Back to Authors

Smaletz, Oren

0000-0003-2788-2616

Mayo Clinic

Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein

Citations 2

Differential Activity of PARP Inhibitors in BRCA1 - Versus BRCA2 -Altered Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Taza, Fadi , Holler, Albert , Fu, Wei , Wang, Hao , Adra, Nabil , Albany, Costantine , Ashkar, Ryan, Cheng, Heather H. , Sokolova, Alexandra , Agarwal, Neeraj , Kessel, Adam , Bryce, Alan H. , Nafissi, Nellie , Berchuck, Jacob E. , Taplin, Mary‐Ellen , Aggarwal, Rahul , Vlachostergios, Panagiotis J. , Alva, Ajjai , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S. , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S. , Holler, Albert E , Sokolova, Alexandra O , Bryce, Alan H , Barata, Pedro , Sartor, A Oliver , Bastos, Diogo , Smaletz, Oren , Berchuck, Jacob E , Aggarwal, Rahul , Sternberg, Cora N , Vlachostergios, Panagiotis J , Su, Christopher , Marshall, Catherine H , Agarwal, Archana M , Cheng, Heather H , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Wang, Hao , Barata, Pedro C. , Sartor, Oliver , Su, Christopher , Marshall, Catherine H.

JCO Precision Oncology | July 22, 2021 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1200-1220

10.1200/po.21.00070 Get It

PURPOSE Two poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (olaparib and rucaparib) are US Food and Drug Administration–approved for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring BRCA1/ 2 mutations, but the relative efficacy of PARP inhibition in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered mCRPC is understudied. METHODS We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis involving 12 sites. We collected genomic and clinical data from 123 patients with BRCA1/ 2-altered mCRPC who were treated with PARP inhibitors. The primary efficacy end point was the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥ 50% PSA decline) rate. Secondary end points were PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), clinical or radiographic PFS, and overall survival. We compared clinical outcomes, and other genomic characteristics, among BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered mCRPC. RESULTS A total of 123 patients (13 BRCA1 and 110 BRCA2) were included. PARP inhibitors used were olaparib (n = 116), rucaparib (n = 3), talazoparib (n = 2), and veliparib (n = 2). At diagnosis, 72% of patients had Gleason 8-10 disease. BRCA1 patients were more likely to have metastatic disease at presentation (69% v 37%; P = .04). Age, baseline PSA, metastatic distribution, and types of previous systemic therapies were similar between groups. There were equal proportions of germline mutations (51% v 46%; P = .78) in both groups. BRCA1 patients had more monoallelic (56% v 41%; P = .49) and concurrent TP53 (55% v 36%; P = .32) mutations. PSA 50 responses in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered patients were 23% versus 63%, respectively ( P = .01). BRCA2 patients achieved longer PSA-PFS (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.92 to 4.09; P = .08), PFS (HR, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.99 to 4.40; P = .05), and overall survival (HR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.32 to 6.83; P = .008). Biallelic (compared with monoallelic) mutations, truncating (compared with missense) mutations, and absence of a concurrent TP53 mutation were associated with PARP inhibitor sensitivity. CONCLUSION PARP inhibitor efficacy is diminished in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered mCRPC. This is not due to an imbalance in germline mutations but might be related to more monoallelic mutations and/or concurrent TP53 alterations in the BRCA1 group.
Differential activity of PARP inhibitors in BRCA1- versus BRCA2-altered metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
Taza, Fadi , Ashkar, Ryan, Sokolova, Alexandra , Kessel, Adam , Nafissi, Nellie , Aggarwal, Rahul , Berchuck, Jacob E. , Holler, Albert , Adra, Nabil , Barata, Pedro C. , Bastos, Diogo , Smaletz, Oren , Vlachostergios, Panagiotis J. , Su, Christopher , Marshall, Catherine H. , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | March 2, 2021 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 6_suppl | Pages: 100-100

10.1200/jco.2021.39.6_suppl.100 Get It

100 Background: Two PARP inhibitors (olaparib, rucaparib) are now FDA approved for mCRPC patients with mutations in BRCA1/2, but the relative efficacy of PARP inhibition in BRCA1- vs BRCA2-altered mCRPC is understudied. Methods: We conducted a multi-center retrospective analysis involving 11 academic sites. We collected genomic and clinical data from 123 BRCA1/2-altered mCRPC patients receiving PARP inhibitor treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was PSA50 response rate (≥50% decline in PSA level). Secondary endpoints were PFS (clinical, radiographic or PSA progression, whichever occurred first) and overall survival (OS). We also captured information on other concurrent genomic alterations. We compared genomic characteristics and clinical outcomes among BRCA1- vs BRCA2-altered mCRPC. Results: A total of 123 patients (13 BRCA1, 110 BRCA2) were included. PARP inhibitors used were olaparib (n = 116), rucaparib (n = 3), talazoparib (n = 2) and veliparib (n = 2). All BRCA1 and 71% of BRCA2 patients had Gleason 8-10 disease. Compared to BRCA2 patients, BRCA1 patients were more likely to have received prior taxane chemotherapy (77% vs 62%). Age, baseline PSA, and prior enzalutamide/abiraterone treatment were similar between groups. PSA50 responses in BRCA1- vs BRCA2-altered patients were 38% vs 65% respectively ( P= 0.06). Median PFS in BRCA1 vs BRCA2 patients was 3.0 mo (95%CI, 0.9–5.1) vs 8.0 mo (95%CI, 5.3–10.6) respectively (HR 0.42, P= 0.01). Similarly, median OS in BRCA1 vs BRCA2 patients was 11.0 mo (95%CI, 9.9–12.1) vs 24.0 mo (95%CI, 18.2–29.8) respectively (HR 0.33, P= 0.005). There were roughly equal proportions of germline mutations (50% vs 45%) and biallelic mutations (31% vs 25%) in the BRCA2 and BRCA1 groups, respectively. There were numerically more TP53 mutations in the BRCA1 vs BRCA2 group (40% vs 29%, P= 0.45), but an equal number of mutations in other key genes ( PTEN, RB1 and AR). Conclusions: PARP inhibitor activity is diminished in BRCA1- vs BRCA2-altered mCRPC. In our cohort, this differential activity was not explained by mutation origin (germline vs somatic) or allelic status (mono- vs biallelic). These findings warrant validation.