ARTICLE ABSTRACTNo approved medical therapies prevent progression of low-grade prostate cancer. Rapamycin inhibits cell proliferation and augments immune responses, producing an antitumor effect. Encapsulated rapamycin (eRapa) incorporates rapamycin into a pH-sensitive polymer, ensuring consistent dosing. Here, we present results from a phase I trial evaluating the safety and tolerability of eRapa in patients with prostate cancer. Patients with Gleason ≤7 (3+4) disease (low and intermediate risk) under active surveillance were enrolled in a 3+3 study with three eRapa dosing cohorts (cohort 1, 0.5 mg/week; cohort 2, 1 mg/week; and cohort 3, 0.5 mg/day). Patients were treated for 3 months and followed for an additional 3 months to assess safety, pharmacokinetics, quality of life (QoL), immune response, and disease progression. Fourteen patients (cohort 1, n = 3; cohort 2, n = 3; and cohort 3, n = 8) were enrolled. In cohort 3, one dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; neutropenia) and two non-DLT grade 1–2 adverse events (AE) occurred that resulted in patient withdrawal. All AEs in cohorts 1 and 2 were grade 1. Peak serum rapamycin concentration was 7.1 ng/mL after a 1 mg dose. Stable trough levels (∼2 ng/mL) developed after 48–72 hours. Daily dosing mildly worsened QoL, although QoL recovered after treatment cessation in all categories, except fatigue. Weekly dosing increased naïve T-cell populations. Daily dosing increased central memory cell populations and exhaustion markers. No disease progression was observed. In conclusion, treatment with eRapa was safe and well-tolerated. Daily dosing produced higher frequencies of lower grade toxicities and transient worsening of QoL, while weekly dosing impacted immune response. Future studies will verify clinical benefit and long-term tolerability.Prevention Relevance: There is an unmet medical need for a well-tolerated treatment capable of delaying progression of newly diagnosed low-grade prostate cancer. This treatment would potentially obviate the need for future surgical intervention and improve the perception of active surveillance as a more acceptable option among this patient population.