Reconsidering the mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitors based on clinical outcomes.

Abstract

PARP inhibitors (PARPis) were initially developed as DNA repair inhibitors that inhibit the catalytic activity of PARP1 and PARP2 and are expected to induce synthetic lethality in BRCA‐ or homologous recombination (HR)‐deficient tumors. However, the clinical indications for PARPis are not necessarily limited to BRCA mutations or HR deficiency; BRCA wild‐type and HR‐proficient cancers can also derive some benefit from PARPis. These facts are interpretable by an additional primary antitumor mechanism of PARPis named PARP trapping, resulting from the stabilization of PARP‐DNA complexes. Favorable response to platinum derivatives (cisplatin and carboplatin) in preceding treatment is used as a clinical biomarker for some PARPis, implying that sensitivity factors for platinum derivatives and PARPis are mainly common. Such common sensitivity factors include not only HR defects (HRD) but also additional factors. One of them is Schlafen 11 (SLFN11), a putative DNA/RNA helicase, that sensitizes cancer cells to a broad type of DNA‐damaging agents, including platinum and topoisomerase inhibitors. Mechanistically, SLFN11 induces a lethal replication block in response to replication stress (ie, DNA damage). As SLFN11 acts upon replication stress, trapping PARPis can activate SLFN11. Preclinical models show the importance of SLFN11 in PARPi sensitivity. However, the relevance of SLFN11 in PARPi response is less evident in clinical data compared with the significance of SLFN11 for platinum sensitivity. In this review, we consider the reasons for variable indications of PARPis resulting from clinical outcomes and review the mechanisms of action for PARPis as anticancer agents.