Antonio Alcaraz

Dr. Antonio Alcaraz


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

38Years (1989-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
10 November 2019 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AAAndrew J. Armstrong
Andrew J. Armstrong
RSRussell Z. Szmulewitz
Russell Z. Szmulewitz
DPDaniel P. Petrylak
Daniel P. Petrylak
JHJeffrey Holzbeierlein
Jeffrey Holzbeierlein
AVArnauld Villers
Arnauld Villers
ASArnulf Stenzl
Arnulf Stenzl
PURPOSE: Enzalutamide, a potent androgen-receptor inhibitor, has demonstrated significant benefits in metastatic and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). METHODS: ARCHES (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02677896 ) is a multinational, double-blind, phase III trial, wherein 1,150 men with mHSPC were randomly assigned 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg/day) or placebo, plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel chemotherapy. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival. RESULTS: As of October 14, 2018, the risk of radiographic progression or death was significantly reduced with enzalutamide plus ADT versus placebo plus ADT (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.50; P < .001; median not reached v 19.0 months). Similar significant improvements in radiographic progression-free survival were reported in prespecified subgroups on the basis of disease volume and prior docetaxel therapy. Enzalutamide plus ADT significantly reduced the risk of prostate-specific antigen progression, initiation of new antineoplastic therapy, first symptomatic skeletal event, castration resistance, and reduced risk of pain progression. More men achieved an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level and/or an objective response with enzalutamide plus ADT ( P < .001). Patients in both treatment groups reported a high baseline level of quality of life, which was maintained over time. Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 24.3% of patients who received enzalutamide plus ADT versus 25.6% of patients who received placebo plus ADT, with no unexpected adverse events. CONCLUSION: Enzalutamide with ADT significantly reduced the risk of metastatic progression or death over time versus placebo plus ADT in men with mHSPC, including those with low-volume disease and/or prior docetaxel, with a safety analysis that seems consistent with the safety profile of enzalutamide in previous clinical trials in castration-resistant prostate cancer.

1 May 2011 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JCJames WF Catto
James WF Catto
AAAntonio Alcaraz
Antonio Alcaraz
ABAnders S. Bjartell
Anders S. Bjartell
RWRalph De Vere White
Ralph De Vere White
CEChristopher P. Evans
Christopher P. Evans
TVTapio Visakorpi
Tapio Visakorpi

1 February 2017 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AAAbdel-Rahmène Azzouzi
Abdel-Rahmène Azzouzi
SVSébastien Vincendeau
Sébastien Vincendeau
EBEric Barret
Eric Barret
ACAntony Cicco
Antony Cicco
FKFrançois Kleinclauss
François Kleinclauss
MEMark Emberton
Mark Emberton
Vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy, a novel tissue-preserving treatment for low-risk prostate cancer, has shown favourable safety and efficacy results in single-arm phase 1 and 2 studies. We compared this treatment with the standard of care, active surveillance, in men with low-risk prostate cancer in a phase 3 trial. This randomised controlled trial was done in 47 European university centres and community hospitals. Men with low-risk, localised prostate cancer (Gleason pattern 3) who had received no previous treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (4 mg/kg padeliporfin intravenously over 10 min and optical fibres inserted into the prostate to cover the desired treatment zone and subsequent activation by laser light 753 nm with a fixed power of 150 mW/cm for 22 min 15 s) or active surveillance. Randomisation was done by a web-based allocation system stratified by centre with balanced blocks of two or four patients. Best practice for active surveillance at the time of study design was followed (ie, biopsy at 12-month intervals and prostate-specific antigen measurement and digital rectal examination at 3-month intervals). The co-primary endpoints were treatment failure (histological progression of cancer from low to moderate or high risk or death during 24 months' follow-up) and absence of definite cancer (absence of any histology result definitely positive for cancer at month 24). Analysis was by intention to treat. Treatment was open-label, but investigators assessing primary efficacy outcomes were masked to treatment allocation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01310894. Between March 8, 2011, and April 30, 2013, we randomly assigned 206 patients to vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy and 207 patients to active surveillance. Median follow-up was 24 months (IQR 24-25). The proportion of participants who had disease progression at month 24 was 58 (28%) of 206 in the vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy group compared with 120 (58%) of 207 in the active surveillance group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·34, 95% CI 0·24-0·46; p<0·0001). 101 (49%) men in the vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy group had a negative prostate biopsy result at 24 months post treatment compared with 28 (14%) men in the active surveillance group (adjusted risk ratio 3·67, 95% CI 2·53-5·33; p<0·0001). Vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy was well tolerated. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were prostatitis (three [2%] in the vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy group vs one [<1%] in the active surveillance group), acute urinary retention (three [2%] vs one [<1%]) and erectile dysfunction (two [1%] vs three [1%]). The most common serious adverse event in the vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy group was retention of urine (15 patients; severe in three); this event resolved within 2 months in all patients. The most common serious adverse event in the active surveillance group was myocardial infarction (three patients). Padeliporfin vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy is a safe, effective treatment for low-risk, localised prostate cancer. This treatment might allow more men to consider a tissue-preserving approach and defer or avoid radical therapy. Steba Biotech.

14 April 2022 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AAAndrew J Armstrong
Andrew J Armstrong
AAArun A. Azad
Arun A. Azad
TITaro Iguchi
Taro Iguchi
RSRussell Z. Szmulewitz
Russell Z. Szmulewitz
DPDaniel P. Petrylak
Daniel P. Petrylak
ASArnulf Stenzl
Arnulf Stenzl
Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. In primary analysis, enzalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC); however, overall survival data were immature. In the phase III, double-blind, global ARCHES trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02677896 ), 1,150 patients with mHSPC were randomly assigned 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg once daily) plus ADT or placebo plus ADT, stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel use. Here, we report the final prespecified analysis of overall survival (key secondary end point) and an update on rPFS, other secondary end points, and safety. After unblinding, 180 (31.3%) progression-free patients randomly assigned to placebo plus ADT crossed over to open-label enzalutamide plus ADT. As of May 28, 2021 (median follow-up, 44.6 months), 154 of 574 patients randomly assigned to enzalutamide plus ADT and 202 of 576 patients randomly assigned to placebo plus ADT had died. Enzalutamide plus ADT reduced risk of death by 34% versus placebo plus ADT (median not reached in either group; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.81; P < .001). Enzalutamide plus ADT continued to improve rPFS and other secondary end points. Adverse events were generally consistent with previous reports of long-term enzalutamide use. In conclusion, enzalutamide plus ADT significantly prolongs survival versus placebo plus ADT in patients with mHSPC.

1 May 2009 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CPChris Protzel
Chris Protzel
AAAntonio Alcaraz
Antonio Alcaraz
SHSimon Horenblas
Simon Horenblas
GPGiorgio Pizzocaro
Giorgio Pizzocaro
AZAlexandre Zlotta
Alexandre Zlotta
OHOliver W. Hakenberg
Oliver W. Hakenberg

1 April 2009 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AAAntonio Alcaraz
Antonio Alcaraz
PHPeter Hammerer
Peter Hammerer
ATAndrea Tubaro
Andrea Tubaro
FSFritz H. Schröder
Fritz H. Schröder
RCRamiro Castro
Ramiro Castro