Abstract
Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase 1 (PARP-1) and PARP-2 are DNA damage sensors that are most active during S-phase of the cell cycle and that have wider-reaching roles in DNA repair than originally described. BRCA1 and BRCA2 (Breast Cancer) proteins are involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR), which requires a homologous chromosome or sister chromatid as a template to faithfully repair DNA double-strand breaks. The small-molecule NAD+ mimetics, olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, veliparib, and talazoparib, inhibit the catalytic activity of PARP-1 and PARP-2 and are currently being studied in later-stage clinical trials. PARP inhibitor clinical trials have predominantly focused on patients with breast and ovarian cancer with deleterious germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (gBRCA1/2+) but are now expanding to include cancers with known, suspected, or more-likely-than-not defects in homologous recombination repair. In ovarian cancer, this group also includes women whose cancers are responsive to platinum therapy. Olaparib was FDA-approved in January 2018 for the treatment of gBRCA1/2+ metastatic breast cancers. gBRCA1+ predisposes women to develop triple-negative breast cancers, while women with gBRCA2+ tend to develop hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative breast cancers. Although PARP inhibitor monotherapy strategies seem most effective in cancers with homologous recombination repair defects, combination strategies may allow expansion into a wider range of cancers. By interfering with DNA repair, PARP inhibitors essentially sensitize cells to DNA-damaging chemotherapies and radiation therapy. Certainly, one could also consider expanding the utility of PARP inhibitors beyond gBRCA1/2+ cancers by causing DNA damage with cytotoxic agents in the presence of a DNA repair inhibitor. Unfortunately, in numerous phase I clinical trials utilizing a combination of cytotoxic chemotherapy at standard doses with dose-escalation of PARP inhibitors, there has generally been failure to reach monotherapy dosages of PARP inhibitors due to myelosuppressive toxicities. Strategies utilizing angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors are generally not hindered by additive toxicities, though the utility of combining PARP inhibitors with treatments that have not been particularly effective in breast cancers somewhat tempers enthusiasm. Finally, there are combination strategies that may serve to mitigate resistance to PARP inhibitors, namely, upregulation of the intracellular PhosphoInositide-3-kinase, AK thymoma (protein kinase B), mechanistic target of rapamycin (PI3K–AKT–mTOR) pathway, or perhaps are more simply meant to interfere with a cell growth pathway heavily implicated in breast cancers while administering relatively well-tolerated PARP inhibitor therapy.
Keywords: BRCA1, BRCA2, breast cancer, niraparib, olaparib, PARP inhibitor, rucaparib, talazoparib, veliparib
Introduction
In the care of oncology patients, poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are best known as a semitargeted treatment for BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated ovarian and breast cancers, but a broader understanding of PARP biology has spurred interest in expanding their clinical utility (see Figure 1). Using NAD+ as a substrate, PARP enzymes catalyze the addition of linear and branching chains of ADP-ribose to aspartic acid, glutamic acid, and/or lysine amino acids on acceptor proteins in a process termed poly-ADP-ribose-ylation (‘PARylation’).1 Seventeen PARP enzymes have been discovered, with their functionalities primarily determined by their target-binding domains, cellular compartment localization signals, and tertiary structures.1,2 PARP-1 and PARP-2 localize to the nucleus and undergo conformational changes to become catalytically activated upon binding to exposed DNA. They effectively act as sensors of DNA damage – including single-strand and double-strand DNA breaks, DNA supercoils, DNA crosslinks, and stalled replication forks – and facilitate DNA repair processes at the site of damage.3 PARP-1 self-PARylates its automodification domain to release itself from DNA, a process that is inhibited in the presence of PARP inhibitors (PARPi) and has been termed ‘PARP-trapping.’2,4,5
Figure 1. PARP’s diverse roles in DNA repair.
PARP-1 and PARP-2 recognize DNA damage, including single-strand and double-strand DNA breaks, DNA crosslinks, supercoils, and stalled replication forks. Upon binding to DNA, PARP-1 and PARP-2 become catalytically active, utilizing nicotinamide as a substrate to add ADP-ribose chains to target proteins in a process termed ‘PARylation.’ PARylation of histones H2B and H1 relaxes the chromatin to allow access to DNA for repair, the G2/M checkpoint is activated to allow time to repair DNA, DNA repair proteins are recruited to the site of damage, and transcription is temporarily halted via PARylation of RNA Pol I and RNA Pol II. PARP-1 also has roles to play in cell death if DNA cannot be repaired, both as an active participant in apoptosis and indirectly by draining the cell of its nicotinamide resources, which is necessary for normal cell respiration.
ATM, Ataxia telangiectasia mutated serine/threonine kinase; dsDNA, double-stranded DNA; NAD+, nicotinamide; PARP-1, poly-ADP-ribosyl polymerase 1; PARylation, poly(ADP-ribose)ylation; ssDNA, single-stranded DNA.
PARP-1 and PARP-2 are the primary targets of PARPi in clinical development due to their roles in the repair of DNA, but the understanding of PARP-1’s role in DNA repair has shifted over time. PARP-1 was originally described as part of the base excision repair (BER) pathway based on genetic studies, but PARP-1 and PARylation are now known to have much wider-reaching roles in all major DNA repair pathways. PARP-1 has been implicated in chromatin relaxation by histone modification, recruitment of repair proteins to the site of DNA damage, inhibition of transcription through PARylation of Ribonucleic acid (RNA) polymerases I and II, cell cycle arrest, and apoptosis.2,6–8 During apoptosis, caspase-mediated cleavage of PARP-1 releases the N-terminal nuclear localization signal and DNA-binding domains from the C-terminal catalytic and auto-PARylation domains, uncoupling DNA repair and DNA binding (Figure 2).2,3,9 The N-terminal fragment of ‘cleaved PARP’ binds DNA in a natural form of PARP-trapping to prevent DNA repair, replication, and transcription in a dying cell.9
Figure 2. PARP-1 protein domains.
PARP-1 and PARP-2′s protein domains include zing finger DNA-binding domains and a nuclear localization signal on the N-terminus. Their catalytic domain with NAD+ binding site is located on the C-terminus. Unique to PARP-1 is a BRCT domain upon which PARP-1 auto-PARylates itself, undergoing a conformational change that frees the protein from its DNA target, and a caspase cleavage site that separates the DNA-binding domains from PARP-1′s DNA repair functions.2,3
BRCT, BRCA1 C-terminus domain; NAD+, Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide; NLS, nuclear localization signal; PARP-1, poly-ADP-ribosyl polymerase 1; PARylation, poly(ADP-ribose)ylation; Zn, zinc finger DNA-binding domains.
PARPi are molecular mimics of nicotinamide that compete with NAD+ at the catalytic site of PARP enzymes and thus prevent PARylation. Their specificity for one or more of the PARP enzymes varies, as does their potency.10–12 By interfering with its ability to PARylate itself but not its ability to bind DNA, PARP-1 inhibitors also result in PARP-trapping.4,5 In addition to interfering with DNA repair, transcription, and replication, PARP-trapping can itself cause lethal DNA double-strand breaks during S-phase by collapse of stalled replication forks.13 The most well-represented PARPi in clinical trials include olaparib, veliparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib.14–18 Although iniparib was found to inhibit PARP-1 function in vitro and was tested in clinical trials, it was eventually found to bind to PARP-1’s zinc-finger domain rather than the catalytic domain and is no longer considered to be a PARP inhibitor for the purposes of clinical trial research.19,20
Early clinical trials were designed to use PARPi in patients with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations with breast and ovarian cancers deficient in DNA repair by HRR due to acquired loss of BRCA1/2 heterozygosity.21–23 With an understanding of PARP as a BER enzyme, the PARPi were thought to contribute to a type of ‘synthetic lethality’ by which inhibition of two DNA repair pathways contributes to preferential cell kill in HRR-deficient cancerous cells over normal cells. As knowledge of PARP-1’s roles and the mechanisms by which PARPi exert their efficacy has expanded, an updated basic science understanding also considers PARPi as 1) interfering with the identification of DNA damage and multiple types of repair, 2) predominantly exerting their effects during S-phase when dependence on PARP-1 and PARP-2 is highest, DNA is exposed for replication, and HRR is preferred over nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) for repair of DNA double-strand breaks, and3 likely to be strongly dose-dependent if PARP-trapping is a clinically relevant in vivo mechanism.1,4–6,8 These concepts drive some of the PARPi combination trials, as is most evident in the plethora of combination clinical trials for ovarian cancer.24
Current PARPi clinical trials registered with the National Institutes of Health’s United States National Library of Medicine in ClinicalTrials.gov which include patients with breast cancer are listed in Table 1, which is headed by monotherapy trials followed by combination trials, organized by type of combination (e.g. PARPi + chemotherapy) and clinical trial phase from I to III within each category, and includes trial characteristics, patient population (with gBRCA1/2 bolded if a requirement for a particular trial), trial interventions with the PARPi bolded for easy reference, and outcome measures. Search terms were ‘breast cancer’ and ‘PARP.’ Data for individual trials were garnered using the Google and Google Scholar search engines to identify published manuscripts and oncology conference abstracts.
Table 1.
Breast cancer clinical trials with PARP inhibitors registered with clinicaltrials.gov as on April 2018.
NCT number (Trial name) | Trial phase, design | Eligible population* | Interventions | Primary outcomes | Secondary outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||
PARP inhibitor monotherapy | |||||
| |||||
NCT0332993725 | I | Women gBRCA1/2+ HER2− breast carcinoma >1 cm in neoadjuvant setting |
|
MRI RadR | pCR, TRR, S/T |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Neoadj | ||||
| |||||
NCT0074950226 | I | All genders Advanced malignancies including HER2− breast cancer after ≤1 cytotoxic regimen |
|
DLT, MTD, PD | Not given |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0051637327 | I | All genders Advanced solid tumors, incurable. Expansion cohort with gBRCA1/2+ enriched population, primarily ovarian |
|
DLT, MTD, RP2D | ORR |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0077758228 | I | All genders Stage I: Advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapies Stage II: Solid tumors, particularly gBRCA1/2+ breast or ovarian cancer |
|
PK, RP2D | PD, S/T |
R | |||||
X | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0221066329,30 | I | All genders, 20 yo and up gBRCA1/2+ advanced breast cancer after anthracyclines and/or taxane (in Japanese patients) |
|
DLT | PK, AEs, SD, PR, CR |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0089273631,32 | I | All genders, 19 yo and up gBRCA1/2+ cancers, ovarian cancer, and HER2− basal-like breast cancer with progression after standard therapies |
|
MTD, DLT, RP2D | PK, CR, PR, SD, AEs, PD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0198954633 | I/II | All genders gBRCA1/2+ metastatic breast cancer after ≥1 cytotoxic treatment |
|
PD | CR, PR |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
NCT0128698734,35 | I/II | All genders Ph I: Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic solid tumor Ph II: gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer after ≤4 cytotoxic regimens |
|
MTD | AEs, PK, RP2D, ORR |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT00494234 (ICEBERG 1)36,37 | II | Women gBRCA1/2+ advanced breast cancer after failure of ≥1 cytotoxic |
|
ORR | CBR, PFS, DOR, ECOG |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0067978338,39 | II | All genders Advanced, recurrent gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer or TNBC. Also included ovarian cancer patients |
|
ORR | DCR, DOR, PFS |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0334496540 | II | All genders gBRCA1/2 wild-type, metastatic breast cancer with genetic HRD or deleterious somatic BRCA1/2 mutation |
|
ORR | CBR, PFS, SD, AEs |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
NCT02681562 (OLTRE)41 | II | Women Locally advanced TNBC (arm A) or gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer (arm B) |
|
Correlate gene expression and protein with clinical response | ORR, S/T, QoL |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Neoadj | |||||
| |||||
NCT02299999 (SAFIR02_Breast)42 | II | All genders Metastatic HER2− breast cancer after ≤2 cytotoxic regimens |
|
PFS | PFS, OS, ORR, PR, CR, SD, S/T |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
NCT0066478143 | II | All genders gBRCA1/2+ inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer or ovarian cancer |
|
ORR, S/T | TTP, OS, PK |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT02505048 (RUBY)44 | II | Women Metastatic gBRCA1/2 wild-type, HER2− breast cancer after ≥1 chemo with ‘BRCAness’ by Clovis genomic signature or BRCA1/2 somatic mutation |
|
CBR | CR, PR, SD, PFS, OS, AEs |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
NCT02034916 (ABRAZO)45,46 | II | All genders gBRCA1/2+ locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with a documented PR or CR to platinum for metastatic disease or ≥2 nonplatinum regimens in the metastatic setting |
|
ORR | CBR, DOR, PFS, OS, AEs, S/T, PK, QoL |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0228668747 | II | All genders Advanced or metastatic solid tumors with HRD due to somatic mutations |
|
CBR, CR, PR, SD | Not given |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT0240134748 | II | All genders Advanced BRCA1/2 wild-type TNBC with HRD by Myriad’s HRD assay or HER2− cancer with HR gene deficiency excluding BRCA1/2+ after ≥1 cytotoxics |
|
ORR | CBR, PFS, AEs |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT01905592 (BRAVO)49 | III | All genders gBRCA1/2+, HER2− metastatic or incurable locally advanced breast cancer after ≤2 cytotoxic regimens |
|
PFS | OS, QoL |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT02000622 (OlympiAD)50–52 | III | All genders gBRCA1/2+ metastatic breast cancer after anthracycline + taxane in adjuvant or metastatic setting or after endocrine therapy for ER/PR+ |
|
PFS | PFS2, OS, ORR, CR, PR, SD, QoL, TFST, TSST |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT01945775 (EMBRACA)53 | III | All genders gBRCA1/2+ inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with ≤3 cytotoxic regimens |
|
PFS | ORR, OS, AEs, PK, DOR, QoL |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + chemotherapy | |||||
| |||||
NCT0078257454 | I | All genders Metastatic, incurable ovarian, pancreatic, or breast cancer |
|
S/T | PK, ORR |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0144541855 | I | All genders gBRCA1/2+ unresectable or metastatic TNBC or ovarian cancer |
|
S/T | ORR, PD |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0123706756 | I | All genders Recurrent/refractory inoperable or metastatic breast cancer, particularly if gBRCA1/2+, and gynecological cancers |
|
PD, S/T | Not given |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT02418624 (REVIVAL)57 | I | All genders gBRCA1/2+ HER2− advanced breast cancer treated with ≤1 prior cytotoxic therapy in metastatic setting |
|
MTD olaparib in combination | PK, PD, ORR |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0051672458 | I | All genders Metastatic solid tumors |
|
MTD of olaparib in combination | DLT |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0081922159 | I | All genders Advanced incurable solid tumors, ≤3 cytotoxic therapies |
|
RP2D, MTD | PK, S/T, AEs, PD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0100919060 | I | All genders Advanced solid tumors, including breast |
|
DLT, MTD of rucaparib | PK, PD, QTc |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0125187461 | I | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC, gBRCA1/2+, or FANC-associated HER2− breast cancers; ≤3 cytotoxic regimens in metastatic setting |
|
AEs, S/T, RP2D | CR, PR, SD, CBR, PD, exploratory biology |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0203355162 | I | All genders Metastatic malignancy; must be gBRCA1/2+ for monotherapy arm |
|
AEs | ORR, OS, TTP, PFS, EKG, PK |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0053511963 | I | All genders A. Advanced solid malignancy B: gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer |
|
RP2D | DLT, PR, CR, SD, TTP, AEs, PD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0128115064 | I | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic HER2− breast cancer |
|
MTD | PD, DLT, AEs, CR, PR, SD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0136614465 | I | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors in patients with liver or kidney disease |
|
PK, PD, MTD in pts with liver or renal dysfunction | AEs, DLT, SD, PR, CR, ORR, TTP |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT0110425966 | I | All genders Recurrent or metastatic TNBC or gBRCA1/2+ associated |
|
MTD veliparib | S/T, PK, PD, PFS, CR, PR, ORR, DOR, ECOG, TTP |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0135190967 | I | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic HER2− breast cancer after ≥1 hormonal or chemo treatment unless gBRCA1/2+ |
|
RP2D | PFS, CBR, CR, PR, OS, biomarkers |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0114543068 | I | All genders Metastatic TNBC after ≤2 cytotoxic regimens |
|
RP2D | AEs, OS, PFS |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0106381669 | I | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors, ≤2 cytotoxic regimens |
|
MTD veliparib, RP2D | PK, S/T, PR, CR, SD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0057665470 | I | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC; gBRCA1/2+ required for dose expansion phase |
|
OBD, MTD, RP2D, DLT | AEs, PR, SD, CR, PD PK |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT0052661771 | I | All genders Unresectable or metastatic nonheme malignancies Expansion cohort must be gBRCA1/2+ |
|
MTD, S/T, PK | Not given |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT0161813672 | I/II | All genders Ph I: Metastatic breast cancer Ph II: TNBC after one cytotoxic regimen (but excluded if given carboplatin or paclitaxel) |
|
Ph I: MTD of E7449 | Ph II: ORR |
NR (I) | |||||
SG (I) | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0070770773 | I/II | Women Metastatic TNBC, ≤1 cytotoxic regimen in the metastatic setting |
|
RP2D, AEs, S/T | Not given |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT01074970 (BRE09-146)74 | II | All genders gBRCA1/2+ and TNBC who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (anthracyclines 57% and taxanes 91%) and surgery with curative intent |
|
2 year DFS | 1 year DFS, S/T, OS, PK |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Adj | |||||
| |||||
NCT0114908375 | II | Women gBRCA1/2+, inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer after progression on at least one cytotoxic regimen excluding platinums |
|
ORR | PFS, S/T, CBR at 24 weeks, OS |
NR | |||||
SG/X | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT01506609 (BROCADE)76 | II | All genders gBRCA1/2+ inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer after ≤2 cytotoxic regimens in the metastatic setting; patients who received taxane in the metastatic setting were excluded |
|
PFS | OS, CBR, ORR, CR, PR, SD, CIPN |
R | |||||
P | |||||
DM | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT01042379 (I-SPY 2)77 | II | All genders Stage II–III or regional IV (supraclavicular lymph nodes only) with operable breast cancer and tumors ≥2.5 cm |
|
Probability of pCR over standard neoadjuvant | pCR, RCB, RFS, OS, AEs, MRI volume |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Neoadj | |||||
| |||||
NCT0259590578 | II | All genders Locally recurrent or metastatic TNBC or gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer treated with ≤1 cytotoxic regimen |
|
PFS | OS, CBR, CR, PR, SD |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT0130603279 | II | All genders Metastatic TNBC |
|
ORR, CR, PR, PFS | AEs, PD, biomarkers |
R | |||||
X | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0100978880 | II | All genders Metastatic BC after ≥1 cytotoxic regimen with expansion cohort of gBRCA1/2+ metastatic breast cancer |
|
ORR, S/T | PFS, CBR |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT03150576 (PARTNER)81 | II/III | All genders, 16–70 yo TNBC or gBRCA1/2+ HER2− tumors |
|
AE, pCR, TCR | RFS, BCSS, DDFS, LRFS, OS, RCB, RadR, QoL |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Neoadj | ||||
| |||||
NCT02032277 (BrighTNess)82 | III | Women Operable stage II–III TNBC (T1N1-2 or T2-4N0-2), gBRCA1/2+ or gBRCA1/2 wild-type |
|
pCR | EFS, CBR OS, S/T, BCS, QoL, ECOG, RCB |
R | |||||
P | |||||
DM | |||||
Neoadj | |||||
| |||||
NCT02163694 (BROCADE 3)83 | III | All genders gBRCA1/2+ HER2− inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with ≤2 cytotoxic regimens |
|
PFS | DOR, PFS2, ORR, OS, CBR, ECOG, QoL |
R | |||||
P | |||||
DM | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + angiogenesis inhibitors | |||||
| |||||
NCT0307546284 | I | Women Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC after ≤1 cytotoxic regimen |
|
AEs | ORR, DOR, TTP, OS, PK |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT0111664885 | I/II | Women Ph I only: recurrent ovarian or metastatic TNBC |
|
DLT, MTD, PFS | Ph I: S/T |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0248440486 | I/II | All genders Ph I: metastatic solid tumors Ph II: gBRCA1/2+ recurrent TNBC after ≤3 cytotoxic regimens |
|
Ph I: RP2D Ph II: ORR |
Not given |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
NCT0249861387 | II | All genders Unresectable or metastatic TNBC after cytotoxic chemotherapy |
|
ORR | AEs, PFS, biomarkers |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + protein chaperone inhibitors | |||||
| |||||
NCT0289820788 | I | All genders Metastatic TNBC after ≤4 cytotoxic regimens |
|
MTD | PD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + immune checkpoint inhibitors | |||||
| |||||
NCT02657889 (KEYNOTE-162)89 | I/II | All genders Advanced or metastatic TNBC Ph I: ≤4 cytotoxic therapies in metastatic setting Ph II: ≤2 cytotoxic therapies in metastatic setting |
|
DLT, ORR | S/T, DOR, ORR, DCR, PFS, OS, PK, biomarkers |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
NCT02734004 (MEDIOLA)90,91 | I/II | All genders Ph II gBRCA1/2+ HER2− metastatic breast cancer patients who have received anthracycline/taxane therapy |
|
CBR, CR, PR, SD, S/T | Biomarkers, TDT, DOR, PFS, OS, ADA, PK, PD |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT03330405 (JAVELIN PARP MEDLEY)92 | Ib/II | All genders Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic gBRCA1/2+ or ATM-deficient TNBC or HR+ breast cancer |
|
DLT, OR | PK, ADA, biomarkers, TTR, DOR, PFS, OS |
NR | |||||
S | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT02484404 | Olaparib + durvalumab + cediranib (see angiogenesis section above) | ||||
| |||||
NCT03167619 (DORA)93 | II | Women, 21 yo and up Inoperable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC after ≥4 cycles of platinum-based therapy with documented clinical benefit |
|
PFS | OS, S/T, ORR |
R | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Not yet recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT0284949694 | II | All genders Stage III–IV gBRCA1/2+ TNBC after ≤3 cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens |
|
PFS | ORR, DOR, biomarkers |
R | |||||
X | |||||
O | |||||
Adv | |||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + intracellular signaling inhibitors | |||||
| |||||
NCT0162334995,96 | I | All genders Metastatic TNBC after failure of ≥1 cytotoxic |
|
MTD, RP2D | S/T, PK, ORR, exploratory biology |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
NCT0316262797 | I | All genders Metastatic solid tumors |
|
MTD | PK, ORR, PD |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met | ||||
| |||||
NCT0220837598,99 | I/II | Women Metastatic TNBC, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer |
|
MTD, RP2D | ORR, biomarkers |
NR | |||||
P | |||||
O | |||||
Met | |||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + radiation therapy | |||||
| |||||
NCT03109080 (RadioPARP)100 | I | Women Inoperable advanced disease, residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, or metastatic TNBC |
|
MTD of olaparib | AEs, ORR, CR, PR, LRFS, DDFS, OS, BCSS, biomarkers |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Met, Adj | ||||
| |||||
NCT02227082101 | I | Women Inoperable local recurrence and/or metastatic breast cancer |
|
DLT | S/T |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Recruiting | Adv | ||||
| |||||
NCT01477489102 | I | All genders, 19 yo and up Locoregional recurrence after mastectomy or inflammatory BC after mastectomy in adjuvant setting. |
|
MTD of veliparib | S/T |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Adj, Adv | |||||
| |||||
PARP inhibitors + HER2 inhibitors | |||||
| |||||
NCT03368729103 | I/II | Women Metastatic HER2+ breast cancer |
|
Ph I: DLT Ph II: ORR |
Ph I: PK Ph II: AEs, PFS |
NR | |||||
SG | |||||
O | |||||
Not yet recruiting | Met |
Table 1 is organized by category (e.g. monotherapy trials), followed by clinical trial phase, then alphabetized by PARP inhibitor. The PARP inhibitor utilized is bolded. If germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (or strong suspicion of such) is a requirement for enrollment, gBRCA1/2+ is bolded. Clinical trials with iniparib are not included, as iniparib is no longer considered as a PARP inhibitor. In clinical trials performed after this came to light, use of iniparib was not considered as prior use of a PARP inhibitor and therefore not a barrier to enrollment.
18 years old and older unless otherwise mentioned.
Therapy targeted to deleterious mutations discovered by comparative genomic hybridization and next generation sequencing, including olaparib, antiandrogen bicalutamide, VEGFR and EGFR inhibitor vandetanib, MEK inhibitor selumetinib, pan-HER inhibitor sapitinib, AKT inhibitor AZD5363, EGFR inhibitor AZD4547, and mTORC1/2 inhibitor vistusertib.
ADA, antidrug antibodies; Adj, adjuvant therapy = after definitive resection with curative intent; Adv, advanced breast cancer = inoperable, locally invasive or metastatic disease; AEs, adverse events as defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE); BCS, breast conservation surgery; BCSS, breast cancer-specific survival = time from enrollment to death from breast cancer; BICR, blinded-independent central review; bid, bis in die (twice a day); CBR, clinical benefit rate = CR + PR + SD; CIPN, chemotherapy-induced neuropathy; CR, complete response rate = proportion of patients with no measurable disease; CTCAE, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events = definitions for severity of organ toxicity for patients receiving antineoplastic agents per the National Cancer Institute; DCR, disease control rate = CR + PR + SD; DDFS, distant disease-free survival = time from study enrollment to distant relapse or date of death from all causes; DLT, dose-limiting toxicity = drug-related grade 3–5 adverse events using CTCAE; DM, double masking; DOR, duration of response = time from initial response to first documented tumor progression; gBRCA1/2+, germline-mutated BRCA1 or BRCA2; HER2, human epidermal growth factor; HGSOC, high-grade serous ovarian cancer; HRD, homologous recombination deficiency (as defined by a deleterious mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, PTEN, PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, NBN, BARD1, BRIP1, RAD50, RAD51C, RAD51D, MRE11, ATR, or FANC genes or by a high score on Myriad’s HRD assay); irRC, Immune-Related Response Criteria = rules defining tumor response, stabilization, or progression for immuno-oncology drugs, which can result in an inflammatory response that appears to be progression; LRFS, local recurrence-free survival = time from enrollment to first local recurrence or death from all causes; Met, metastatic disease; MTD, maximum tolerated dose = one dose level below the highest dose at which 1/3 of the patients at that dose level experience a dose-limiting toxicity as defined by NCI CTCAE; NCI, National Cancer Institute; Neoadj, neoadjuvant = pre-operative chemotherapy; NR, nonrandomized; O, open label; OBD, optimal biologic dose = dose of complete PARP inhibition; ORR, objective response rate = CR + PR; OS, overall survival = time from study enrollment until death from all causes; P, parallel assignment; pCR, pathological complete response = no tumor remaining in breast or lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy as determined by pathological evaluation; PD, pharmacodynamics = drug effect on physiology; PFS, progression-free survival = time from study enrollment to determination of tumor progression or death due to any cause; PFS2, progression-free survival 2 = time from first PFS to second PFS or death; PK, pharmacokinetics = study of the absorption, bodily distribution, metabolism, and excretion of drugs; po, per os (by mouth); PR, partial response rate = proportion of patients with favorable but incomplete response of a predefined amount for a predefined minimum time period; QoL, quality of life = impact of health status on physical, mental, emotional, social functioning; R, randomized; RadR, radiological response rate; RCB, residual cancer burden = pathological diagnosis of residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy at time of surgical resection; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors = rules defining tumor response, stabilization, or progression for antineoplastic agents; RFS, relapse-free survival; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose = highest oncology drug dose with acceptable toxicity, usually defined in reference to DLT and MTD established in phase I clinical trials; S, sequential assignment; SD, stable disease rate = proportion of patients without disease shrinkage or progression by RECIST criteria; SG, single group; S/T, safety and tolerability = number and grade of adverse events; TCR, therapy completion rate; TFST, time to first subsequent therapy = time from enrollment to the first subsequent therapy start date or death date; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TNBC, triple-negative breast cancer; TRR, tumor response rate = CR + PR; TSST, time to second subsequent therapy = time from enrollment to the second subsequent therapy start date or death date; TTD, time to treatment discontinuation = time from enrollment to treatment discontinuation for any reason; TTF, time to treatment failure = time from enrollment to documentation of progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient refusal to continue participation; TTP, time to progression = time from study enrollment to determination of tumor progression; TTR, time to tumor response; TTSC, time to second cancer; VEGFR, Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor; X, crossover study; yo, years old.
PARP inhibitor monotherapy
Olaparib, rucaparib, and niraparib are approved for use in ovarian cancer as monotherapy.104–110 Efficacy data for PARP inhibitor monotherapy in breast cancer patients primarily come from early stage clinical trials. However, two phase III studies evaluating single agent PARP inhibition (olaparib and talazoparib) in advanced breast cancer have recently been reported, resulting in the first regulatory approval of a PARP inhibitor for breast cancer. The results of monotherapy studies are reviewed later.
Olaparib
In 2009, Fong et al. published the results of a phase I clinical trial (NCT00516373) of olaparib in patients with advanced solid tumors followed by an expansion cohort enriched for gBRCA1/2+ patients with ovarian and breast cancers.27 One of the nine breast cancer patients – gBRCA2+ with extensive pulmonary metastases and progression on anthracycline-based chemotherapy – had a complete response (CR) that lasted over 60 months. An additional 3/9 breast cancer patients, one gBRCA2+ and two BRCA wild-type (BRCA-wt), had stable disease (SD) for 4 months or more.
The nature of phase I clinical trials with cytotoxic therapies is to dose-escalate to a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) to establish a recommended phase II dose (RP2D). The minimal effective dose is not usually determined, though in clinical practice cytotoxic therapies are often dose-reduced from standard doses according to an individual patient’s toxicities. It could be argued that PARP inhibitors are a novel cytotoxic therapy, as they do essentially perpetuate DNA damage and have myelosuppression as the DLT. Olaparib was originally FDA-approved at a dosage of 400 mg by mouth twice daily, which required patients to take eight 50 mg capsules twice a day. The phase II trial ICEBERG 1 (NCT00494234) investigated dosage levels of 100 mg by mouth twice daily (n=27) compared with 400 mg by mouth twice daily (n=27) in women with gBRCA1/2 mutations with advanced breast cancers after a minimum of one cytotoxic regimen in the metastatic setting. The 100 mg dosage was grossly inferior in terms of median progression free survival (mPFS), overall response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR).36 Women in the olaparib, 100 mg by mouth twice daily (p.o. b.i.d.), arm had a mPFS of 122 days (n=24) compared with 193 days (n=26), ORR of 22% (n=27; 95% CI: 11–41) compared with 41% (n=27; 95% CI: 25–59), and CBR 62.5% (n=24; 95% CI: 42.7–78.8) compared with 84.6% (n=26; 95% CI: 66.5–93.9).37
Disappointingly, there were no confirmed partial or CRs in the phase II trial NCT00679783 with olaparib, 400 mg p.o. b.i.d., in patients with advanced gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (n=26 with 4 gBRCA1+, 6 gBRCA2+, 16 BRCA-wt).38 Five of the ten gBRCA1/2+ breast patients did actually have decrease in the size of target lesions by >30%, but three were not confirmed at the next follow up visit and two were taken off study for progression of nontarget lesions or new lesions. Of the 23 breast cancer patients evaluable for response, almost 1/3 had SD at 8 weeks, including 2 of 3 gBRCA1+, 3 of 5 gBRCA2+, and 2 of 14 BRCA-wt patients.39
A tablet formulation of olaparib was developed in part to reduce the 16-capsule/day pill burden on patients. Pharmacokinetic parameters for capsule versus tablet formulations were compared in the first stage of phase I trial NCT00777582 with the determination that the olaparib, 300 mg p.o. b.i.d., tablet formulation matched or exceeded drug exposure at steady state compared to the 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. capsule form.28 In the expansion phase, patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapies were randomly assigned to receive olaparib, 400 mg p.o. b.i.d., in capsule formulation, 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. in tablet form, or 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. in tablet form. Efficacy was similar in all three arms, but the 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. tablet dosing was more tolerable. In fact, almost 2/3 of patients taking 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. tablets required dose reduction to 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. The olaparib monotherapy dose for phase II and III clinical trials thereafter was set at 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. tabs, which reduced the pill burden from 16 capsules a day to four tablets a day.28
The phase III OlympiAD trial randomized patients with gBRCA1/2+ metastatic breast cancer to olaparib, 300 mg p.o. b.i.d., compared with physician’s choice of capecitabine, vinorelbine, or eribulin.51 The primary outcome measure was mPFS with ORR and overall survival (OS) as secondary endpoints. mPFS in the olaparib arm (n=205) was 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.7–8.3 months) based on investigator analysis and 7.4 months based on blinded-independent central review (BICR) compared to the chemotherapy arm (n=97) with mPFS of 4.2 months (95% CI: 2.8–4.3 months) by investigator analysis and 4.2 months (95% CI: 2.8–4.3 months) on BICR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% CI: 0.43–0.80, p<0.001). Of the patients with measurable disease, 59.9% (100/167) on olaparib had an objective response compared to 28.8% (19/66) of the patients given chemotherapy. OS was not significantly different between the arms at 19.3 months in the PARP inhibitor arm and 19.6 months in the chemotherapy arm (HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.63–1.29, p=0.57). The rate of grade 3 and 4 adverse events was lower in the olaparib arm at 36.6% compared to 50.5% in the chemotherapy arm. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were anemia (16.1%), neutropenia (9.3%), and leukopenia (3.4%). Low-grade gastrointestinal side-effects were also common, including nausea (58.0%), vomiting (29.8%), and diarrhea (grade 1/2 20.0%, grade 3/4 0.5%). Olaparib was FDA-approved in January 2018 for gBRCA1/2+ HER2–breast cancers in the metastatic setting.
Talazoparib
In phase I/II trial NCT01286987 with talazoparib, 50% (7/14) of gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer patients had an objective response at the 1.0 mg p.o. daily dose.35 The phase II ABRAZO trial (NCT02034916) investigated talazoparib in patients with gBRCA1/2+ locally advanced or metastatic breast cancers with or without prior exposure to platinum agents.46 Those enrolled in the platinum-exposed arm were required to have had a documented PR or CR and could not have had progression of their disease on a platinum agent. Those who had not been exposed to platinum were required to have had two or more nonplatinum regimens in the metastatic setting. The primary outcome measure was ORR with CBR, PFS, and OS among the secondary outcome measures. Response rates to talazoparib were higher in patients who had not had prior platinum exposure, suggesting some degree of cross-resistance. The ORR was 20.8% (95% CI: 10.47–34.99) with a CBR of 27.1% (95% CI: 15.28–41.85) in the platinum-exposed cohort (n=48). In those without prior platinum exposure (n=35), the ORR was 37.1% (95% CI: 21.49–55.08) with CBR 45.7% (95% CI: 28.83–63.35). mPFS was 4.0 months (95% CI: 2.8–5.4 months) with a median overall survival (mOS) of 11.8 months (95% CI: 8.8–15.0) in those with prior platinum exposure (n=49), but 5.6 months (95% CI: 5.5–7.8 months) with mOS 16.5 months in the nonplatinum-exposed arm (n=35). As with all PARPi, myelosuppression was the predominant toxicity.
EMBRACA (NCT01945775) is a recently reported phase III study comparing talazoparib, 1 mg p.o. daily.46,49,53,111 to physician’s choice chemotherapy (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine) in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.112 Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to talazoparib (n=287) or chemotherapy (n=144). The primary endpoint was PFS (assessed by BICR) with secondary endpoints being safety, OS, ORR, CBR at 24 weeks, and quality of life measurements. mPFS was 8.6 months in the talazoparib arm compared to 5.6 months in the chemotherapy arm (HR 0.54, p<0.0001) with an ORR of 62.6% (n=219) with talazoparib (including 12 CRs) compared to 27.2% (n=144; no CRs) with chemotherapy. Although grade 3/4 myelosuppressive toxicities were higher with talazoparib than chemotherapy (55 versus 39%), patients experienced fewer grade 3/4 gastrointestinal side-effects (5.6 versus 11.9%) and had a much slower decline in overall health (as assessed by the questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30) compared to the chemotherapy arm.113,114 The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted priority review designation for talazoparib based on the results of EMBRACA.
Niraparib
In the phase I trial NCT00749502 evaluating niraparib in patients with advanced malignancies, the ORR was 2 of 4 gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer patients with one achieving PR at 150 mg/day for 132 days and the second with PR at 210 mg/day for 133 days. The RP2D was declared at 300 mg p.o. daily.26 The BRAVO study (NCT01905592) is a randomized phase III clinical trial investigating niraparib, 300 mg p.o. daily, compared to physician’s choice of chemotherapy with a primary outcome measure of PFS.
Rucaparib
Rucaparib has been predominantly studied in ovarian cancer, but the phase II ‘RUBY’ trial (NCT02505048) is currently recruiting patients with metastatic gBRCA-wt, HER2-negative breast cancers with a ‘BRCAness’ phenotype as determined by Clovis genomic signature testing or BRCA1/2 somatic mutation.115
Veliparib
Veliparib was studied in cancers associated with gBRCA1/2+, ovarian cancers, or basal-like HER2-negative breast cancers in NCT0089736.31,116 Of the 52 BRCA+ patients (13 with breast cancer) evaluated for response (all dose levels included), the ORR was 23%, and the CBR was 58%. At the MTD of 400 mg p.o. b.i.d., 28 gBRCA1/2+ patients were evaluated with an ORR of 40% and CBR 68%. Twenty-four BRCA-wt patients (21 breast and 3 ovarian) had an ORR of 4% and CBR of 38%.32
Combination strategies
Chemotherapy
Recommended monotherapy dosages of PARP inhibitors are as follows: niraparib, 300 mg p.o. daily,26 olaparib, 300 mg p.o. b.i.d.,28 rucaparib, 600 mg p.o. b.i.d.,117 talazoparib, 1 mg p.o. daily,35 and veliparib 400 mg p.o. b.i.d.32 Myelosuppression is the primary DLT for PARPi, which has made combination of PARPi with cytotoxic chemotherapies problematic (see Table 2).
Table 2.
Results of phase I dose escalation studies combining chemotherapy with PARP inhibitors.
Trial | Patient characteristics | Dosing strategy | Doses studied | RP2D | Results | DLTs | Most frequent Gr 3–5 AEs |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NCT0078257454,118 |
|
Dose-escalation of olaparib Cisplatin decreased to 60 mg/m2 only for cohort 6 |
|
Olaparib, 50 mg po bid days 1–5 + cisplatin 60 mg/m2 | ORR 71% (12/17) in gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer. Authors note this falls within the range of ORR to single agent carboplatin or cisplatin in this population
|
|
|
NCT01445418119 |
|
Dose-escalation of olaparib followed by dose-escalation of carboplatin |
|
Olaparib, 400 mg po twice daily on days 1–7 + carboplatin AUC5 |
|
|
|
NCT01237067120 |
|
|
|
Olaparib, 200 mg bid ×7 days with carboplatin AUC4 q21 days |
|
|
|
NCT02418624 (REVIVAL)57 |
|
Dose-escalation of carboplatin followed by dose-escalation of olaparib |
|
N/A | Protocol published; no results | N/A | N/A |
NCT00819221121 |
|
Dose-escalation of olaparib |
|
|
|
|
|
NCT01009190122 |
|
|
|
Arm E: MTD 240 mg po daily rucaparib + carbo AUC 5 mg/mL*min; rucaparib doses of 12, 18, and 24 mg IV are ~ equivalent to 33, 50, and 57 mg po, respectively |
|
Arm E:
|
Arm E:
|
NCT01251874123 |
|
De-escalation of carboplatin followed by dose-escalation of veliparib |
|
RP2D V, 250 mg po bid, days 1–21 + carbo AUC 5 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle |
|
|
|
NCT01281150124 |
|
Dose-escalation of veliparib |
|
RP2D 150 mg po bid + carbo AUC 2 + paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 |
|
|
|
NCT01104259125 |
|
Dose-escalation of veliparib |
|
MTD not reached |
|
|
|
NCT0106381669 |
|
Dose-escalation of veliparib |
|
MTD veliparib, 250 mg po bid + carboplatin AUC4 + gemcitabine, 800 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle |
|
|
|
Combination trials of PARP inhibitors plus chemotherapy have primarily been designed to maximize cytotoxic chemotherapy doses while dose-escalating the PARP inhibitor to MTD. DLTs and grade 3–4 adverse events are most often myelosuppressive in nature.
G-CSF allowed.
AEs, adverse events as defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE); AUC, area under the curve; bid, bis in die (twice a day); carbo, carboplatin; CBR, clinical benefit rate = CR + PR + SD; cis, cisplatin; CR, complete response rate = proportion of patients with no measurable disease; DLT, dose-limiting toxicity = drug-related grade 3–5 adverse events using CTCAE; DOR, duration of response = time from initial response to first documented tumor progression; gBRCA1/2+, germline-mutated BRCA1 or BRCA2; Gr, grade as defined by CTCAE; HER2−, HER2 negative; HR+, hormone receptor positive; IV, intravenous; MTD, maximum tolerated dose = one dose level below the highest dose at which 1/3 of the patients at that dose level experience a dose-limiting toxicity as defined by CTCAE; n, number of patients; N/A, not applicable/available; ORR, objective response rate = CR + PR; OS, overall survival = time from study enrollment until death from all causes; pem, pemetrexed; PFS, progression-free survival = time from study enrollment to determination of tumor progression or death due to any cause; po, per os (by mouth); PR, partial response rate = proportion of patients with favorable but incomplete response of a predefined amount for a predefined minimum time period; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose = highest oncology drug dose with acceptable toxicity, usually defined in reference to DLT and MTD established in phase I clinical trials; SD, stable disease rate = proportion of patients without disease shrinkage or progression by RECIST criteria; TNBC, triple-negative breast cancer; wt, wild-type gene.
The majority of phase I clinical trials using chemotherapy–PARPi combination approaches has understandably prioritized the use of standard dosages of chemotherapy over maximum doses of PARP inhibitor. In combination with myelosuppressive chemotherapies with efficacy in ovarian and breast cancers with HRR defects, namely, platinum agents in combination with taxane therapy, the RP2Ds of PARPi are a fraction of that required for efficacy as a monotherapy. In the phase II adjuvant BRE09-146 trial (NCT01074970), patients with gBRCA1/2+ breast cancers or TNBC were randomized to cisplatin, 75 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle +/− rucaparib, 30 mg intravenously (IV) on days 1–3, after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery with curative intent. For reference, rucaparib, 24 mg IV, is approximately equivalent to 57 mg by mouth, and the monotherapy dose of rucaparib is 600 mg by mouth twice a day.122 At 2 years, the disease-free survival was 58.3% in the cisplatin arm compared with 63.1% in the cisplatin + rucaparib arm (p=0.43).126,127 It is not currently clear if maximizing the PARPi dose at the expense of the cytotoxic chemotherapy is a more viable therapeutic strategy, but the results of the phase III BrighTNess trial (discussed later) suggests that using a grossly subtherapeutic dose of PARPi in combination with standard dosages of chemotherapy does not significantly improve clinical outcomes.128
Strategies to mitigate the myelosuppressive effects of PARPi have mirrored strategies utilized for myelosuppressive cytotoxic chemotherapies, including intermittent dosing schedules and support with granulocyte colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) such as filgrastim. Phase I/II clinical trial NCT00707707 was amended to include an algorithm for filgrastim rescue and subsequent prophylaxis for women with metastatic TNBC being treated with olaparib, 200 mg p.o. b.i.d. continuously, in combination with paclitaxel, 90 mg/m2 weekly × 3 weeks of a 28-day cycle, after 7/9 women in cohort 1 developed neutropenia (4/9 grade 3 or 4) with 8/9 requiring dose delay or reduction of paclitaxel.73 After implementation of neutropenia management with G-CSF, cohort 2 (n=10) fared better, with 4/10 developing neutropenia (2/10 grade 3 or 4) and fewer paclitaxel dose reductions.
In the ongoing phase II neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 trial (NCT01042379), breast cancer patients with operable stage II–III or stage IV with solely supraclavicular lymph node involvement (‘regional stage IV’) and tumors ≥ 2.5 cm are randomized to one of many experimental arms with a standard-of-care control arm of paclitaxel, 80 mg/m2 weekly × 12 weeks (T), followed by doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (AC) ×4 cycles.77 The primary outcome measure is probability of pathologic complete response (pCR) over standard neoadjuvant therapy. I-SPY 2 included an experimental arm with PARP inhibitor veliparib, which was dosed at 50 mg p.o. b.i.d. continuously in conjunction with paclitaxel + carboplatin AUC6 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle (TCV) and followed by AC ×4 cycles. The estimated pCR rate in TNBC of TCV ⇒ AC (n=72) was estimated to be 51% (95% Bayesian probability interval 36–66%) compared to 26% in the T ⇒ AC arm (n=44) (95% Bayesian probability interval 9–43%). The predicted probability of success of TCV ⇒ AC in TNBC patients in a phase III trial was estimated to be 88%.
The phase III randomized, placebo-controlled neoadjuvant trial BrighTNess (NCT02032277) was developed based on the carboplatin + veliparib results of I-SPY 2, and results were recently published.128 Women with operable stage II–III TNBC were enrolled with stratification by gBRCA1/2 status and randomization to one of the three arms: paclitaxel, 80 mg/m2 weekly + carboplatin AUC6 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle + veliparib, 50 mg p.o. b.i.d. continuously (n=316), paclitaxel + carboplatin + placebo p.o. b.i.d., or paclitaxel + IV placebo + placebo p.o. b.i.d. All patients received AC ×4 cycles in the adjuvant setting. The primary outcome was pCR. The pCR for the triple combination therapy was 53% (168/316), paclitaxel + carboplatin yielded a pCR of 58% (92/160), and paclitaxel alone had a pCR of 31% (49/158). The triplet combination was superior to paclitaxel alone (p<0.0001) but equivalent to paclitaxel + carboplatin (p=0.36). It should be noted that paclitaxel, 80 mg/m2, and carboplatin AUC6 are standard full doses, but the veliparib dose is 1/8 of the monotherapy dose of veliparib, 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. The addition of veliparib, 50 mg p.o. b.i.d., to paclitaxel and carboplatin did not improve therapeutic benefit, though the addition of carboplatin to paclitaxel clearly did.
The phase II BROCADE trial (NCT01506609) evaluated veliparib in gBRCA1/2+ patients with inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer.129,130 Patients were randomized to one of the three arms: (1) paclitaxel, 175 mg/m2 on day 1 + carboplatin AUC6 on day 1 + veliparib, 120 mg p.o. b.i.d. on days 1–7 of a 21-day cycle (VCP; n=97), (2) paclitaxel, 175 mg/m2 on day 1 + carboplatin AUC6 on day 1 + placebo p.o. b.i.d. on days 1–7 of a 21-day cycle (PCP; n=99), or (3) temozolomide, 150–200 mg/m2 on days 1–5 + veliparib, 40 mg p.o. b.i.d. on days 1–7 of a 28-day cycle (VT; n=94). Forty percent of the breast cancer patients had TNBC. mPFS was 14.1 months (95% CI: 11.5–16.2 months) in the veliparib + carboplatin + paclitaxel (VCP) arm compared to 12.3 months (95% CI: 9.3–14.5 months) in the placebo + carboplatin + paclitaxel (PCP) arm (HR 0.789, 95% CI: 0.536–1.162, p=0.227). mPFS in the veliparib + temozolomide (VT) arm was 7.4 months (95% CI: 5.9–8.5 months) with a HR 1.858 (95% CI: 1.278–2.702, p=0.001) compared to VCP. Although they were unable to detect improvements in the primary endpoint of PFS at p<0.05, secondary endpoints of ORR and CBR were improved by the addition of veliparib to paclitaxel and carboplatin. ORR was 77.8% (95% CI: 66.4–86.7) with VCP compared to 61.3% (95% CI: 49.7–71.9) with PCP (p=0.027). Only 28.6% of patients receiving VT achieved a partial or CR (PCP versus VT p<0.001). The CBR at 18 weeks was 87.0% (95% CI: 78.3–92.4) for PCP, 90.7% (95% CI: 82.2–95.2) for VCP, and 73.0% (95% CI: 62.2–81.2) for VT. The phase III randomized, placebo-controlled BROCADE 3 trial for gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer patients in the advanced setting includes paclitaxel, 80 mg/m2 weekly + carboplatin AUC6 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle in each of two arms, but the veliparib dose is 120 mg p.o. b.i.d. and is only given on days 1–7 of a 28-day cycle.131 We eagerly await results from this trial.
Olaparib in combination with chemotherapy is being evaluated in the neoadjuvant setting in TNBC or gBRCA1/2+ HER2-negative tumors in the phase III randomized, placebo-controlled PARTNER study (NCT03150576) in combination with weekly paclitaxel, 80 mg/m2 weekly + carboplatin AUC5 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle.81 At 150 mg p.o. b.i.d., the olaparib dose is half of the 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. monotherapy dose and is given for 12 days of a 21-day cycle starting either 2 days prior to chemotherapy administration or 2 days after chemotherapy administration.
Radiation therapy
Radiation therapy induces DNA double-strand breaks, which are lethal if not repaired. By interfering with DNA repair, PARPi could be expected to act as radiosensitizers. Although radiosensitization is a common therapeutic approach in the definitive management of some cancers, such as squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck, it is an uncommon strategy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancers. Nonetheless, the combination of PARPi with radiation therapy is intriguing. There are three clinical trials in the clinicaltrials.gov database involving PARPi and radiation therapy for the treatment of breast cancer. RadioPARP (NCT03109080) is recruiting women with (1) inoperable advanced disease, (2) residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, and (3) metastatic TNBC for a dose-escalation trial with olaparib.100 NCT02227082 is an olaparib dose-escalation trial in women with inoperable locally recurrent and/or metastatic breast cancer.101 Phase I NCT01477489 with veliparib + radiation therapy also includes patients in the adjuvant setting; this trial has been completed, but results have not been published.102
Angiogenesis, heat-shock protein inhibitors, and immune checkpoint inhibitors
Angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have thus far not reliably been shown to be of benefit in the treatment of breast cancer, and so there are no current FDA-approved indications for their use in breast cancer.132 The combination of angiogenesis inhibitors and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors with PARP inhibitors will likely be safe due to nonoverlapping toxicities, and it might be expected that PARP inhibitors could be used at full monotherapy dosages.
Biologically, it has been hypothesized that hypoxia induces down-regulation of HRR proteins BRCA1 and RAD51 and induces a BRCA-like state that could sensitize cells to PARP inhibitors.133,134 NCT01116648 is a completed phase I/II clinical trial involving women with recurrent ovarian carcinoma (n=20) or metastatic TNBC (n=8; 3 gBRCA1/2+, 1 BRCA1/2-wt, 4 unknown BRCA1/2 status).85 The MTD was olaparib, 400 mg p.o. b.i.d., in combination with small-molecule VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) cediranib, 30 mg p.o. daily; the RP2D was olaparib, 200 mg p.o. b.i.d., with cediranib, 30 mg p.o. daily. None of the breast cancer patients achieved complete or partial responses by RECIST criteria, but it should also be noted that only two breast cancer patients were in the highest dose arm with a therapeutic dose of olaparib, 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. Three breast patients had SD on olaparib, 200 mg p.o. b.i.d., including two gBRCA1/2+ patients with progression at 4 and 7 months.135 Three phase I or II clinical trials combining PARP inhibitors with VEGFR TKIs are currently recruiting patients with advanced or metastatic TNBC in the second-line-or-beyond setting: NCT03075462 (PARP inhibitor fluzoparib + VEGFR inhibitor apatinib), NCT02484404 (olaparib + VEGFR inhibitor cediranib), and NCT02498613 (olaparib + cediranib).84,86,87 NCT02484404 also includes an arm with olaparib + cediranib + PDL1 inhibitor durvalumab.
Induction of a BRCA-like phenotype is also the rationale behind the phase I dose-escalation clinical trial NCT02898207, which combines olaparib with heat-shock protein 90 (HSP90) inhibitor onalespib for patients with metastatic TNBC.88 HSP90 is a chaperone protein that facilitates folding and stabilization of BRCA1 (among many other proteins).136 Preclinical data suggest that stabilization of deleteriously mutated BRCA1 could be a mechanism of resistance to platinum agents and PARP inhibitors.137
There are several studies combining PARP inhibitors with immune checkpoint inhibitors, including phase I/II KEYNOTE-162 (NCT02657889) in TNBC with niraparib, 200 mg p.o. b.i.d. + PD1 inhibitor pembrolizumab and phase I/II MEDIOLA (NCT02734004) in gBRCA1/2+ HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer patients with olaparib, 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. + PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab.89–91,138 Phase II NCT02849496 has enrolled gBRCA1/2+ TNBC patients for veliparib in combination with PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab, phase Ib/II JAVELIN PARP MEDLEY (NCT03330405) is recruiting patients with gBRCA1/2+ or ATM-deficient breast cancer for evaluation of talazoparib + PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab, and phase II DORA (NCT03167619) is soon to start recruiting women with platinum-sensitive metastatic TNBC with olaparib, 300 mg p.o. b.i.d. + durvalumab.92–94
Intracellular signaling
The intracellular phosphorylation cascades of the Rat sarcoma, rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma, extracellular signal-regulated kinases (RAS–RAF–MEK–ERK) and PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathways have been implicated in the proliferation, survival, and metastatic potential of numerous types of cancer, thus driving development of small-molecule inhibitors targeting these pathways.139,140 PI3K, AKT, and mTOR inhibitors are of special interest in clinical trials for breast cancer in particular, as enhanced signaling through the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway is thought to represent a major mechanism of resistance to therapies targeting the estrogen receptor (ER) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2).141 There are dozens of inhibitors of the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway in development and a wide array of combination clinical trials in early and late stages, though FDA-approved-indications for treatment of breast cancer with PI3K–AKT–mTOR inhibitors has been thus far limited to mTOR inhibitor everolimus in combination with exemestane after failure of letrozole or anastrozole for advanced hormone-receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative breast cancer based on BOLERO-2.142,143
Preclinical data suggest that upregulation of the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway may contribute to PARP inhibitor resistance as well.144 If this is clinically relevant, perhaps combinations of PARP inhibitors with inhibitors of PI3K, AKT, or mTOR are meant to enhance clinical benefit and prolong duration of response to PARPi. Phase I clinical trial NCT01623349 is evaluating olaparib in combination with PI3K inhibitors BKM120 or BYL719 in patients with metastatic TNBC after failure of one or more cytotoxic regimens.95,145 Olaparib, 300 mg p.o. b.i.d., in combination with mTOR inhibitor AZD2014 or AKT inhibitor AZD5363 is being evaluated in the phase I/II study NCT02208375.98,99
Conclusions
The recent FDA approval of olaparib has been a much-welcomed expansion of therapeutic options for metastatic gBRCA1/2+ breast cancer patients. If PARPi approvals for breast cancer are to follow the same path as those for ovarian cancer, we are likely to see the approval of additional PARP inhibitors in the near future. To date, there is no data demonstrating an OS benefit for PARP inhibitors in breast cancer patients, though to be fair, none of the studies discussed in this manuscript has been powered to detect OS. In the metastatic setting, OS data are difficult to interpret, as treatment options are numerous and patients are likely to be treated with a series of therapies for disease control. The phase III trial OlympiA is powered to assess OS in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer with gBRCA1/2 mutations treated with olaparib in the adjuvant setting; data are expected in 2020.
Active PARPi monotherapy phase I and II trials hint at a willingness to explore their use beyond patients with deleterious germline BRCA1/2 mutations to cancers with defects in homologous recombination repair, either germline or acquired, as well as in TNBC. Several academic and commercial institutions are developing assays to test tumor tissue for a BRCA-like phenotype, loosely defined as homologous recombination repair deficiency, and thus to expand the number of patients who could be offered PARP inhibitors.26,27
Combination strategies could also potentially expand the role of PARP inhibitors beyond cancers with homologous recombination repair defects, though it will take time to understand how best to use them to full effect while minimizing toxicities. The diversity of currently active early phase combination clinical trials is a fascinating reflection of a rapidly growing understanding of DNA repair, PARP inhibitor resistance mechanisms, and cancer biology. In the details and designs of the clinical trials discussed herein, there are clues that platinum sensitivity predicts response to PARP inhibitors, PARP inhibitors may be useful radiosensitizers and chemosensitizers, induction of ‘BRCAness’ is being explored for therapeutic exploitation, and that intermittent dosing and G-CSF support are feasible tactics to mitigate myelosuppressive toxicities of PARP inhibitors in the same way as for cytotoxic chemotherapies. PARP inhibitors remain a very active area of research, to the benefit of our future patients.
Footnotes
Disclosure and potential conflicts of interest: Dr McCann has nothing to disclose. Dr Hurvitz reports: grants and nonfinancial support from Ambryx, Amgen, Bayer, BI Pharma, Biomarin, Cascadian, Daiichi Sankyo, Dignitana, Genentech, GSK, Lilly, Macrogenics, Medivation, Merrimack, Novartis, OBI Pharma, Pfizer, Pieris, PUMA, Roche, and Seattle Genetics; other from Lilly, Novartis, and OBI Pharma, during the conduct of the study. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Potential Conflicts of Interests form for the authors are available for download at http://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/dic.212540-COI.pdf
Funding declaration: There was no funding for this manuscript.
Correct attribution: Copyright © 2018 McCann KE, Hurvitz SA. https://doi.org/10.7573/dic.212540. Published by Drugs in Context under Creative Commons License Deed CC BY NC ND 4.0.
Article URL: https://www.drugsincontext.com/advances-in-the-use-of-parp-inhibitor-therapy-for-breast-cancer
Provenance: invited; externally peer reviewed.
Peer review comments to author: 4 July 2018
Drugs in Context is published by BioExcel Publishing Ltd. Registered office: Plaza Building, Lee High Road, London, England, SE13 5PT.
BioExcel Publishing Limited is registered in England Number 10038393. VAT GB 252772009.
For all manuscript and submissions enquiries, contact the Editorial office dic.editorial@bioexcelpublishing.com
For all permissions, rights and reprints, contact David Hughes david.hughes@bioexcelpublishing.com
References
- 1.Schreiber V, Dantzer F, Ame J-C, de Murcia G. Poly(ADP-ribose): novel functions for an old molecule. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2006;7(7):517–528. doi: 10.1038/nrm1963. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Kraus WL, Lis JT. PARP Goes Transcription. Cell. 2003;113(6):677–683. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(03)00433-1. . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Kim MY. Poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation by PARP-1: ‘PAR-laying’ NAD+ into a nuclear signal. Genes Dev. 2005;19(17):1951–1967. doi: 10.1101/gad.1331805. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Murai J, Huang SyN, Das BB, et al. Trapping of PARP1 and PARP2 by clinical PARP inhibitors. Cancer Res. 2012;72(21):5588–5599. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-12-2753. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Murai J, Huang SYN, Renaud A, et al. Stereospecific PARP trapping by BMN 673 and comparison with olaparib and rucaparib. Mol Cancer Ther. 2013;13(2):433–443. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.mct-13-0803. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.De Vos M, Schreiber V, Dantzer F. The diverse roles and clinical relevance of PARPs in DNA damage repair: current state of the art. Biochem Pharmacol. 2012;84(2):137–146. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2012.03.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Kashima L, Idogawa M, Mita H, et al. CHFR protein regulates mitotic checkpoint by targeting PARP-1 protein for ubiquitination and degradation. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(16):12975–12984. doi: 10.1074/jbc.m111.321828. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Swindall A, Stanley J, Yang E. PARP-1: friend or foe of DNA damage and repair in tumorigenesis? Cancers. 2013;5(3):943–958. doi: 10.3390/cancers5030943. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Aredia F, Scovassi AI. Poly(ADP-ribose): a signaling molecule in different paradigms of cell death. Biochem Pharmacol. 2014;92(1):157–163. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2014.06.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kotz J. PARP target practice. Science-Business eXchange. 2012;5(13):323. doi: 10.1038/scibx.2012.323. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Liscio P, Camaioni E, Carotti A, Pellicciari R, Macchiarulo A. From polypharmacology to target specificity: the case of PARP inhibitors. Curr Top Med Chem. 2013;13(23):2939–2954. doi: 10.2174/15680266113136660209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Wahlberg E, Karlberg T, Kouznetsova E, et al. Family-wide chemical profiling and structural analysis of PARP and tankyrase inhibitors. Nat Biotechnol. 2012;30(3):283–288. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Zeman MK, Cimprich KA. Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat Cell Biol. 2013;16(1):2–9. doi: 10.1038/ncb2897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.“Talazoparib” CID=44819241 [Internet] PubChem Compound Database, National Center for Biotechnology Information. [Accessed October 26, 2017]. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/44819241.
- 15.“Olaparib” CID=23725625 [Internet] Pubmed Compound Database, National Center for Biotechnology Information. [Accessed October 26, 2017]. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/23725625.
- 16.“Velaparib” CID=11960529 [Internet] PubChem Compound Database, National Center for Biotechnology Information. [Accessed October 26, 2017]. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/11960529.
- 17.“Niraparib” CID=24958200 [Internet] PubChem Compound Database, National Center for Biotechnology Information. [Accessed October 26, 2017]. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/24958200.
- 18.“Rucaparib” CID=9931954 [Internet] PubChem Compound Database, National Center for Biotechnology Information. [Accessed October 26, 2017]. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/9931954.
- 19.Liu X, Shi Y, Maag DX, et al. Iniparib nonselectively modifies cysteine-containing proteins in tumor cells and is not a bona fide PARP inhibitor. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;18(2):510–523. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-11-1973. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Patel AG, De Lorenzo SB, Flatten KS, Poirier GG, Kaufmann SH. Failure of iniparib to inhibit poly(ADP-Ribose) polymerase in vitro. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(6):1655–1662. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-11-2890. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Narod SA. BRCA mutations in the management of breast cancer: the state of the art. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2010;7(12):702–707. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Roy R, Chun J, Powell SN. BRCA1 and BRCA2: different roles in a common pathway of genome protection. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;12(1):68–78. doi: 10.1038/nrc3181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Venkitaraman AR. Cancer susceptibility and the functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Cell. 2002;108(2):171–182. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00615-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.McCann KE. Novel poly-ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor combination strategies in ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;30(1):7–16. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000428. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Study evaluating the antitumor activity and safety of niraparib as neoadjuvant treatment. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03329937.
- 26.Sandhu SK, Schelman WR, Wilding G, et al. The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor niraparib (MK4827) in BRCA mutation carriers and patients with sporadic cancer: a phase 1 dose-escalation trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(9):882–892. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70240-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Fong PC, Boss DS, Yap TA, et al. Inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in tumors from BRCA mutation carriers. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(2):123–134. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0900212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Mateo J, Moreno V, Gupta A, et al. An adaptive study to determine the optimal dose of the tablet formulation of the PARP inhibitor olaparib. Target Oncol. 2016;11(3):401–415. doi: 10.1007/s11523-016-0435-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.A phase 1 study of single agent veliparib in Japanese subjects with advanced solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02210663. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 30.Yamamoto N, Nokihara H, Yamada Y, et al. A Phase I, dose-finding and pharmacokinetic study of olaparib (AZD2281) in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Sci. 2012;103(3):504–509. doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2011.02179.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Veliparib in treating patients with malignant solid tumors that do not respond to previous therapy. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00892736.
- 32.Puhalla S, Beumer JH, Pahuja S, et al. Final results of a phase 1 study of single-agent veliparib (V) in patients (pis) with either BRCA1/2-mutated cancer (BRCA plus ), platinum-refractory ovarian, or basal-like breast cancer (BRCA-wt) J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15) PubMed PMID: WOS:000358613202835. [Google Scholar]
- 33.Pilot trial of BMN 673, an oral PARP inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors and deleterious BRCA mutations. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01989546.
- 34.Study of talazoparib, a PARP inhibitor, in patients with advanced or recurrent solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01286987.
- 35.de Bono J, Ramanathan RK, Mina L, et al. Phase I, dose-escalation, two-part trial of the PARP inhibitor talazoparib in patients with advanced germline BRCA1/2 mutations and selected sporadic cancers. Cancer Discov. 2017;7(6):620–629. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-16-1250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Study to assess the efficacy and safety of a PARP inhibitor for the treatment of BRCA-positive advanced breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00494234.
- 37.Tutt A, Robson M, Garber JE, et al. Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9737):235–244. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60892-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Phase II study of AZD2281 in patients with known BRCA mutation status or recurrent high grade ovarian cancer or patients with known BRCA mutation status/triple neg breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00679783.
- 39.Gelmon KA, Tischkowitz M, Mackay H, et al. Olaparib in patients with recurrent high-grade serous or poorly differentiated ovarian carcinoma or triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-randomised study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(9):852–861. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70214-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Olaparib in metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03344965.
- 41.Roviello G, Milani M, Gobbi A, et al. A phase II study of olaparib in breast cancer patients: biological evaluation from a ‘window of opportunity’ trial. Future Oncol. 2016;12(19):2189–2193. doi: 10.2217/fon-2016-0116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.SAFIR02_Breast—efficacy of genome analysis as a therapeutic decision tool for patients with metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02299999.
- 43.Rucaparib(CO-338;Formally Called AG-014699 or PF-0136738) in treating patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer or advanced ovarian cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00664781.
- 44.A study to assess the efficacy of rucaparib in metastatic breast cancer patients with a BRCAness genomic signature. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02505048.
- 45.A phase 2, 2-Stage, 2-Cohort study of talazoparib (BMN 673), in locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer patients with BRCA mutation (ABRAZO Study) https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02034916.
- 46.Turner NC, Telli ML, Rugo HS, et al. Final results of a phase 2 study of talazoparib (TALA) following platinum or multiple cytotoxic regimens in advanced breast cancer patients (pts) with germline BRCA1/2 mutations (ABRAZO) J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(15_suppl):1007. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.1007. [Google Scholar]
- 47.Study of the PARP inhibitor BMN 673 in advanced cancer patients with somatic alterations in BRCA1/2, mutations/deletions in PTEN or PTEN loss, a homologous recombination defect, mutations/deletions in other BRCA pathway genes and germline mutation in BRCA1/2 (not breast or ovarian cancer) https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02286687.
- 48.Phase II talazoparib in BRCA1 +BRCA2 wild-type &triple-neg HER2-negative breast cancer solidtumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02401347.
- 49.A phase III trial of niraparib versus physician’s choice in HER2 negative, germline BRCA mutation-positive breast cancer patients. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01905592.
- 50.Assessment of the efficacy and safety of olaparib monotherapy versus physicians choice chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02000622.
- 51.Robson M, Im S-A, Senkus E, et al. Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(6):523–533. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1706450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Robson ME, Im S-A, Senkus E, et al. OlympiAD: phase III trial of olaparib monotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients (pts) with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC) and a germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm) J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(18_suppl):LBA4-LBA. doi: 10.1200/jco.2017.35.18_suppl.lba4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 53.A study evaluating talazoparib (BMN 673), a PARP inhibitor, in advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer patients with BRCA mutation (EMBRACA study) https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01945775.
- 54.Balmaña J, Tung NM, Isakoff SJ, et al. Phase I trial of olaparib in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of patients with advanced breast, ovarian and other solid tumors. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(8):1656–1663. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.AZD2281 plus carboplatin to treat breast and ovarian cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01445418.
- 56.Olaparib in combination with carboplatin for refractory or recurrent women s cancers. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01237067.
- 57.Schouten PC, Dackus GMHE, Marchetti S, et al. A phase I followed by a randomized phase II trial of two cycles carboplatin-olaparib followed by olaparib monotherapy versus capecitabine in BRCA1- or BRCA2-mutated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as first line treatment (REVIVAL): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2016;17(1):293. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1423-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Study to assess the safety and tolerability of a PARP inhibitor in combination with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00516724.
- 59.Del Conte G, Sessa C, von Moos R, et al. Phase I study of olaparib in combination with liposomal doxorubicin in patients with advanced solid tumours. Br J Cancer. 2014;111(4):651–659. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Wilson RH, Evans TJ, Middleton MR, et al. A phase I study of intravenous and oral rucaparib in combination with chemotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours. Br J Cancer. 2017;116(7):884–892. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Veliparib and carboplatin in treating patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01251874.
- 62.A study evaluating veliparib as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy in subjects with solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02033551.
- 63.Veliparib, carboplatin, and paclitaxel in treating patients with advanced solid cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00535119.
- 64.Veliparib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in treating patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01281150.
- 65.Veliparib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin in treating patients with solid tumors that are metastatic or cannot be removed by surgery and liver or kidney dysfunction. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01366144.
- 66.Veliparib, cisplatin, and vinorelbine ditartrate in treating patients with recurrent and/or metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01104259.
- 67.Cyclophosphamide and veliparib in treating patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01351909.
- 68.Veliparib and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride in treating patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, or primary peritoneal cancer or metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01145430.
- 69.Gray HJ, Bell-McGuinn K, Fleming GF, et al. Phase I combination study of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus carboplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced ovarian cancer and other solid malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;148(3):507–514. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.12.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Veliparib and irinotecan hydrochloride in treating patients with cancer that is metastatic or cannot be removed by surgery. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00576654.
- 71.A phase I study of ABT-888 in combination with temozolomide in cancer patients. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00526617.
- 72.An open-label, multicenter, phase 1/2 study of poly(ADP-Ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor E7449 as single agent in subjects with advanced solid tumors or with B-cell malignancies and in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) or with carboplatin and paclitaxel in subjects with advanced solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01618136.
- 73.Dent RA, Lindeman GJ, Clemons M, et al. Phase I trial of the oral PARP inhibitor olaparib in combination with paclitaxel for first- or second-line treatment of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2013;15(5) doi: 10.1186/bcr3484. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.PARP inhibition for triple negative breast cancer (ER-/PR-/HER2-)With BRCA1/2 mutations. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01074970.
- 75.Veliparib with or without carboplatin in treating patients with stage III–IV breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01149083.
- 76.The study evaluating efficacy and tolerability of veliparib in combination with temozolomide or in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel versus placebo in subjects with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation and metastatic breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01506609.
- 77.Rugo HS, Olopade OI, DeMichele A, et al. Adaptive randomization of veliparib–carboplatin treatment in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(1):23–34. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1513749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Cisplatin with or without veliparib in treating patients with recurrent or metastatic triple-negative and/or BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer with or without brain metastases. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02595905.
- 79.Phase II ABT-888 with cyclophosphamide. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01306032.
- 80.ABT-888 and temozolomide for metastatic breast cancer and BRCA1/2 breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01009788.
- 81.Platinum and polyadenosine 5′diphosphoribose polymerisation (PARP) inhibitor for neoadjuvant treatment of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and/or germline BRCA (gBRCA) positive breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03150576.
- 82.Geyer CE, O’Shaughnessy J, Untch M, et al. Phase 3 study evaluating efficacy and safety of veliparib (V) plus carboplatin (Cb) or Cb in combination with standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients (pts) with early stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(15_suppl):520. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.520. [Google Scholar]
- 83.A phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without veliparib (ABT-888) in HER2-negative metastatic or locally advanced unresectable BRCA-associated breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02163694.
- 84.A study of fluzoparib given in combination with apatinib in ovarian or breast cancer patients. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03075462.
- 85.Cediranib maleate and olaparib in treating patients with recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer or recurrent triple-negative breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01116648.
- 86.Phase I/II study of the anti-programmed death ligand-1 antibody MEDI4736 in combination with olaparib and/or cediranib for advanced solid tumors and advanced or recurrent ovarian, triple negative breast, lung, prostate and colorectal cancers. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02484404.
- 87.A phase 2 study of cediranib in combination with olaparib in advanced solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02498613.
- 88.Olaparib and onalespib in treating patients with solid tumors that are metastatic or cannot be removed by surgery or recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal, or triple-negative breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02898207.
- 89.Niraparib in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with triple-negative breast cancer or ovarian cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02657889.
- 90.A phase I/II study of MEDI4736 in combination with olaparib in patients with advanced solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02734004.
- 91.Domchek S, Bang YJ, Coukos G, et al. MEDIOLA: A phase I/II, open-label trial of olaparib in combination with durvalumab (MEDI4736) in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumours. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(suppl_6) doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw378.56. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Javelin parp medley: avelumab plus talazoparib in locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03330405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 93.Phase II multicenter study of durvalumab and olaparib in platinum treated advanced triple negative breast cancer (DORA) https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03167619.
- 94.Veliparib and atezolizumab either alone or in combination in treating patients with stage III–IV triple negative breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02849496.
- 95.Phase I study of the oral PI3kinase inhibitor BKM120 or BYL719 and the oral PARP inhibitor olaparib in patients with recurrent triple negative breast cancer or high grade serous ovarian cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01623349.
- 96.Matulonis UA, Penson RT, Domchek SM, et al. Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced relapsed ovarian cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation: a multistudy analysis of response rates and safety. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(6):1013–1019. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Selumetinib and olaparib in solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03162627.
- 98.A phase Ib study of the oral PARP inhibitor olaparib with the oral mTORC1/2 inhibitor AZD2014 or the oral AKT inhibitor AZD5363 for recurrent endometrial, triple negative breast, and ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02208375.
- 99.Westin S, Litton J, Williams R, et al. 391PPhase I expansion of olaparib (PARP inhibitor) and AZD5363 (AKT inhibitor) in recurrent ovarian, endometrial and triple negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(suppl_5) doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx367.025. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Olaparib & radiation therapy for patients triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03109080.
- 101.Olaparib and radiotherapy in inoperable breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT02227082.
- 102.Veliparib with radiation therapy in patients with inflammatory or loco-regionally recurrent breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT01477489.
- 103.Niraparib in combination with trastuzumab in metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT03368729.
- 104.Jenner ZB, Sood AK, Coleman RL. Evaluation of rucaparib and companion diagnostics in the PARP inhibitor landscape for recurrent ovarian cancer therapy. Future Oncol. 2016;12(12):1439–1456. doi: 10.2217/fon-2016-0002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Kaufman B, Shapira-Frommer R, Schmutzler RK, et al. Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and a germlineBRCA1/2mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(3):244–250. doi: 10.1200/jco.2014.56.2728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Ledermann J, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Olaparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(15):1382–1392. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1105535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Ledermann J, Harter P, Gourley C, et al. Olaparib maintenance therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer: a preplanned retrospective analysis of outcomes by BRCA status in a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(8):852–861. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70228-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108.Ledermann J, Oza AM, Lorusso D, et al. ARIEL3: a phase 3, randomised, double-blind study of rucaparib vs placebo following response to platinum-based chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian carcinoma (OC) Ann Oncol. 2017;28(suppl_5) doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx440.034. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 109.Mirza MR, Monk BJ, Herrstedt J, et al. Niraparib maintenance therapy in platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(22):2154–2164. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1611310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110.Pujade-Lauraine E, Ledermann JA, Penson RT, et al. Treatment with olaparib monotherapy in the maintenance setting significantly improves progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer: results from the phase III SOLO2 study. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145:219–220. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.03.505. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 111.Tryfonidis K, Bogaerts J, Martell RE, et al. A phase III randomized trial of niraparib versus physician’s choice in previously treated, HER2-negative, germline-BRCA mutated breast cancer patients: intergroup study EORTC-1307-BCG and BIG5-13. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15_suppl):TPS659-TPS. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.tps659. [Google Scholar]
- 112.Litton JK, Rugo HS, Johannes Ettl J, et al., editors. Abstract GS6-07: A phase 3 trial comparing talazoparib, an oral PARP inhibitor, to physician’s choice of therapy in patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA-mutation. San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; December 5–9, 2017; San Antonio, TX. [Google Scholar]
- 113.Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(5):365–376. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114.Osoba D, Aaronson N, Zee B, Sprangers M, te Velde A. Modification of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 2.0) based on content validity and reliability testing in large samples of patients with cancer. The Study Group on Quality of Life of the EORTC and the Symptom Control and Quality of Life Committees of the NCI of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Qual Life Res. 1997;6(2):103–108. doi: 10.1023/a:1026429831234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115.Patsouris A, Vicier C, Campion L, et al. An open-label, phase II study of rucaparib, a PARP inhibitor, in HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients with high genomic loss of heterozygosity: RUBY. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(15_suppl):TPS1117-TPS. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.TPS1117. [Google Scholar]
- 116.Puhalla S, Beumer JH, Pahuja S, et al. Final results of a phase 1 study of single-agent veliparib (V) in patients (pts) with either BRCA1/2-mutated cancer (BRCA+), platinum-refractory ovarian, or basal-like breast cancer (BRCA-wt) J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15_suppl):2570. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.2570. [Google Scholar]
- 117.Kristeleit RS, Burris HA, LoRusso P, et al. Phase 1/2 study of oral rucaparib: final phase 1 results. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15_suppl):2573. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.2573. [Google Scholar]
- 118.Byrski T, Dent R, Blecharz P, et al. Results of a phase II open-label, non-randomized trial of cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with BRCA1-positive metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14(4):R110. doi: 10.1186/bcr3231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119.Lee J-M, Hays JL, Annunziata CM, et al. Phase I/Ib study of olaparib and carboplatin in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation-associated breast or ovarian cancer with biomarker analyses. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(6):dju089. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120.Chiou VL, Annunziata C, Lipkowitz S, et al. Abstract CT326: pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic study of sequence specificity of the PARP inhibitor, olaparib and carboplatin in recurrent womens cancers. Cancer Res. 2015;75(15 Suppl):CT326. [Google Scholar]
- 121.Del Conte G, Sessa C, von Moos R, et al. Phase I study of olaparib in combination with liposomal doxorubicin in patients with advanced solid tumours. Br J Cancer. 2014;111(4):651–659. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122.Wilson RH, Evans TRJ, Middleton MR, et al. A phase I study of intravenous and oral rucaparib in combination with chemotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours. Br J Cancer. 2017;116(7):884–892. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123.Wesolowski R, Zhao M, Geyer SM, et al. Phase I trial of the PARP inhibitor veliparib (V) in combination with carboplatin (C) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15_suppl):1074. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.1074. [Google Scholar]
- 124.Pahuja S, Beumer JH, Appleman LJ, et al. A phase I study of veliparib (ABT-888) in combination with weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced solid malignancies and enriched for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(15_suppl):1015. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.1015. [Google Scholar]
- 125.Rodler ET, Kurland BF, Griffin M, et al. Phase I study of veliparib (ABT-888) combined with cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced triple-negative breast cancer and/or BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(12):2855–2864. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-15-2137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126.Dwadasi S, Tong Y, Walsh T, et al. Cisplatin with or without rucaparib after preoperative chemotherapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): Hoosier Oncology Group BRE09-146. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15_suppl):1019. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.1019. [Google Scholar]
- 127.Miller K, Tong Y, Jones DR, et al. Cisplatin with or without rucaparib after preoperative chemotherapy in patients with triple negative breast cancer: final efficacy results of Hoosier Oncology Group BRE09-146. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(15_suppl):1082. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.1082. [Google Scholar]
- 128.Loibl S, O’Shaughnessy J, Untch M, et al. Addition of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus carboplatin or carboplatin alone to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer (BrighTNess): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(4):497–509. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30111-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129.Han HS, Diéras V, Robson ME, et al. Abstract S2-05: efficacy and tolerability of veliparib (V; ABT-888) in combination with carboplatin (C) and paclitaxel (P) vs placebo (Plc)+C/P in patients (pts) withBRCA1orBRCA2mutations and metastatic breast cancer: a randomized, phase 2 study. Cancer Res. 2017;77(4 Suppl):S2-05-S2. doi: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs16-s2-05. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 130.Han HS, Diéras V, Robson M, et al. Veliparib with temozolomide or carboplatin/paclitaxel versus placebo with carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with BRCA1/2 locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer: randomized phase II study. Ann Oncol. 2017;29(1):154–161. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.Huggins-Puhalla SL, Han HS, Diéras V, et al. Phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial of carboplatin (C) and paclitaxel (P) with/without veliparib (ABT-888) in HER2- BRCA-associated locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (BC) J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(28_suppl):155. doi: 10.1200/jco.2015.33.28_suppl.155. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 132.Nakasone ES, Hurvitz SA, McCann KE. Harnessing the immune system in the battle against breast cancer. Drugs Context. 2018;7:212520. doi: 10.7573/dic.212520. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133.Bindra RS, Gibson SL, Meng A, et al. Hypoxia-Induced down-regulation of BRCA1Expression by E2Fs. Cancer Res. 2005;65(24):11597–11604. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-05-2119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134.Chan N, Bristow RG. “Contextual” synthetic lethality and/or loss of heterozygosity: tumor hypoxia and modification of DNA repair. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(18):4553–4560. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-10-0527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135.Liu JF, Tolaney SM, Birrer M, et al. A phase 1 trial of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib (AZD2281) in combination with the anti-angiogenic cediranib (AZD2171) in recurrent epithelial ovarian or triple-negative breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(14):2972–2978. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.05.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136.Neckers L. Heat shock protein 90: the cancer chaperone. J Biosci. 2007;32(3):517–530. doi: 10.1007/s12038-007-0051-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137.Johnson N, Johnson SF, Yao W, et al. Stabilization of mutant BRCA1 protein confers PARP inhibitor and platinum resistance. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110(42):17041–17046. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1305170110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138.Konstantinopoulos P, Moore KN, Sachdev JC, et al. Phase I/II study of niraparib plus pembrolizumab in patients with triple-negative breast cancer or recurrent ovarian cancer (KEYNOTE-162) J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(15_suppl):TPS5599-TPS. http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.TPS5599. [Google Scholar]
- 139.Janku F, Yap TA, Meric-Bernstam F. Targeting the PI3K pathway in cancer: are we making headway? Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018;15(5):273–291. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2018.28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140.Zhao Y, Adjei AA. The clinical development of MEK inhibitors. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014;11(7):385–400. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141.Bahrami A, Khazaei M, Hasanzadeh M, et al. Therapeutic potential of targeting PI3K/AKT pathway in treatment of colorectal cancer: rational and progress. J Cell Biochem. 2018;119(3):2460–2469. doi: 10.1002/jcb.25950. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142.Baselga J, Campone M, Piccart M, et al. Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(6):520–529. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1109653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143.Piccart M, Hortobagyi GN, Campone M, et al. Everolimus plus exemestane for hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative advanced breast cancer: overall survival results from BOLERO-2dagger. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(12):2357–2362. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144.Bitler BG, Watson ZL, Wheeler LJ, Behbakht K. PARP inhibitors: clinical utility and possibilities of overcoming resistance. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;147(3):695–704. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.10.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145.Matulonis UA, Wulf G, Barry W, et al. Abstract CT324: phase I of oral BKM120 or BYL719 and olaparib for high-grade serous ovarian cancer or triple-negative breast cancer: Final results of the BKM120 plus olaparib cohort. Cancer Res. 2015;75(15 Suppl):CT324-CT. doi: 10.1158/1538-7445.am2015-ct324. [DOI] [Google Scholar]