDR gene aberrations confer sensitivity to poly-(ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitors and/or platinum chemotherapy, while other defects might identify cases that are more likely to benefit from immune checkpoint inhibition. The potential prognostic impact and relevance for treatment selection together with the decreasing costs and broader accessibility to next-generation sequencing have already resulted in the increased frequency of genetic profiling of prostate tumours. Remarkably, almost half of all DDR genetic defects can occur in the germline, and prostate cancer patients identified as mutation carriers, as well as their families, will require appropriate genetic counselling. In this review, we summarise the current knowledge regarding the biology and clinical implications of DDR defects in prostate cancer, and outline how this evidence is prompting a change in the treatment landscape of the disease.