We’ll be recapping some of the top news presented each day during the meeting—and soon we’ll speak with Dr Manish Shah on the latest results in gastrointestinal cancers, and Dr Scott Tagawa on the most exciting studies in prostate cancer.

Welcome to OncLive News Network! I’m Gina Columbus.

In prostate cancer, nearly 80% of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer who were treated with enzalutamide plus standard of care were alive after 3 years compared with 72% of patients who received a different non- steroidal anti-androgen plus standard therapy, according to results from an interim analysis of the phase III ENZAMET trial.

Results showed that the 3-year overall survival (OS) rate for men who received enzalutamide was 79% versus 72% in those who received another NSAA. In the phase III POLO trial, maintenance therapy with olaparib significantly improved progression-free survival compared with placebo among patients with germline BRCA-mutated metastatic pancreatic cancer. The median PFS with the PARP inhibitor was 7.4 months compared with 3.8 months with placebo.

In multiple myeloma, higher incomes and having private insurance were associated with significantly greater probability of survival for patients with multiple myeloma. At a median 30 months of treatment, patients on study who were living in areas with a median regional annual income at least $46,000 had a 16% greater chance of survival compared with those living in less wealthy areas.

Moreover, those with private insurance had a 59% greater probability of survival versus those insured through Medicaid and a 62% greater probability of survival than the uninsured. Private insurance was also associated with longer survival for those aged 65 and older. A subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab is noninferior in inefficacy and pharmacokinetics compared with standard intravenous daratumumab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, according to data from the phase III COLUMBA study.

Results showed that the rate of very good partial response or better was 19% with the subcutaneous formulation compared with 17% for the IV formulation. The subcutaneous formulation had a much shorter administration time of 5 mintues compared with over 3 hours for patients receiving the IV treatment. Additionally, no new safety signals emerged with the subcutaneous formulation. For a full review of all of these studies, please visit OncLive.com.

And don’t forget!

The OncLive Global Expo is taking place October 11th through 13th in Orlando, Florida. Join us for a fully interactive meeting that brings together the most inclusive group of oncology professionals to collaborate on emerging trends and technologies in oncology care and research.

Thank you for watching OncLive News Network! I’m Gina Columbus.