Ryan, Charles J.

TPS389 Background: Recent data have shown that up to 25% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including mCRPC, have a deleterious germline or somatic mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, or another homologous recombination DNA repair gene. Such mutations can be used as a molecular marker to select patients for targeted treatment with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis), which are lethal to cells with HRD. Treatment with PARPis has shown preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC and a mutation in a homologous recombination DNA repair gene (Mateo et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1697-708). These data provide a compelling rationale for evaluating rucaparib, a potent inhibitor of PARP1, PARP2, and PARP3, in patients with mCRPC associated with HRD. Methods: TRITON3 (NCT02975934) is a randomized, phase 3 study evaluating rucaparib 600 mg BID vs physician’s choice of abiraterone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel in patients with mCRPC and a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM mutation (identified by prior local testing or central testing during screening). Patients must have progressed on androgen receptor signaling–directed therapy in the mCRPC setting; prior PARPi treatment or chemotherapy for mCRPC are exclusion criteria. Patients will be randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to either rucaparib or physician’s choice, with the possibility for cross over from the comparator treatment to rucaparib upon radiographic progression confirmed by independent radiology review. The primary endpoint is radiographic progression-free survival (modified RECIST v1.1/PCWG3 criteria) assessed by independent radiology review. Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, duration of response, patient-reported outcomes, overall survival, and safety. Pretreatment blood samples collected from all patients will enable development of a noninvasive plasma-based companion diagnostic to select patients who may benefit from rucaparib treatment. Patients (≈400) will be enrolled at > 100 sites worldwide. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934.

TPS388 Background: Up to 25% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including mCRPC, have a deleterious germline or somatic mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM or another homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair gene that can serve as a molecular marker to select those who may respond to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis). PARPis are lethal to cells with HRD, and PARPi treatment has shown preliminary evidence of an antitumor effect in patients with mCRPC who harbor a mutation in an HR DNA repair gene (Mateo et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1697-708). These data provide a compelling rationale for evaluating rucaparib, a potent PARP1, PARP2 and PARP3 inhibitor, in patients with mCRPC associated with HRD. Methods: TRITON2 (NCT02952534) is a phase 2 study evaluating rucaparib 600 mg BID in patients with mCRPC. Patients with a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1, BRCA2 or ATM mutation (per prior local test or central test during screening) will be enrolled into 1 of 2 cohorts based on the presence or absence of measurable visceral and/or nodal disease. An exploratory cohort will enroll patients with an alteration in any of 12 other prespecified HR genes (eg, RAD51C, RAD51D and PALB2), with or without measurable visceral and/or nodal disease. Patients must have progressed on androgen receptor signaling–directed therapy and 1 prior taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Patients who received prior treatment with a PARPi, mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide or platinum-based chemotherapy are excluded. The primary endpoint is objective response rate measured using modified RECIST v1.1/PCWG3 for patients with soft-tissue disease and prostate-specific antigen response for patients with nonmeasurable disease. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, clinical benefit rate and safety. Pretreatment blood samples collected from all patients will enable development of a plasma-based companion diagnostic to select patients who may benefit from rucaparib treatment. Patients (≈160) will be enrolled at > 100 sites worldwide. Clinical trial information: NCT02952534.

3 Background: There is a clear need to develop a clinically relevant molecular subtyping approach for prostate cancer. We hypothesized that prostate cancer can be subtyped based on luminal versus basal lineage. Methods: We applied the PAM50 classifier, which is used clinically to identify luminal and basal cancers in breast cancer, to subtype a total of 3,782 prostate cancer samples using a high-density microarray platform run in a CLIA-certified laboratory. We examined the associations of these subtypes and clinical outcomes. Results: We demonstrate that PAM50 segregates prostate cancer into three reproducible subtypes in both retrospective cohorts and on prospective validation: luminal A (33.3%-34.3%), luminal B (28.5%-32.6%), and basal (34.1%-37.1%). Luminal B prostate cancers exhibited the worst clinical prognoses, followed by basal and luminal A subtypes (10-year biochemical recurrence-free survival: 29/39/41%; distant metastasis-free survival: 53/73/73%; prostate cancer-specific survival: 78/86/89%; overall survival: 69/80/82% respectively) on both univariable and multivariable analyses accounting for standard clinicopathologic prognostic factors. Known luminal lineage markers, such as NKX3.1 and KRT18, and the basal lineage CD49f signature, were enriched in luminal- and basal-like cancers respectively, demonstrating the connection between these subtypes and established prostate cancer biology. While both luminal-like subtypes were associated with increased AR expression and signaling, only luminal B prostate cancers were significantly associated with post-operative response to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in a subset analysis matching patients based on clinicopathologic variables (interaction p = 0.006, luminal B 10-year metastasis: 33% (treated) vs. 55% (untreated), non-luminal B: 37% (treated) vs. 21% (untreated)). Conclusions: These findings contribute novel insight into the biology of prostate cancer, and provide translatable clinical tools for personalizing post-operative ADT for patients with prostate cancer. Similar to breast cancer, these findings suggest that luminal/basal subtyping may be useful in treatment selection in prostate cancer.

243 Background: Cbz/pred extends survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase I trial was initiated through the DOD PCCTC to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred. Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naive pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD of CAMP; secondary objectives included assessing PSA and objective response rates and duration of response. Starting dose of Cbz was 25 mg/m2 (the currently approved single-agent dose) and Mito 4 mg/m2, administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Mito was escalated by 2 mg/m2 per dose level. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were administered with each cycle. Results: 9 pts were enrolled (dose level I, N = 1; dose level II, N = 1; dose level III, N = 3; dose level IV N = 4). The median age was 67 (range 55-81) and the median baseline PSA was 82.3 (range 20.4-791.2). There were 2 DLTs observed at dose level IV (Cbz 25 mg/m2 + mito 10 mg/m2), both grade 4 sepsis. The most common grade 3 adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 5; febrile neutropenia, n = 2, thrombocytopenia, n = 2). 6 of 9 pts remain on study (range 2.2 - 10.5+ months). Maximal PSA declines from baseline > 50% have been observed in 4/7 (57%) evaluable pts to date. 2 of 4 pts with measurable disease have experienced partial responses and a third has had a minor response after 4 cycles of chemo. The median progression-free survival and duration of response have not been reached. Conclusions: The approved single-agent dosage of Mito (12 mg/m2) could not be safely reached in combination with Cbz 25 mg/m2. Pre-planned evaluation of an alternate dosing strategy combining Mito with Cbz 20 mg/m2, which has demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity, is underway. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging but additional follow-up and further study of the treatment combination is required. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

238 Background: Cbz/pred extends survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase 1 trial was initiated through the DOD PCCTC to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred (CAMP). Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naïve pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD and RP2D of CAMP; secondary objectives included PSA response rate and duration of response. Cbz 20 and 25 mg/m2 were each evaluated in combination with escalating doses of Mito (starting dose 4 mg/m2), both administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were given with each cycle. Results: 20 pts were enrolled. The median age was 66 (range 51-78) and the median baseline PSA was 62.5 (range 3.0-791.2). There were 2 DLTs observed at the dose level of Cbz 25 mg/m2 + Mito 10 mg/m2 (sepsis and febrile neutropenia). No DLTs were observed with Cbz 20 mg/m2 (N = 10), establishing Cbz 20 mg/m2 + Mito 12 mg/m2 as the MTD and RP2D. The most common grade ≥ 3 related adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 8; thrombocytopenia, n = 3; febrile neutropenia, n = 2). No cardiac adverse events were observed. The median number of treatment cycles was 9 (range 2-16), and 5 pts remain on study. Greater than 50% maximal PSA declines from baseline were observed in 8 of 18 evaluable pts (44%). Objective tumor responses have been observed in 2 of 4 pts (50%) with measurable disease, with evaluation ongoing. The median duration of response has not been reached (range 4.9-10.0+ months). Conclusions: The approved single-agent dose of Mito (12 mg/m2) was safely combined with Cbz 20 mg/m2, a dose with demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity than 25 mg/m2. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging with durable responses observed in a subset of pts. Further study of the treatment combination is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

202 Background: Cabazitaxel and prednisone (Cbz/pred) extend survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase 1 trial was initiated to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred(CAMP). Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naive pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD and RP2D of CAMP; secondary objectives included PSA response rate and duration of response. Cbz 20 and 25 mg/m2 were evaluated in combination with escalating doses of Mito (starting dose 4 mg/m2), both administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were given with each cycle. Results: 23 pts were enrolled. The median age was 66 (range 51-78) and the median baseline PSA was 62.5 (range 3-791.2). There were 2 DLTs (sepsis and febrile neutropenia) observed at the dose level of Cbz 25 mg/m2 + Mito 10 mg/m2 (n = 4). There was 1 DLT (febrile neutropenia) observed with Cbz 20 mg/m2 (N = 12), establishing Cbz 20 mg/m2 + Mito 12 mg/m2 as the MTD and RP2D. The most common grade ³ 3 related adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 9; thrombocytopenia, n = 3; febrile neutropenia, n = 3). The median number of treatment cycles was 7.5 (range 2-16), and 2 pts remain on study. Greater than or equal to 50% maximal PSA declines from baseline were observed in 12 of 19 evaluable pts(63%). The median duration of response has not been reached (range 4.9-10.0+ months). Conclusions: The approved single-agent dose of Mito (12 mg/m2) was safely combined with Cbz 20 mg/m2, a dose with demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity than 25 mg/m2. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging with durable control of disease observed in a subset of pts. Further study of the treatment combination is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

Discoveries over the past decade suggest that castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is sensitive, but not resistant to, further manipulation of the androgen–androgen receptor (AR) axis. Several new therapies that target this axis have demonstrated clinical activity. In this article, preclinical and clinical findings occurring in the field of AR-targeted therapies are reviewed. Reviews of scientific and clinical development are divided into those occurring prereceptor (androgen production and conversion) and at the level of the receptor (AR aberrations and therapies targeting AR directly). Intracrine androgen production and AR amplification, among others, are among the principal aberrancies driving CRPC growth. Phase III data with abiraterone acetate and phase II data with MDV-3100, along with other similar therapies, confirm for the clinician that the scientific findings related to persistent AR signaling in a castrate milieu can be harnessed to produce significant clinical benefit for patients with the disease. Studies aimed at optimizing the timing of their use and exploring the mechanisms of resistance to these therapies are under way. The clinical success of therapies that directly target androgen synthesis as well as the most common aberrancies of the AR confirm that prostate cancer retains dependence on AR signaling, even in the castrate state.