Homologous Recombination Repair Mutations Research Articles

A boost or a redundancy? on the value of combination of androgen receptor signal inhibitor and PARP inhibitor for advanced prostate cancer

AbstractPoly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi), as a novel endocrine therapy, has been investigated in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in recent years. Multiple large-scale clinical trials have consistently demonstrated that various PARP inhibitors, including olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, and talazoparib, confer longer radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) compared to new hormonal agents (NHA) in mCRPC patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). Moreover, the incidence of grade 3 and above adverse events did not significantly increase. Additionally, when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI), olaparib, niraparib, and talazoparib have shown significant extension of rPFS but also an increased occurrence of serious adverse events in HRD-positive patients. Only PROpel yielded positive results among the homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutation negative population. Therefore, it remains uncertain whether ARSI-PARPi combination therapy should be considered as first-line treatment for mCRPC patients without HRR mutations. In this review article, we aim to elucidate the necessity and feasibility of combination therapy versus monotherapy specifically within the HRR mutant population while exploring its potential applicability to other non-HRR mutant subtypes. Furthermore, we conducted a comprehensive search on registered clinical trials at present to summarize the research progress of PARP inhibitors in prostate cancer patients at different disease stages.

Combination of PARP Inhibitors and Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibitors in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Despite recent advances in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer, progression to a castration-resistant state remains inevitable for most and prognosis is limited. Genetic testing for homologous recombination repair pathway alterations is recommended for all patients with advanced prostate cancer given that a mutation is present in up to 25% of cases. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARPis) are now approved for use in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have progressed on an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) and harbour a germline or somatic homologous recombination repair mutation. Preclinical data support a synergistic effect with an ARPI and PARPi, and various ARPI-PARPi combinations have therefore been explored in phase III clinical trials. Despite heterogeneous findings, a clear hierarchy of benefit is evident, with patients harbouring a BRCA mutation deriving the greatest magnitude of benefit, followed by any homologous recombination repair mutation. The benefit in homologous recombination repair-proficient cohort is less clear, and questions remain about whether ARPI-PARPi combination therapy should be offered to patients without a homologous recombination repair mutation. With ARPIs now considered standard-of-care for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, ARPI-PARPi combination therapy is currently being explored earlier in the treatment paradigm. The purpose of this review is to discuss the rationale behind ARPI-PARPi combination therapy, summarise the results of key clinical trials, and discuss clinical considerations and future perspectives.

Abiraterone, Olaparib, or Abiraterone + Olaparib in First-Line Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer with DNA Repair Defects (BRCAAway).

Deleterious germline/somatic homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm) are present in ∼25% of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Preclinically, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition demonstrated synergism with androgen receptor pathway (ARP)-targeted therapy. This trial evaluated the efficacy of ARP inhibitor versus PARP inhibitor versus their combination as first-line therapy in patients with mCRPC with HRRms. BRCAAway is a biomarker preselected, randomized, phase 2 trial. Patients with BRCA1/2 and/or ATM alterations were randomized 1:1:1 to Arm1: abiraterone (1,000 mg)/prednisone (5 mg BID) (Abi/pred), Arm2: olaparib (300 mg BID) (Ola), or Arm3: abiraterone/prednisone + olaparib (Abi/pred + Ola). Single-agent arms could cross over at progression. Exploratory Arm4 patients with other HRRms received olaparib alone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints were objective response, PSA response, and safety. Sixty-one of 165 eligible patients had BRCA1/2 or ATM mutations: median age: 67 (IQR, 62-73) years. Mutations: BRCA1 n = 3, BRCA2 n = 46, ATM n = 11, and multiple n = 1; 33 germline and 28 somatic mutations. Median PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)]: Abi/pred, 8.6 months (m; 2.9, 17), Ola, 14 m (8.4, 20), and Abi/pred + Ola, 39 m [22, not reached (NR)]. There were no G4/5 adverse events; 8/19 patients on Abi/pred treatment crossed over to Ola, and 8/21 vice versa. Median PFS (95% CI) from crossover: Ola-after-Abi/pred, 8.3 m (5.5, 15) and Abi/pred-after-Ola, 7.2 m (2.8, NR). Median PFS (95% CI) from randomization: Ola-after-Abi/pred, 16 m (7.8, 25) and Abi/pred-after-Ola, 16 m (11, NR). Seventeen of 165 patients with other HRRms received olaparib: median PFS (95% CI): 5.5 m (2, 11). In patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 or ATM HRRm, Abi/pred + Ola was well tolerated and demonstrated longer PFS versus either agent alone or sequentially.

DNA-Damaging Therapies in Patients With Prostate Cancer and Pathogenic Alterations in Homologous Recombination Repair Genes.

Outcomes data for DNA-damaging therapeutics for men with prostate cancer (PC) and non-BRCA1/2 homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations are limited. We evaluated outcomes by HRR alteration in men with PC treated with poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) and/or platinum chemotherapy. Retrospective data from the PROMISE consortium were used. Clinical outcomes differences were assessed between patients with BRCA1/2 mutations (cohort A) and those with HRR mutations without direct BRCA complex interaction (cohort B: ATM, CDK12, CHEK1, CHEK2, and FANCL). Outcomes in patients with HRR mutations with direct BRCA complex interaction were also explored (cohort C: RAD51B/C/D, RAD54L2, BARD1, GEN1, PALB2, FANCA, and BRIP1). One hundred and forty-six patients received PARPi (cohort A: 94, cohort B: 45, cohort C: 7) and 104 received platinum chemotherapy (cohort A: 48, cohort B: 44, cohort C: 10). PSA50 response rate to PARPi was higher in cohort A (61%) than cohort B (5%), P < .001. Median clinical/radiographic progression-free survival (crPFS) with PARPi in cohort A was significantly longer than in cohort B: 15.9 versus 8.7 months, P = .005. PSA50 response rate to platinum therapy was higher in cohort A (62%) than in cohort B (32%), P = .024, although crPFS was not significantly different. PSA50 response rate to PARPi and platinum was 40% and 32%, respectively, in cohort C. In multivariable analysis, cohort A had significantly improved overall survival and crPFS compared with cohort B with PARPi but not platinum chemotherapy. Patients with BRCA1/2-mutated PC had significantly improved outcomes to PARPi but not platinum chemotherapy compared with those with HRR mutations without direct BRCA complex interaction.

Untapped Potential of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors: Lessons Learned From the Real-World Clinical Homologous Recombination Repair Mutation Testing.

Testing for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) mutations is pivotal to assess individual risk, to proact preventive measures in healthy carriers and to tailor treatments for cancer patients. Increasing prominence of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with remarkable impact on molecular-selected patient survival across diverse nosologies, ingrains testing for BRCA genes and beyond in clinical practice. Nevertheless, testing strategies remain a question of debate. While several pathogenic BRCA1/2 gene variants have been described as founder pathogenic mutations frequently found in patients from Russia, other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes have not been sufficiently explored. In this study, we present real-world data of routine HRR gene testing in Russia. We evaluated clinical and sequencing data from cancer patients who had germline/somatic next-generation sequencing (NGS) HRR gene testing in Russia (BRCA1/2/ATM/CHEK2, or 15 HRR genes). The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the frequency of BRCA1/2 and non-BRCA gene mutations in real-world unselected patients from Russia, and to determine whether testing beyond BRCA1/2 is feasible. Data of 2,032 patients were collected from February 2021 to February 2023. Most had breast (n = 715, 35.2%), ovarian (n = 259, 12.7%), pancreatic (n = 85, 4.2%), or prostate cancer (n = 58, 2.9%). We observed 586 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and 372 deleterious variants (DVs) across 487 patients, with 17.6% HRR-mutation positivity. HRR testing identified 120 (11.8%) BRCA1/2-positive, and 172 (16.9%) HRR-positive patients. With 51 DVs identified in 242 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE), testing for variant origin clarification was required in one case (0.4%). Most BRCA1/2 germline variants were DV (121 DVs, 26 VUS); in non-BRCA1/2 genes, VUS were ubiquitous (53 DVs, 132 VUS). In silico prediction identified additional 4.9% HRR and 1.2% BRCA1/2/ATM/CHEK2 mutation patients. Our study represents one of the first reports about the incidence of DV and VUS in HRR genes, including genes beyond BRCA1/2, identified in cancer patients from Russia, assessed by NGS. In silico predictions of the observed HRR gene variants suggest that non-BRCA gene testing is likely to result in higher frequency of patients who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy. Continuing sequencing efforts should clarify interpretation of frequently observed non-BRCA VUS.

Is the Homologous Recombination Repair Mutation Defined by a 15-Gene Panel Associated with the Prognosis of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer?

There is no consensus regarding the specific genes included in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene panel for identifying the HRR deficiency (HRD) status and predicting the prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients. We aimed to explore a 15-gene panel involving the HRR pathway as a predictive prognostic indicator in Chinese patients newly diagnosed with EOC. We reviewed the previously published reports about different HRR gene panels and prespecified the 15-gene panel. The genetic testing results in a 15-gene panel from 308 EOC patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2022 from six centers were collected. The association of clinicopathologic characteristics, the use of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) and progression-free survival (PFS) with 15-gene panel HRR mutations (HRRm) status was assessed. 43.2% (133/308) of patients were determined to carry 144 deleterious HRRm, among which68.1% (98/144) were germline mutations and 32.8% (101/308) were BRCA1/2gene lethal mutations. The hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval, CI) for PFS (HRRmvHRR wild type, HRRwt) using the 15-gene panel HRRm was 0.42 (0.28-0.64) at all stages and 0.42 (0.27-0.65) at stages IIIC-IV. However, a prognostic difference was observed only between the BRCA mutation group and the HRRwt group, not between the non-BRCA HRRm group and the HRRwt group. For the subgroups of patients not using PARPis, the HR (95% CI) was 0.41 (0.24-0.68) at stages IIIC-IV. This study provides evidence that 15-gene panel HRRm can predict the prognosis of EOC, of these only the BRCA1/2 mutations, not non-BRCA HRRm, contribute to prognosis prediction. Among patients without PARPis, the HRRm group presented a better PFS. This is the first study of this kind in the Chinese population.

First-in-human phase I trial of the oral first-in-class ubiquitin specific peptidase 1 (USP1) inhibitor KSQ-4279 (KSQi), given as single agent (SA) and in combination with olaparib (OLA) or carboplatin (CARBO) in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors, enriched for deleterious homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations.

3005 Background: USP1 is a deubiquitinase that regulates DNA damage response pathways, such as Translesion Synthesis and Fanconi Anemia pathways. KSQi is a potent, selective small molecule inhibitor of USP1 with anti-proliferative activity in tumors with HRR mutations. The combination of KSQi and PARP inhibitors (PARPi) showed strong synergy in Ovarian and TNBC PDX models, supporting this clinical trial. Methods: This is a 2-part study: Part 1 dose escalation using a BOIN design explored safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD) and preliminary anti-tumor activity of KSQi as SA (Arm 1) and in combination with OLA at 200 mg BID (Arm 2) or CARBO at AUC 4 (Arm 3) to determine the MTD and/or recommended dose for expansion (RDE). Part 2 will assess efficacy and safety of the combinations in expansion cohorts. Results: As of Jan 4, 2024, 64 pts (19m/45f; median age 63 y) received KSQi 100 - 1250 mg; Arm 1: 100 mg (3 pts), 150 (3), 200 (4), 300 (6), 450 (5), 650 (9), 900 (7) and 1250 (5); Arm 2: 200 (5), 450 (5) and 900 (5); Arm 3: 200 (3) and 450 (4). Median number of prior therapies was 5, 4 and 3 for Arm 1, 2 and 3, respectively. 29% had prior PARPi in Arm 1, 53% in Arm 2, and 71% in Arm 3. All pts in Arms 2 and 3 had tumors with deleterious HRR mutations. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) were anemia (36%), increased creatinine (33%) as SA, and anemia in combination with OLA (87%) and CARBO (71%). The most common G3+ TEAEs were hyponatremia (12%) as SA and anemia in combination with OLA (73%) and CARBO (29%). DLTs (n = 3) were G3 maculopapular rash at 1250 mg (Arm 1) and G3 WBC decrease at 200 mg, G3 anemia at 450 mg (Arm 2). 30% (19/64) of pts had an interruption in KSQi dosing and 1 (1.6%) discontinued treatment. PK AUC and Cmax increased almost dose-proportionally up to 650 mg. A preliminary review of OLA concentrations following co-administration with KSQi showed no significant impact of OLA at C2D1. Ubiquitinated PCNA induction was observed in paired tumor biopsies from pts receiving KSQi, supporting intra-tumoral USP1 inhibition. A RECIST PR was observed in a fallopian tube cancer pt lasting 7 weeks and SD in 9 pts treated with SA KSQi; best response in combination with OLA was SD in 6 pts and 2 SD with CARBO. Disease control rate at 16 weeks was 28% (Arm 1), 40% (Arm 2) and 29% (Arm 3). Conclusions: KSQi is a first-in-class USP1 inhibitor with an acceptable safety profile as SA and in combination. An MTD was not reached in any Arms. PD results support the mechanism of action of USP1 inhibition. The RDE will be determined in additional back-fill cohorts. Clinical trial information: NCT05240898 .

A phase 1 study of HRS-1167 (M9466), a highly selective PARP1 inhibitor, in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors.

3154 Background: The use of first-generation dual PARP1/2 inhibitors is limited due to their hematological toxicities and inevitable drug resistance. Given that loss of PARP1 is the primary driver of synthetic lethality in homologous recombination repair (HRR) deficient tumors, and PARP2 is largely associated with hematological toxicities, development of next-generation PARPi with selectivity for PARP1 is warranted. Here, we present results of the dose escalation (D-ESC) and dose expansion (D-EXP) parts of a first-in-human study of HRS-1167 (M9466), a highly selective PARP-1 inhibitor, in pts with advanced solid tumors. Methods: Pts were eligible for the D-ESC part if they had advanced solid tumors that had progressed on standard therapies or for which no standard therapies were available. The D-ESC part began with accelerated titration (30 mg; QD) and then switched to the BOIN design (50, 100, 200, and 300 mg; QD). In the D-EXP part, previously treated pts harboring germline or somatic BRCA1/2, PALB2, or RAD51C/D mutations received HRS-1167 at 50, 100, and 200 mg QD. Prior PARPi was allowed. The primary objectives were to assess the safety and tolerability of HRS-1167. Results: As of Nov 20, 2023, 40 pts were enrolled (median lines of prior treatment, 2 [range, 1–5]; prior PARPi, 15.0%). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred, and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12 (30.0%) pts, with the most common being anemia (6 [15.0%]), decreased neutrophil count (5 [12.5%]), and decreased WBC count (5 [12.5%]). Of the 24 pts with HRR mutations who had at least one post-baseline assessment for tumor response, 10 (41.7%) pts had objective responses (8 ovarian cancer, 1 prostate cancer, and 1 pancreatic cancer). PK exposures were approximately dose-proportional. The median Tmax was 1.0–1.5 h, and the mean t1/2 was 10.5–15.0 h following a single dose of HRS-1167 at 30–300 mg. No obvious drug accumulation was observed (Rac, 1.08–1.30 for Cmax; 1.29–1.62 for AUC0-24). Conclusions: HRS-1167 was well-tolerated and exhibited favorable safety and PK profiles in pts with advanced solid tumors, and demonstrated promising anti-tumor activity in pretreated pts with HRR mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT05473624 .

Leveraging genomic instability scores (GIS) to investigate BRCA variants of unknown significance (VUS) in ovarian cancer: An analysis of 14,513 patients in the Myriad Collaborative Research Registry (MCRR).

e17549 Background: In ovarian cancer, use of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and BRCA mutation ( BRCAm) status is essential in guiding PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy, with the greatest survival benefit in patients harboring BRCAm pathogenic variants (PVs). In other indications, PARPi are only approved for patients with BRCAm or homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm). Genomic instability scores (GIS), an HRD proxy, are also predictive of PARPi benefit in patients without BRCAm or HRRm, suggesting that other DNA alterations without definitive classification, such as BRCA VUS or variants of Special Interpretation (SI), may be contributing to HRD. Here, we evaluated the association of BRCA VUS and SI variants that have complex clinical interpretation with reduced penetrance. Methods: Retrospective analysis was conducted using de-identified genetic testing data from the MCRR. Eligible patients with ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer were tested with the MyChoice CDx HRD test between 2016 and 2023, with HRD+ defined as GIS≥42 or presence of BRCAm PV. Patient BRCAm and HRRm status were defined using the most clinically significant variant observed in BRCA1/2 and an HRR 13-gene set, respectively. GIS distributions were compared using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests and decomposed using mixture models. Results: Overall, 31.9% (4,628/14,513) of patients were HRD+ with 9.3% (N=1,344) having BRCAm PVs. An additional 3.7% (N=538) had a BRCA VUS [N=83 uncharacterized large rearrangement (LR), N=455 non-LR]. The distributions of GIS in both non-LR and LR VUS were significantly different from the distributions in BRCAm PVs and BRCA wildtype tumors (ps &lt; 0.001), likely representing a spectrum of pathogenic and benign variants. Mixture models estimated that 28.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 21.9, 35.8] of non-LR VUS and 55.8% (95% CI 40.0, 70.4) of LR VUS exhibited GIS similar to BRCAm PVs. Of the 15 non-LR VUS observed more than once, two were observed only in tumors with low GIS and are therefore presumed benign. BRCA SI variants (N=6) were observed in 16 patients and had a distribution of GIS significantly different from BRCA wildtype tumors (p &lt; 0.001), but not significantly different from BRCAm tumors (p = 0.1). Two SI variants had high GIS in multiple patients and are therefore presumed pathogenic. One SI variant had low GIS in two patients and is therefore presumed benign. Conclusions: The BRCA VUS GIS distribution spanned across the BRCAm PV and BRCA wildtype GIS distributions, which suggests that BRCA VUS represent a mix of benign variants and PVs. In these patients, GIS is able to correctly classify HRD status. Additional data are needed to further characterize these uncertain BRCA variants and the appropriate therapeutic and preventive strategies required for these patients.

Association of homologous recombination repair mutation defined with a 15-gene panel with the prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer: A Chinese multicenter retrospective study.

e17556 Background: There was no consensus regarding the optimal homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene panel to predict prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Methods: The genetic testing results in a 15-gene panel from 308 EOC patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2022 from six centres were collected. The association of clinicopathologic characteristics, the use of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and progression-free survival (PFS) with 15-gene panel mutation status was assessed. Results: 43.2% (133/308) of patients were determined to carry 144 deleterious HRR mutations (HRRm), among which 68.1% (98/144) were germline mutations and 32.8% (101/308) were BRCA1/2 gene lethal mutations. Patients who received PARP inhibitors (PARPis) were 29.1% (37/127) and 50.5% (46/91) in the HRR wild-type (HRRwt) group and HRRm group at IIIC-IV stages, respectively. A prognostic difference was observed only between the BRCA mutation group and the HRRwt group, not between the non-BRCA HRRm group and the HRRwt group. In univariate analysis, significant predictors of relapse included nonresidual status (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.98; P = 0.0287), 15-gene panel mutation (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.64; P = 0.0001), platinum sensitivity (HR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02-0.22; P &lt; 0.001) and maintenance therapy (PARPi) (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31-0.74; P = 0.0028) (Figure 5). In multivariate Cox analysis, nonresidual (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40-0.99; P = 0.046), 15-gene panel mutation (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.28-0.88; P = 0.016) and platinum sensitivity (HR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.01-0.05; P &lt; 0.001) remained independent prognostic factors. Conclusions: This study provides evidence that HRRm with a 15-gene panel can predict the prognosis of EOC, among which only BRCA1/2 mutations contribute to prognosis prediction. [Table: see text]

Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-cohort, randomized study of saruparib (AZD5305) in combination with new hormonal agents in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer with and without homologous recombination repair mutation (EvoPAR-Prostate01).

Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-cohort, randomized study of saruparib (AZD5305) in combination with new hormonal agents in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer with and without homologous recombination repair mutation (EvoPAR-Prostate01).

Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) of talazoparib plus enzalutamide (TALA+ENZA) versus olaparib plus abiraterone and prednisone/prednisolone (OLAP+AAP) for first-line (1L) therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm)/BRCAm.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) of talazoparib plus enzalutamide (TALA+ENZA) versus olaparib plus abiraterone and prednisone/prednisolone (OLAP+AAP) for first-line (1L) therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm)/BRCAm.

A systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison of PARP inhibitors in combination with next-generation hormonal agents in BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

e17029 Background: In the USA, several poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are approved in combination with next-generation hormonal agents (NHAs) for metastatic castration resistant-prostate cancer (mCRPC), including olaparib plus abiraterone acetate with prednisone/prednisolone (OLA+AA/P) and niraparib plus AA/P (NIRA+AA/P) for mCRPC with BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations (BRCAm), and talazoparib plus enzalutamide (TALA+ENZ) for mCRPC with homologous recombination repair mutations, including BRCAm. All approvals were based on placebo (PBO)-controlled Phase III trials. To support clinical decision-making, we performed a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison (ITC) to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of regimens. Methods: Published clinical trials were identified by searching Embase, MEDLINE, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews database, conferences and registries up to September 2023. Studies reporting radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and/or safety outcomes for mCRPC were included. The feasibility of performing anchored or unanchored ITCs using BRCAm subgroup data was assessed. Where feasible, Bayesian ITCs were performed using BRCAm subgroup hazard ratios (HRs) for investigator-assessed rPFS, blinded independent central review (BICR) rPFS, and OS. Safety ITCs were performed using overall study data and reported as risk differences (RD) for adverse events (AEs). Results: Thirty-nine studies were identified, of which three reported BRCAm-specific data, including PBO-controlled studies for OLA+AA/P, NIRA+AA/P, and TALA+ENZ. An anchored ITC was feasible for OLA+AA/P and NIRA+AA/P using PBO+AA/P as a common comparator. ITC results showed a significant improvement in rPFS and OS, and a numerical reduction in AE risk for OLA+AA/P vs NIRA+AA/P (Table). TALA+ENZ was excluded from the ITC as it was not possible to form a network with OLA+AA/P or NIRA+AA/P due to differences in NHA use (ENZ vs AA/P) in PBO-control arms, whilst data limitations prevented unanchored ITCs. Conclusions: In BRCAm mCRPC, ITC results suggest that OLA+AA/P has improved efficacy and a favorable safety profile vs NIRA+AA/P. Current evidence does not allow for a robust comparison of OLA+AA/P or NIRA+AA/P with TALA+ENZ in BRCAm mCRPC. [Table: see text]

Clinical homologous recombination repair gene reversion analysis identifies mechanisms of resistance to PARP inhibitors and platinum‐chemotherapy

AbstractIdentifying mechanisms underlying cancer resistance to therapy is vital for advancing treatment strategies. Pathogenic mutations of homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes are known biomarkers for platinum (Pt)‐based chemotherapy and poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) effectiveness. Yet, the dynamics of HRR reversion mutations, which may herald therapy resistance, are not fully elucidated. Addressing this gap, our study analyzed secondary HRR gene mutations in a comprehensive pan‐cancer data set of approximately 13,000 patients who underwent targeted next‐generation sequencing. We identified a subset of patients harboring secondary mutations, which were further categorized into three tiers based on their nature, and occur in the presence of a primary pathogenic mutation, notably in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51D genes. Here we show that secondary BRCA2 mutations, indicative of adaptive resistance, emerge post‐Pt/Olaparib treatment. This challenges the prevailing notion that pathogenic HRR mutations uniformly predict therapeutic sensitivity, highlighting a nuanced genetic interplay that impacts treatment success. This investigation enriches our understanding of cancer's adaptive mechanisms against therapy, suggesting a pivotal shift towards more personalized, dynamic treatment strategies. It underscores the imperative of adapting to cancer's genetic evolution, aiming for a step ahead in the ongoing battle against this disease.

Establishing the homologous recombination score threshold in metastatic prostate cancer patients to predict the efficacy of PARP inhibitors

BackgroundThe homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score serves as a promising biomarker to identify patients who are eligible for treatment with PARP inhibitors (PARPi). Previous studies have suggested a 3-biomarker Genomic Instability Score (GIS) threshold of ≥ 42 as a valid biomarker to predict response to PARPi in patients with ovarian cancer and breast cancer. However, the GIS threshold for prostate cancer (PCa) is still lacking. Here, we conducted an exploratory analysis to investigate an appropriate HRD score threshold and to evaluate its ability to predict response to PARPi in PCa patients. MethodsA total of 181 patients with metastatic castration-resistant PCa were included in this study. Tumor tissue specimens were collected for targeted next-generation sequencing for homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes and copy number variation (CNV) analysis. The HRD score was calculated based on over 50,000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) distributed across the human genome, incorporating three SNP-based assays: loss of heterozygosity, telomeric allelic imbalance, and large-scale state transition. The HRD score threshold was set at the last 5th percentile of the HRD scores in our cohort of known HRR-deficient tumors. The relationship between the HRD score and the efficacy in 16 patients of our cohort who received PARPi treatment were retrospectively analyzed. ResultsGenomic testing was succeeded in 162 patients. In our cohort, 61 patients (37.7%) had HRR mutations (HRRm). BRCA mutations occurred in 15 patients (9.3%). The median HRD score was 4 (ranged from 0 to 57) in the total cohort, which is much lower than that in breast and ovarian cancers. Patients who harbored HRRm and BRCA or TP53 mutations had higher HRD scores. CNV occured more frequently in patients with HRRm. The last 5th percentile of HRD scores was 43 in the HRR-mutant cohort and consequently HRD high was defined as HRD scores ≥43. In the 16 patients who received PARPi in our cohort, 4 patients with a high HRD score achieved an objective response rate (ORR) of 100% while 12 patients with a low HRD score achieved an ORR of 8.3%. Progression-free survival (PFS) in HRD high patients was longer compared to HRD low patients, regardless of HRRm. ConclusionsA HRD score threshold of 43 was established and preliminarily validated to predict the efficacy of PARPi in this study. Future studies are needed to further verify this threshold.

Comparative effectiveness of first-line systemic treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

No head-to-head trials had been performed to estimate the relative effectiveness of poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) and androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSi) in the first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We aimed to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of various systemic treatment agents for patients with mCRPC. A comprehensive literature search was conducted for abstracts and full-text articles from the database's inception through April 27, 2023. The study concentrated on assessing radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) for both overall and homologous recombination repair mutation (HRRm) population, with overall survival (OS) as the secondary measure. Under the Bayesian framework, the overall effect was pooled using the fixed-effects model in base case analysis. Scenario analysis using restricted mean survival time (RMST) methods was performed to test the robustness of the results. Nine studies with 6,830 patients and 8 unique treatment options were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated that talazoparib in combination with enzalutamide (TALA + ENZA; overall population, hazard ratio [HR], 0.20; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.16-0.26; RMST, 3.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.46-4.60; HRRm population, HR, 0.15; 95% CrI: 0.09-0.23; RMST, 4.14; 95% CI 2.84-5.39) was superior to other treatments in the first-line setting in terms of rPFS. The results of Bayesian framework and RMST models showed consistent efficacy ranks. When extrapolated to overall survival benefit, within the Bayesian framework, olaparib plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (OLAP + AAP) achieved the highest OS benefit for the overall population, which was not statistically significant when compared to TALA + ENZA. However, TALA + ENZA achieved the highest OS benefit at 3years by applying RMST. We suggest that talazoparib in combination with enzalutamide is probably a preferred treatment agent for the overall population and HRRm patients with mCRPC. Given the limitations of network framework and the modeling assumptions undertaken to finalize the analyses, results should be cautiously interpreted.

Genetic Testing in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

This cross-sectional study assesses homologous recombination repair mutation genetic testing and associated characteristics among men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

Management of advanced prostate cancer in the Asia-Pacific region: Summary of the Asia-Pacific Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2023.

The aim of the third Asia-Pacific Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APAC APCCC 2023) was to discuss the application in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region of consensus statements from the 4th Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022). The one-day meeting in July 2023 brought together 27 experts from 14 APAC countries. The meeting covered five topics: (1) Intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer; (2) Management of newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer; (3) Management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; (4) Homologous recombination repair mutation testing; (5) Management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Pre- and post-symposium polling gathered APAC-specific responses to APCCC consensus questions and insights on current practices and challenges in the APAC region. APAC APCCC highlights APAC-specific considerations in an evolving landscape of diagnostic technologies and treatment innovations for advanced prostate cancer. While new technologies are available in the region, cost and reimbursement continue to influence practice significantly. Individual patient considerations, including the impact of chemophobia on Asian patients, also influence decision-making. The use of next-generation imaging, genetic testing, and new treatment combinations is increasing the complexity and duration of prostate cancer management. Familiarity with new diagnostic and treatment options is growing in the APAC region. Insights highlight the continued importance of a multidisciplinary approach that includes nuclear medicine, genetic counseling, and quality-of-life expertise. The APAC APCCC meeting provides an important opportunity to share practice and identify APAC-specific issues and considerations in areas of low evidence where clinical experience is growing.

Tolerability of Olaparib Combined with Abiraterone in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Further Results from the Phase 3 PROpel Trial

BackgroundThe PROpel study (NCT03732820) demonstrated a statistically significant progression-free survival benefit with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone in the first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) setting, irrespective of homologous recombination repair mutation status. ObjectiveWe report additional safety analyses from PROpel to increase clinical understanding of the adverse-event (AE) profiles of olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone. Design, setting, and participantsA randomised (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 126 centres in 17 countries (October 2018–January 2020). Patients had mCRPC and no prior systemic mCRPC treatment. InterventionOlaparib (300 mg bid) or placebo with abiraterone (1000 mg od) plus prednisone/prednisolone (5 mg bid). Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe data cut-off date was July 30, 2021. Safety was assessed by AE reporting (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03) and analysed descriptively. Results and limitationsThe most common AEs (all grades) for olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone were anaemia (46.0% vs 16.4%), nausea (28.1% vs 12.6%), and fatigue (27.9% vs 18.9%). Grade ≥3 anaemia occurred in 15.1% versus 3.3% of patients in the olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone arm. The incidences of the most common AEs for olaparib plus abiraterone peaked early, within 2 mo, and were managed typically by dose modifications or standard medical practice. Overall, 13.8% versus 7.8% of patients discontinued treatment with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone because of an AE; 3.8% versus 0.8% of patients discontinued because of anaemia. More venous thromboembolism events were observed in the olaparib plus abiraterone arm (any grade, 7.3%; grade ≥3, 6.8%) than in the placebo plus abiraterone arm (any grade, 3.3%; grade ≥3, 2.0%), most commonly pulmonary embolism (6.5% vs 1.8% for olaparib plus abiraterone vs placebo plus abiraterone). ConclusionsOlaparib plus abiraterone has a manageable and predictable safety profile. Patient summaryThe PROpel trial showed that in patients who had not received any previous treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, olaparib combined with abiraterone was more effective in delaying progression of the disease than abiraterone alone. Most side effects caused by combining olaparib with abiraterone could be managed with supportive care methods, by pausing olaparib administration for a short period of time and/or by reducing the dose of olaparib.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer Harboring Homologous Recombination Repair Mutations

BackgroundThere is currently limited literature assessing the real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations. MethodsMedical charts were abstracted for mCRPC patients with ≥ 1 of 12 HRR somatic gene alterations treated at US oncology centers participating in the American Association for Cancer Research Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange. Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes were assessed from the initiation of first-line or later (1L+) mCRPC therapy received on or after July 1, 2014. ResultsAmong 138 patients included in the study, the most common somatic HRR mutations were CDK12 (47.8%), BRCA2 (22.5%), and ATM (21.0%). Novel hormonal therapy and taxane chemotherapy were most commonly used in 1L; taxane use increased in later lines. Median overall survival (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 36.3 (30.7-47.8) months from initiation of 1L therapy and decreased for subsequent lines. Similarly, there was a trend of decreasing progression-free survival and prostate-specific antigen response from 1L to 4L+ therapy. ConclusionsTreatment patterns identified in this study were similar to those among patients with mCRPC regardless of tumor HRR mutation status in the literature.