ESMO Congress 2026
Bayer Sponsored and Supported GU Oncology Research

ESMO 2026 Bayer Sponsored and Investigator Initiated Research Slides
These slides provide a brief overview of the prostate cancer abstracts from ESMO 2026.
ABSTRACT LIST
Oral Presentation – Presidential Symposium I
Authors Conclusions:
Darolutamide significantly improved MFS-CI when added to ADT and loco-regional RT for very high-risk localised, or biochemically persistent/recurrent prostate cancer. Follow-up is ongoing to confirm the surrogacy of MFS-CI for OS.
Author: Niazi, T. et al.
Oral Abstract #LBA4
Poster and ePoster Abstracts- mHSPC
Authors Conclusions:
Efficacy outcomes favored DARO + ADT vs ADT alone in patients with HV or LV mHSPC. Sensitivity analyses support the robustness of the findings using both historical and contemporary controls. DARO + ADT was well tolerated for the treatment of mHSPC in all pts, regardless of disease volume.
Author: Shore, N.D. et al.
Abstract #2242P
Authors Conclusions:
In ARASEC, low bPSA and PSA <0.2 ng/mL response with darolutamide were associated with improved PFS, OS, time to mCRPC and rPFS. The darolutamide safety profile was maintained independent of baseline PSA.
Author: Maclachlan, A.A. et al.
Abstract #2374eP
Authors Conclusions:
In this national cohort of U.S. Veterans, darolutamide triplet therapy was associated with significantly lower one-year mortality than abiraterone triplet therapy for newly diagnosed mCSPC. Further research with longer follow-up is warranted to confirm these observations and evaluate additional outcomes including toxicity and quality of life.
Author: Filmore, N. et al.
Abstract #2297P
Authors Conclusions:
Among patients with mHSPC and broadly similar baseline characteristics, both cohorts had favorable clinical outcomes. Darolutamide-based triplet therapy showed a numerically higher 24-month castration-resistance-free survival rate, along with a lower pDDIs risk for concomitant medications, consistent with its pharmacokinetic profile. Findings support darolutamide as an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for mHSPC in China.
Author: Luo, M. et al.
Abstract #2371eP
Authors Conclusions:
ctDNA identifies clinically distinct mHSPC populations. Detectable ctDNA is associated with less favorable clinicopathological features and higher biochemical tumor burden at study entry, supporting ctDNA-based stratification in ProBio.
Author: De Laere, B. et al.
Abstract #2310eP
Poster and ePoster Abstracts- nmCRPC
Authors Conclusions:
DEAR-EST RW data reinforce DARO as an effective treatment for nmCRPC, with greater early tolerability and longer time on treatment leading to long-term clinical benefits compared with ENZA.
Author: George, D.J. et al.
Abstract #2062eP
Authors Conclusions:
In clinical settings, darolutamide consistently showed favorable safety and effectiveness profiles in the European and overall populations at IA4, supporting its use as a standard of care for patients with nmCRPC.
Author: Briganti, A. et al.
Abstract #2055eP
Poster and ePoster Abstracts- mCRPC
Authors Conclusions:
In PEACE-3, approximately one-third of CM administrations carried a moderate/major DDI with enzalutamide and were associated with substantially higher odds of pain, CVE, nausea and severe hypertension. Systematic identification and proactive management of DDIs should be integrated into enzalutamide-based treatment and prospectively captured in future trials.
Author: Bsilat, M. et al.
Abstract #2245P
Authors Conclusions:
Xerostomia was common but most events were G1. Of G2 events, half were at 150 kBq/kg (not being pursued) and all at 125 kBq/kg improved. SG absorption was low and sAA was not predictive of xerostomia incidence. Overall, 225Ac-PSMA-Trillium was well tolerated; xerostomia did not lead to discontinuation and measurably improved during follow-up.
Author: Hotte, S.J. et al.
Abstract #2270P
Authors Conclusions:
AR amplification identifies patients unlikely to benefit from ExBAT, while non-amplified AR status predicts durable response. ctDNA profiling may guide patient selection for ExBAT and warrants prospective validation.
Author: Bastos, D.A. et al.
Abstract #2259P
Authors Conclusions:
Baseline TF >15% identifies pts at highest progression risk across both arms, while on-treatment ctDNA detection captures high-risk pts on radium-223 standard-of-care monotherapy. Baseline TF ≤15% enriches for olaparib benefit. We propose an exploratory multi-timepoint decision framework combining baseline and on treatment monitoring to guide care and trial designs.
Author: McKay, R.R. et al.
Abstract #2232P
Authors Conclusions:
In routine clinical practice in Spain, Ra-223 was more commonly used in earlier mCRPC lines, where its use was associated with significantly longer OS, supporting early integration in the treatment sequence. Completion of ≥5 Ra-223 injections correlated strongly with improved survival, underscoring the clinical relevance of treatment continuity.
Author: Alvarez Ballesteros, P. et al.
Abstract #2230P
Authors Conclusions:
Study Conclusion: In these exploratory analyses, HRR alterations were neither enriched by clinical risk factors nor prognostic for rPFS, though the analysis is underpowered to exclude an HRR-selective effect. TP53 and AR alterations were prognostic under radium-223 monotherapy but not under combination therapy, and baseline TF was elevated in clinical subgroups with reduced olaparib benefit. Together these findings support baseline disease burden as a candidate modifier of olaparib benefit.
Author: McKay, R.R. et al.
Abstract #2324eP
Additional Prostate Cancer Abstracts
Authors Conclusions:
In this randomized trial of DAR vs ENZ, long-term and pt-reported outcomes were consistent with the 24-week primary analysis, with DAR associated with less objective and patient-reported cognitive change than ENZ at 48 week.
Author: Kwon, D. et al.
Abstract #2280P
Authors Conclusions:
No association of PHS to baseline CANTAB was observed. MCCD on ENZ was higher than DAR across PHS risk quartiles suggesting a mechanism of drug effect. The findings support a mechanism of ARTACE that is independent of genetic risk of AD.
Author: Ryan, C.J. et al.
Abstract #2244P
Authors Conclusions:
Both early onset and later age at enrollment were strongly associated with worse survival in advanced prostate cancer. This relationship is not explained by treatment, de novo metastasis, PSA, cardiovascular risk factors, or self-reported frailty. Pilot biomarker analyses indicate epigenetic aging and CH as potential aging biomarkers in advanced disease.
Author: Guard, H.E. et al.
Abstract #2287P
Authors Conclusions:
In this large real-world analysis, DAR was associated with significantly lower risk of discontinuation and subsequent treatment initiation than ENZ or APA and with fewer physician-reported discontinuations due to adverse events. Additional comparative studies are needed to inform treatment decisions for patients with mPC who are APMN/S.
Author: Mucci, L.A. et al.
Abstract #2359eP
Authors Conclusions:
Pooled data from different trials collectively provided concordant PK and safety evidence supporting elinzanetant 120 mg as an appropriate dose for clinical evaluation in men with ADT-associated VMS.
Author: Tombal, B. et al.
Abstract #2069eP
Want to know more about these presentations?
MA-PFM-ONC-CA-0151-1
*Trials in progress are not included in this list. For additional information on these abstracts or ongoing studies, please contact your Bayer MSL.
AD - Alzheimer's disease, ADT – Androgen Deprivation Therapy, APA – Apalutamide, AR – Androgen Receptor, bPSA – Baseline Prostate Specific Antigen, CH – Clonal Hematopoiesis, CM – Concomitant Medications, CVE – Cardiovascular Event, ctDNA – Circulating Tumour DNA, DARO – Darolutamide, DDI – Drug-Drug Interaction, ENZA – Enzalutamide, ExBAT – Extreme Bipolar Androgen Therapy, G – Grade, HRR - Homologous recombination repair, HV – High volume, LV – Low Volume, MCCD – Maximally changed CANTAB domain, mCRPC – Metastatic Castration–Resistant Prostate Cancer, mCSPC – Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer, MFS-CI – Metastasis-Free Survival by Conventional Imaging, mHSPC – Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer, mPC – Metastatic Prostate Cancer nmCRPC – Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostace Cancer, OS – Overall Survival, pDDI – Potential Drug-Drug Interaction, PFS – Progression Free Survival PHS – Polygenic hazard score, PK – Pharmacokinetic, PSA – Prostate Specific Antigen, Pts – Patients, RA – Radium, rPFS – radiographic Progression Free Survival, RT – Radiation Therapy, RW – Real World, SAA - salivary α-amylase, SG – Salivary glands, TF – Tumour Fraction, TP – Tumour Protein, VMS – Vasomotor Symptoms


