Skip to main content
Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology logoLink to Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology
. 2020 Nov 11;12:1758835920970845. doi: 10.1177/1758835920970845

Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC

Hong Yang 1,*, Zhimin Liu 2,*, Yufang Wang 3,*, Jun Li 4, Ruiqian Li 5, Qilin Wang 6, Chen Hu 7, Haiyang Jiang 8, Hongyi Wu 9, Lele Song 10,11,*,, Yu Bai 12
PMCID: PMC7675892  PMID: 33240400

Abstract

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a common malignancy of the lower and upper urinary tract. Recurrent UC has poor prognosis due to delayed diagnosis and a lack of clinical management guidance, especially for upper urinary tract UC. Patients with germline or somatic BRCA1/2 mutations are a special population in UC. No evidence is available so far on the effectiveness of poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) in this population. Here, we report a 60-year-old female patient diagnosed with left ureter high-grade UC. Recurrent lesions were found 20 months after radical surgery. Computed tomography (CT) examination showed a slightly high-density soft tissue mass (3.2 × 3.1 cm) on the left posterior wall of the abdomen (waist), soft tissue mass adjacent to the left inner wall of the pelvis (3.2 × 4.2 cm), and multiple enlarged lymph nodes to the left of abdominal aorta. A next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based 605-gene panel detected a novel BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation c.1670T>A (p.L557*), and a series of somatic insertion and deletion (INDEL) mutations of BRCA1, RB1, and JAK2, and single nucleotide variation (SNV) mutations of TP53, KMT2D, MET, ROS1, and IL7R. The above lesions were reduced significantly or disappeared (partial response, PR) after a 3-month Olaparib treatment, and the patient’s general condition remained well. In conclusion, this study proved for the first time that PARPi was effective for UC treatment in patients carrying germline BRCA2 pathogenic mutations, providing new treatment options for such patients. In addition, the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) test can be used for drug selection and response monitoring in UC treatment.

Keywords: BRCA1, BRCA2, germline, olaparib, PARPi, ureter, urothelial carcinoma

Introduction

Urothelial cancer (UC) is a general term for malignancies originating from urothelium of renal pelvis, calyx, ureter, and bladder. UC belongs to transitional cell carcinoma and is a type of common malignancy of the urinary system. Bladder cancer is most commonly seen in UC, while upper urinary tract UC accounts for about 5% of all UC.1 Risk factors for upper urinary tract UC include smoking, occupational exposure, and aristolochic acids. Recent studies have found that high-grade UC is associated with cell cycle dysregulation, usually with a poor prognosis, high relapse rate, and accompanied by progression. There is a high risk of invasion and metastasis for high-grade UC, which exhibits more diverse molecular alterations than low-grade UC.2,3 Radical nephroureterectomy is currently the standard method of treatment of upper urinary tract UC. In recent years, percutaneous endoscopic surgery has been used widely. Its advantages include high safety, less trauma, fast recovery, high overall survival rate, and fewer complications, and it is a better method for patients with normal contralateral renal function.4,5 In addition, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy are also used to treat patients with upper urinary tract UC. For example, Erdafitinib was the first approved targeted drug for patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC with FGFR2 or FGFR3 gene mutations.6 The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also approved several immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of metastatic UC.7

More recently, it was found that a small fraction of patients with UC carry pathogenic (P) or likely pathogenic (LP) germline mutations. In terms of BRCA1/2 germline mutations, one recent study reported that 1.4% (8/586) of UC patients carried BRCA1 and 1.5% (9/586) of UC patients carried BRCA2 P/LP germline mutations,8 and another study reported that 2.3% (20/867) of UC carried BRCA1 and 2.1% (18/867) of UC carried BRCA2 P/LP germline mutations.9 Although PARPi have been used widely in the treatment of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations, it was unclear whether PARPi is effective for UC patients with BRCA1/2 germline mutations, as no such observation has been reported in UC. In this study, we reported for the first time the treatment of recurrent UC with Olaparib in a patient carrying a BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation, and observed partial response to Olaparib. Our study proved for the first time the effectiveness of PARPi in the treatment of recurrent UC.

Case presentation

Here, we report a 60-year-old Chinese woman, presenting to a local hospital due to hematuria and diagnosed with left upper tract UC in March 2018. She had a left laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy in the same month. Postoperative pathological examination confirmed invasive high-grade UC. Immunohistochemistry showed GATA-3 (+), CKH (+), CK7 (+), CK20 (–), P63 (+), CgA (–), Syn (–), CKL (weak +), β-Catenin (+), Ki-67 (+, 25%), CK18 (+), and P40 (+). She was discharged and recovered well after surgery, and had gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) combined chemotherapy for four cycles. In November 2019, the patient came to hospital with left back and abdominal pain. Computed tomography (CT) examination showed a slightly high-density soft tissue mass shadow of 3.2 × 3.1 cm on the posterior wall of the left abdomen, a dense soft tissue mass shadow on the left internal iliac lymph nodes (3.2 × 4.2 cm, thick-walled annular enhancement in contrast-enhanced CT), and multiple enlarged lymph nodes to the left of the abdominal aorta (maximum diameter of about 1.5 cm) (Figure 1 before therapy). All masses and enlarged lymph nodes were highly suspected to be metastatic lesions. The patient’s left back pain later worsened, accompanied by a loss of appetite, and a “goose egg” size mass was found at the left waist (Figure 1 before therapy). In order to identify potential targets for systematic treatment, blood samples were collected from the patient, and the germline DNA was tested with a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based 605-gene panel and the status of 58 hereditary cancer related genes were reported (Supplemental Table S1), and the somatic circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was tested with the same NGS-based 605-gene panel (Supplemental Table S2). The test results suggested that the patient carried a novel germline BRCA2 nonsense mutation p.L557* (c.1670T>A), as well as somatic INDEL mutations, including BRCA1 p.Y1845Pfs*34 (c.5533_6634del), RB1 p.E554Gfs*6 (c.1661_1695del), JAK2 p.M84Vfs*6 (c.250_251.del), and somatic SNV mutations in TP53, KMT2D, MET, ROS1 and IL7R (Table 1). Among them, the germline BRCA2 c.1670T>A mutation was discovered for the first time (list of all germline mutations for this patient is provided in Table 2). Based on the above test results, the patient started taking Olaparib orally (300 mg/tablet, bid, po). At 3 months after the initiation of Olaparib therapy, CT reexamination revealed a reduction of the left lumbar mass (Figure 1 after therapy) and a reduction of the abnormal enhanced mass in the original left kidney area (Figure 1 after therapy). Multiple enlarged lymph nodes to the left of the abdominal aorta became smaller or disappeared. The overall response achieved partial response (PR). The repeated ctDNA test after 3 months of treatment showed reduction in mutation allele frequency in BRCA1 (from 13.42% to 0.25%), TP53 (from 12.26% to 0.54%), and KMT2D (from 10.21% to 0.21%). The remaining somatic mutations were not detected in the second test (Table 1). The tumor mutational burden (TMB) decreased from 6.11 Muts/Mb to 0.76 Muts/Mb. These observations suggested that Olaparib treatment successfully controlled the tumor development and reduced the tumor burden. At the time of submission of this article, the patient has been receiving Olaparib treatment for more than 4 months with continued response.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Images of the lesion changes reflected the therapeutic response following Olaparib therapy. The waist lesion can be observed from the body surface and reduced after therapy (left column). CT images show that the waist lesion reduced following Olaparib therapy (middle column, arrows indicate the lesion). CT images show that the pelvic lesion reduced following Olaparib therapy (right column, arrows indicate the lesion).

CT, computed tomography.

Table 1.

Genomic alterations detected from plasma ctDNA by 605-gene panel.

Gene name Amino acid change Nucleotide change AF%
January, 2020 April, 2020
BRCA2 L557* c.1670T>A germline germline
BRCA1 Y1845Pfs*3 c.5533_5534del 13.42 0.25
TP53 N247I c.740A>T 12.26 0.54
KMT2D R2687* c.8059C>T 10.21 0.21
RB1 E554Gfs*6 c.1661_1695del 2.87
ROS1 S1891T c.5672G>C 4.6
JAK2 M84Vfs*6 c.250_251del 2.45
IL7R V400M c.1198G>A 2.91
MET N1239Y c.3715A>T 9.3

AF, allele frequency; ctDNA, circulating tumor DNA; del, deletion.

Table 2.

Germline mutations of the patient.

Gene name Mutation position Base change Amino acid change Mutation type Genotype Pathogenicity
APC rs459552 c.5465T>A p.V1822D Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
ATM rs1801516 c.5557G>A p.D1853N Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
ATM rs659243 c.5948A>G p.N1983S Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
ATM rs1799757 c.3285-10T>- N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
ATM rs201773026 c.125A>G p.H42R Nonsynonymous Heterozygous VUS
AXIN2 rs2240308 c.148C>T p.P50S Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BARD1 rs2229571 c.1134G>C p.R378S Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BARD1 rs2070094 c.1519G>A p.V507M Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BLM rs3815003 c.2555+7T>C N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
BRCA1 rs16941 c.3113A>G p.E1038G Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BRCA1 c.824G>A p.G275D Nonsynonymous Heterozygous VUS
BRCA1 rs16942 c.3548A>G p.K1183R Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BRCA1 rs799917 c.2612C>T p.P871L Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BRCA1 rs1799966 c.4837A>G p.S1613G Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BRCA2 c.1670T>A p.L557X Nonsense Heterozygous Pathogenic
BRCA2 rs169547 c.7397T>C p.V2466A Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
BRCA2 rs1801426 c.10234A>G p.I3412V Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
BRIP1 rs4986764 c.2755T>C p.S919P Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
CDH1 rs3743674 c.48+6C>T N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
EPCAM rs150307203 c.859-6A>G N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
EPCAM rs1126497 c.344T>C p.M115T Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
FLCN rs3744124 c.907G>A p.G303R Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
FLCN rs8065832 c.1062+6C>T N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
MEN1 rs2959656 c.1636A>G p.T546A Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
MLH3 rs175081 c.2476A>G p.N826D Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
MRE11A rs535801 c.403-6G>A N/A Intron Homozygous Benign
MSH2 rs2303426 c.211+9C>G N/A Intron Homozygous Benign
MSH2 rs2303428 c.2006-6T>C N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
MUTYH rs3219489 c.1014G>C p.Q338H Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
PMS2 rs1802683 c.2570G>C p.G857A Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Likely benign
PMS2 c.706-4->T N/A Intron Heterozygous VUS
PMS2 rs60794673 c.706-4T>- N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
PMS2 rs1805321 c.1408C>T p.P470S Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
PMS2 rs1805326 c.2007-4G>A N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
PMS2 rs2228006 c.1621A>G p.K541E Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
POLD1 rs1726801 c.356G>A p.R119H Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
POLD1 rs1726802 c.463+8G>T N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
PTEN rs12573787 c.10G>A p.G4R Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
PTEN rs11202592 c.511C>G p.L171V Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
PTEN rs2943772 c.194G>C p.C65S Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
PTEN rs71022512 c.154+1T>- N/A Splicing Homozygous Benign
RB1 rs3092904 c.2664-10T>A N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
RET rs1799939 c.2071G>A p.G691S Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign
STK11 rs183406870 c.921-10G>A N/A Intron Heterozygous Likely benign
TP53 rs1042522 c.215C>G p.P72R Nonsynonymous Homozygous Benign
TSC1 rs118203716 c.2626-4T>- N/A Intron Heterozygous Benign
TSC1 rs1073123 c.965T>C p.M322T Nonsynonymous Heterozygous Benign

VUS, variant of uncertain significance.

Discussion

One of the most interesting findings of this case was that the patient carried a novel BRCA2 germline mutation (c.1670T>A). This mutation led to the formation of a stop code, which stopped transcription at L557 and formed a truncated protein. Since the full length BRCA2 protein contains 3418 amino acids, truncation at L557 led to loss of large fragment of the protein, which would have a significant impact on the protein structure, function, and activity. As far as we know, c.1670T>A has never been reported in the literature and the Clinvar database, and general population data have not reported the site either. However, Clinvar records a BRCA2 mutation of the same site, i.e., c.1670T>G. This mutation also generated a stop code and was interpreted as a pathogenic mutation. Therefore, based on the ACMG principles, c.1670T>A was also interpreted as a pathogenic mutation. As described in the Introduction, the incidence of pathogenic BRCA mutations in UC is low, and there has been no report of the therapeutic effect of PARPi. Therefore, our study represents the first report on PARPi response in a recurrent UC patient with a BRCA1/2 pathogenic germline mutation, and provided important evidence for future therapy.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 somatic mutations are not uncommon in high-grade upper urinary tract UC.10 An interesting finding in this study was that the patient carried both a BRCA2 germline mutation and a BRCA1 somatic mutation, and both of them were pathogenic. Recent studies have shown similar response rates of PARPi therapy in patients with somatic or germline BRCA mutations, suggesting that patients are likely to benefit from PARPi therapy whether germline or somatic BRCA mutations are detected.11 In this case, the identification of both germline and somatic BRCA mutations ensured the good response to PARPi. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are involved in a series of crucial biological processes, including DNA damage repair, transcription activation and suppression, cell cycle regulation, and maintenance of genome stability. Olaparib has been approved for the treatment of patients with ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, primary peritoneal cancer, and pancreatic cancer carrying BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic mutations. Its efficacy in other cancers is also under investigation. There are few data on PARPi efficacy in UC treatment, but there are a couple of ongoing clinical trials designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PARPi in UC as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs. This includes two ongoing phase II clinical trials [ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03448718 and NCT03375307] investigating Olaparib monotherapy in UC patients, but specific efficacy data have not been reported.12 A comprehensive literature search identified only one reported UC patient with BRCA2 germline mutation who benefited from Olaparib treatment.13 Somatic homozygous deletion of BRCA2 (BRCA2 loss) and BRCA2 I2672V germline mutation were detected in this report, while the pathogenicity of BRCA2 I2672V was not certain, therefore, drug efficacy in this case may be strongly related to somatic BRCA2 loss. In contrast, our study reported the first case with a confirmed BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation, with a coexisting somatic BRCA1 mutation. Thus, our report provides strong evidence in support of the application of PRAPi in UC patients with germline and/or somatic BRCA mutations.

NGS tests are recommended for patients with locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent cancers in China, as these patients generally require systematic therapy. Ideally, both tumor tissue and blood samples are collected from these patients for comprehensive examination. The information on the available targets for potential targeted therapy or immunotherapy is important for establishing the personalized therapeutic strategies. The patient in this study experienced recurrent UC with multiple metastases; therefore, the NGS test was recommended for identifying potential drug targets. Due to the unavailability of tumor tissue samples for this patient, the 605-gene panel was used to examine the blood ctDNA (somatic alterations) and genomic DNA (germline alterations). Germline alterations are usually examined as a normal control for somatic mutational calling, which is a routine procedure for NGS testing. Therefore, both somatic and germline alterations were reported for the patient. Fortunately, a pathogenic BRCA2 germline mutation and a pathogenic somatic BRCA1 mutation were identified as actionable targets for PARPi therapy. Since recurrent metastatic cancer lesions were found with the patient after GC combined adjuvant therapy, it can be suggested that the GC regime may not control the disease well, although it is the standard therapy for recurrent or metastatic UC. PARPi could be a good option in this scenario for this patient. Although no clinical trials with PARPi in UC are available in China, this patient was willing to take an investigational therapy with strict informed consent. The prospective test in this patient rationalized the necessity of NGS for target identification, and provided strong evidence for PARPi prescription.

In addition to the BRCA1/2 gene mutations, this study also detected other driver gene mutations related to tumorigenesis and cancer development. KMT2D and TP53 were reported to be common mutations in upper urinary tract UC.14 By comparing the mutation landscape of low-grade and high-grade UC, it was found that the mutation frequency in TP53 and related pathways in high-grade tumors was significantly higher.15 The TP53 mutation has proved to be a factor for poor prognosis for UC.3,16 RB1 is one of the important driving genes, with a nuclear phosphorylated protein as its expression product. In addition to inhibiting the transition of the cell cycle from the G1–S phase, it also maintains genome stability and mediates apoptosis, senescence, and differentiation. Mutations in the RB1 pathway were also common in high-grade UC, and deletion mutations of chromosome 13 were the most common cause of RB1 gene inactivation.17 Mutations of the TP53/RB1 tumor suppressor pathway may lead to TP53 and RB1 inactivation and genome instability,18,19 which occurred in 93% of malignancies, and were also one of the pathogenic mechanisms of high-grade upper urinary tract UC.14

ctDNA testing has been used widely for assisting the clinical diagnosis and treatment for non-small cell lung cancer, breast cancer, gastric cancer, and esophageal cancer.20,21 Studies have also confirmed that ctDNA detection can be used to monitor the alterations in tumor burden and gene mutation status in UC patients.10 In this case, ctDNA effectively monitored the alterations in mutational status following PARPi treatment, in which the abundance of all somatic mutations was greatly reduced or became undetectable. This alteration was consistent with the lesion changes observed by CT, indicating that ctDNA can reflect changes in tumor burden and response to therapy. It is worth noting that, although bTMB significantly reduced after treatment, statistical clinical evidence is still needed to correlate bTMB with the response in UC.

In conclusion, our study reported for the first time that UC patients with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutations responded well to PARPi, indicating that Olaparib can be used in the treatment of UC patients with BRCA1/2 germline and/or somatic mutations. However, the PARPi efficacy in UC treatment still needs to be confirmed by evidence from clinical trials. In addition, this study confirmed that the NGS panel-based ctDNA test can be used for medication guidance and response monitoring in UC treatment.

Supplemental Material

Supplementary_Table1 – Supplemental material for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC

Supplemental material, Supplementary_Table1 for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC by Hong Yang, Zhimin Liu, Yufang Wang, Jun Li, Ruiqian Li, Qilin Wang, Chen Hu, Haiyang Jiang, Hongyi Wu, Lele Song and Yu Bai in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology

Supplementary_Table2 – Supplemental material for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC

Supplemental material, Supplementary_Table2 for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC by Hong Yang, Zhimin Liu, Yufang Wang, Jun Li, Ruiqian Li, Qilin Wang, Chen Hu, Haiyang Jiang, Hongyi Wu, Lele Song and Yu Bai in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest: The authors claim no conflicts of interest in this study.

Ethics and patient: Written informed consent was obtained from the patient before clinical samples were collected. Consent to publication was also obtained from the patient. The patient was informed the test results.

Funding: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by the Special Funds for Strategic Emerging Industry Development of Shenzhen (grant number 20170922151538732), and the Science and Technology Project of Shenzhen (grant number JSGG20180703164202084). Funders did not participate in the study design, study implementation, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation and manuscript writing of the study.

Supplemental material: Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Contributor Information

Hong Yang, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Zhimin Liu, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Yufang Wang, HaploX Biotechnology, Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, Guangdong, P.R. China.

Jun Li, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Ruiqian Li, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Qilin Wang, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Chen Hu, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Haiyang Jiang, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Hongyi Wu, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan, P.R. China.

Lele Song, HaploX Biotechnology, Co., Ltd. 8th Floor, Auto Electric Power Building, Songpingshan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518057, P.R. China; The Eighth Medical Center of the Chinese PLA General Hospital, No. 17, Heishanhu Road, Haidian district, Beijing 100091, P.R. China.

Yu Bai, Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Tumor Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, Yunnan 650118, P.R. China.

References

  • 1. Roupret M, Babjuk M, Comperat E, et al. European guidelines on upper tract urothelial carcinomas: 2013 update. Eur Urol. 2013; 63: 1059–1071. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Solomon JP, Hansel DE. The emerging molecular landscape of urothelial carcinoma. Surg Pathol Clin 2016; 9: 391–404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Mitra AP, Hansel DE, Cote RJ. Prognostic value of cell-cycle regulation biomarkers in bladder cancer. Semin Oncol 2012; 39: 524–533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Jabbour ME, Desgrandchamps F, Cazin S, et al. Percutaneous management of grade II upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma: the long-term outcome. J Urol 2000; 163: 1105–1295. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Jabbour ME, Smith AD. Primary percutaneous approach to upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am 2000; 27: 739–750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Loriot Y, Necchi A, Park SH, et al. Erdafitinib in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2019; 381: 338–348. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Pierantoni F, Maruzzo M, Gardi M, et al. Immunotherapy and urothelial carcinoma: an overview and future prospectives. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2019; 143: 46–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Carlo MI, Ravichandran V, Srinavasan P, et al. Cancer susceptibility mutations in patients with urothelial malignancies. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38: 406–414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Nassar AH, Abou Alaiwi S, AlDubayan SH, et al. Prevalence of pathogenic germline cancer risk variants in high-risk urothelial carcinoma. Genet Med 2020; 22: 709–718. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Agarwal N, Pal SK, Hahn AW, et al. Characterization of metastatic urothelial carcinoma via comprehensive genomic profiling of circulating tumor DNA. Cancer 2018; 124: 2115–2124. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Mohyuddin GR, Aziz M, Britt A, et al. Similar response rates and survival with PARP inhibitors for patients with solid tumors harboring somatic versus germline BRCA mutations: a meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Cancer 2020; 20: 507. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Garje R, Vaddepally RK, Zakharia Y. PARP inhibitors in prostate and urothelial cancers. Front Oncol. 2020; 10: 114. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Necchi A, Raggi D, Giannatempo P, et al. Exceptional response to olaparib in BRCA2-altered urothelial carcinoma after PD-L1 inhibitor and chemotherapy failure. Eur J Cancer 2018; 96: 128–130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Sfakianos JP, Cha EK, Iyer G, et al. Genomic characterization of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 970–977. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Moss TJ, Qi Y, Xi L, et al. Comprehensive genomic characterization of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol 2017; 72: 641–649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. George B, Datar RH, Wu L, et al. p53 gene and protein status: the role of p53 alterations in predicting outcome in patients with bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 5352–5358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Seront E, Machiels JP. Molecular biology and targeted therapies for urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Treat Rev 2015; 41: 341–353. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Sherr CJ, McCormick F. The RB and p53 pathways in cancer. Cancer Cell 2002; 2: 103–112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Iyer G, Al-Ahmadie H, Schultz N, et al. Prevalence and co-occurrence of actionable genomic alterations in high-grade bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 3133–3140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Mathai RA, Vidya RVS, Reddy BS, et al. Potential utility of liquid biopsy as a diagnostic and prognostic tool for the assessment of solid tumors: implications in the precision oncology. J Clin Med 2019; 8: 373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Oellerich M, Schütz E, Beck J, et al. Circulating cell-free DNA-diagnostic and prognostic applications in personalized cancer therapy. Ther Drug Monit 2019; 41: 115–120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary_Table1 – Supplemental material for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC

Supplemental material, Supplementary_Table1 for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC by Hong Yang, Zhimin Liu, Yufang Wang, Jun Li, Ruiqian Li, Qilin Wang, Chen Hu, Haiyang Jiang, Hongyi Wu, Lele Song and Yu Bai in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology

Supplementary_Table2 – Supplemental material for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC

Supplemental material, Supplementary_Table2 for Olaparib is effective for recurrent urothelial carcinoma with BRCA2 pathogenic germline mutation: first report on olaparib response in recurrent UC by Hong Yang, Zhimin Liu, Yufang Wang, Jun Li, Ruiqian Li, Qilin Wang, Chen Hu, Haiyang Jiang, Hongyi Wu, Lele Song and Yu Bai in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology


Articles from Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES