Statin use and oncological outcomes in a propensity-matched cohort of nonmetastatic castration resistant prostate cancer patients of the ARAMIS trial

•Observational studies suggest favorable associations between statin use and prostate cancer (CaP) outcomes, data from randomized-controlled trials remain inconclusive.•We explored the relationship between statin use and survival outcomes in the context of the phase III ARAMIS study, a trial of darolutamide in the treatment of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.•In our secondary analysis of the ARAMIS trial, statin users had similar metastasis-free survival and secondary outcomes compared to nonusers.•Pursuing further statin synergies with amide-based androgen receptor axis target agents may not be fruitful. While observational studies suggest favorable associations between statin use and prostate cancer (CaP) outcomes, data from randomized-controlled trials remain inconclusive. Our study explores the relationship between statin use and survival outcomes in the context of the phase III ARAMIS study, a trial of darolutamide in the treatment of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We reviewed all 1,509 patients in the ARAMIS trial. Statin use was identified at baseline. Statin users were matched 1:2 with nonusers using a propensity score matching model. The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival (MFS). Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for MFS comparing statin users and nonusers across ARAMIS trial arms. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was fitted using the propensity-matched cohort and incorporating statin use and all covariates. Of the 1,509 patients in ARAMIS, 334 (22.1%) were statin users. We matched 297 statin users to 550 nonusers. Characteristics appeared well balanced. Among nonusers, 331 (60.3%) and 219 (39.7%) were in the ARAMIS darolutamide and placebo arms, respectively. Among statin users, 179 (60.3%) and 118 (39.7%) were in the ARAMIS darolutamide and placebo arms, respectively. Overall, we found no significant difference in MFS between statin users and nonusers (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.80–1.38 P = .72). However, we found significant interaction between statin use and ARAMIS trial arm. Specifically, statin use had a stronger association with MFS in the placebo arm (P = 0.024). However, this is likely coincidental and due to the statin-placebo patients having higher nodal positivity than the nonusers-placebo patients (14.3% vs. 5.5%). Statin use was similarly not associated with the secondary outcomes of PSA progression-free survival (P = 0.42), time-to-pain progression (P = 0.85), or overall survival