Ewan K. Cobran

Comprehensive genomic profiling has expanded the ability to identify potentially actionable molecular alterations across cancers, but identification of an actionable finding does not ensure that a patient will receive a genomically matched therapy. Studies of precision-oncology programs and molecular tumor boards (MTBs) consistently demonstrate substantial attrition between treatment recommendation and treatment initiation. The reasons extend beyond molecular interpretation and include the timing of genomic profiling, clinical deterioration, geographic availability of biomarker-selected trials, insurance and financial barriers, and disparities in access to specialty cancer care. Importantly, these barriers arise after a potentially useful molecular finding has already been identified, creating a distinction between molecular actionability and practical treatment access. This commentary argues that the next implementation challenge for precision oncology is to make clinically meaningful genomic findings realistically actionable. Comprehensive genomic profiling should occur early enough to inform treatment planning; MTB recommendations should be linked to realistic treatment and trial opportunities; financial and insurance barriers should be anticipated when recommendations are made; and equity should be evaluated beyond access to testing to include receipt of genomically informed treatment. As genomic profiling becomes increasingly integrated into routine cancer care, precision oncology should be judged not only by its ability to identify therapeutic opportunities but also by whether patients can reach those opportunities while they remain clinically relevant.

Background: Men with castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) who have a pre‐existing history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) or other comorbidities are often excluded from clinical trials involving oral androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPi). In this study, we compared all‐cause and prostate cancer‐specific mortality among CRPC patients, with and without a pre‐existing history of CVD, receiving ARPi compared to chemotherapy. Methods: Men with CRPC were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results‐Medicare Linked Database from 2004 to 2015. Patients were grouped into two analytical cohorts by drug use. Inverse probability treatment weights (IPTW)‐adjusted Cox models and Fine‐Gray subdistribution hazards models were used to evaluate associations between ARPi and chemotherapy, and between ENZ and AA for all‐cause mortality and cancer‐specific mortality separately. Results: The study cohort included 1438 men with CRPC. Nearly 54.4% of patients had a pre‐existing history of CVD. Patients with a pre‐existing history of CVD had a higher incidence of all‐cause and prostate cancer‐specific mortality compared to patients without a history of CVD (all‐cause mortality: 69.7% vs. 59.3%, prostate cancer‐specific mortality: 56.0% vs. 49.5%, respectively). In the pre‐existing history of CVD cohort, the IPTW‐adjusted Cox model showed a significantly lower all‐cause mortality in patients who received APRi, enzalutamide, and abiraterone, versus chemotherapy (IPTW‐adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.56; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.48–0.64; p ‐value < 0.001). Further, the IPTW‐adjusted competing risk model showed significantly lower prostate cancer‐specific mortality in patients who received ARPi compared with those who received chemotherapy (IPTW‐AHR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.57; p ‐value < 0.001). In the without pre‐existing history of CVD cohort, the adjusted Cox model showed significantly lower all‐cause mortality in patients who received APRi than those who received chemotherapy (IPTW‐AHR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41–0.60; p ‐value < 0.001). Whereas the IPTW‐adjusted competing risk model showed significantly lower prostate cancer‐specific mortality in patients who received ARPi compared with those who received chemotherapy (IPTW‐AHR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42–0.64; p ‐value < 0.001). Conclusion: In this population‐based cohort of older men with castration‐resistant prostate cancer, treatment with oral androgen receptor pathway inhibitors was associated with lower estimated risks of all‐cause and prostate cancer–specific mortality compared with chemotherapy in patients with and without pre‐existing CVD. These findings add real‐world comparative effectiveness evidence for patient populations not well represented in randomized clinical trials; however, given the observational design and limitations of administrative data, residual confounding and unmeasured clinical differences may have influenced the results.

Prostate cancer is a growing public health concern in Kenya, where it is frequently diagnosed at advanced stages and managed within resource-constrained health systems. This study examined the lived experiences of men diagnosed with prostate cancer, focusing on how the illness shaped their identities, relationships, and daily lives. We conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews with 130 men recruited from oncology clinics across five counties (Nairobi, Garissa, Meru, Machakos, and Kisii). Audio recordings were transcribed and translated verbatim into English, where necessary, by trained research assistants. Thematic analysis was conducted following the Braun and Clarke’s six-phase framework, with NVivo 12 Plus supporting data management. Five core themes emerged: 1) emotional and existential disruption at diagnosis; (2) treatment as both a source of hope and hardship; (3) geographic and financial barriers to care; (4) challenges to masculine identity and dignity; and (5) the dual role of family and community as sources of both support and stigma. Prostate cancer precipitated profound identity shifts for Kenyan men, transforming lived experiences from those of strong providers to vulnerable patients and disrupting deeply rooted social and personal roles. These findings underscore the need for holistic, culturally responsive cancer care that integrates psychosocial support from the point of diagnosis and addresses structural barriers to access. Such approaches are essential for advancing patient-centered prostate cancer care in Kenya and similar settings.

The recent report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine emphasizes the importance of detailed and tailored use of population descriptors in genomic analyses, but specific guidance for genomic data analysts is still lacking. In this Perspective, we focus on polygenic risk score (PRS) development and demonstrate that population descriptors are explicitly or implicitly involved in every step of the process. Attention to this matter is both an analytical concern and an ethical concern, as each decision has an impact on PRS results and performance across diverse populations. Drawing from the experience of the Polygenic Risk Methods Development (PRIMED) Consortium, we offer recommendations for applying population descriptors throughout the entire process of PRS development, validation and application. We urge the research community, particularly data analysts, to critically evaluate and justify their choices when using these descriptors to ensure both scientific rigor and research integrity.

Background: This study investigates the association between thromboembolic events (TE) and castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients receiving oral androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPi) compared to those undergoing chemotherapy, both with and without a pre‐existing history of cardiovascular disease (CVD).Methods: A total of 2779 men diagnosed with CRPC were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Medicare Linked Database from 2012 to 2016. Patients were stratified based on their CVD history. Within each CVD stratum (pre‐existing CVD vs. no pre‐existing CVD), patients were further categorized into two treatment groups: those receiving oral ARPi and those undergoing chemotherapy. Unadjusted and inverse probability treatment weight (IPTW)‐adjusted proportional hazards models, using Fine and Gray's method, were applied to evaluate the potential association between ARPi treatment and TE.Results: Patients with pre‐existing CVD treated with ARPi exhibited a significantly lower crude hazard ratio (HR) for TE compared to chemotherapy (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.27–0.58, p < 0.001). However, after adjustment using IPTW, this association was no longer significant (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.75–1.32, p = 0.99). For patients without CVD, ARPi use was also associated with a reduced risk of TE in the crude analysis (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.87, p = 0.01), but this effect was not statistically significant after IPTW adjustment (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69–1.41, p = 0.94).Conclusion: ARPi demonstrated no significant effect on TE risk compared to chemotherapy, regardless of pre‐existing CVD status. Similarly, when excluding patients with a prior history of TE, ARPi use remained non‐significantly associated with new TE in the IPTW‐adjusted competing risk analysis, highlighting the need for further investigation.