Recent correspondence and analyses revisited survival outcomes comparing apalutamide and enzalutamide in metastatic castration‑sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). A primary report examined overall‑survival signals favoring one agent in particular datasets, prompting letters that scrutinize study design, cross‑trial comparisons and real‑world treatment patterns. The exchange underscores ongoing uncertainty about relative survival benefits across androgen‑receptor inhibitors in earlier metastatic disease and highlights the need for head‑to‑head trials or robust comparative effectiveness studies. Clinicians and payers will monitor emerging real‑world evidence and guideline updates to refine sequencing and reimbursement decisions.