Citations

18 Background: TRITON3 (NCT02975934) is a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 study of rucaparib vs physician’s choice (docetaxel [DTX], abiraterone [ABI] or enzalutamide [ENZ]) in patients (pts) with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC with BRCA1/2 (BRCA) or ATM alterations. It was previously reported that rucaparib significantly improved the primary endpoint of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) vs physician’s choice in pts with BRCA or ATM alterations. We report here the interim overall survival (OS) and also report on efficacy of rucaparib compared individually with either DTX or ABI/ENZ. Methods: Pts had disease progression after 1 prior second-generation androgen pathway inhibitor therapy in any setting and were randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg BID or physician’s choice of DTX, ABI or ENZ. An ordered step-down multiple comparisons procedure was used to control the overall error rate. OS was a key secondary endpoint with rPFS as the primary endpoint tested first in the BRCA subgroup, then the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Subgroup analyses based on physician’s choice were exploratory. Results: As of August 25, 2022, 302 pts with BRCA and 103 pts with ATM alterations were randomized. OS maturity was 54% in the BRCA subgroup and 59% in the ITT population. rPFS and OS are shown. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) in the rucaparib, DTX and ABI/ENZ groups was asthenia/fatigue (61.1%, 67.6% and 57.6%, respectively). The most frequent grade ≥3 TEAE in the rucaparib, DTX and ABI/ENZ groups was anemia (23.7%), neutropenia (14.1%), and hypertension (10.2%), respectively. Conclusions: Rucaparib significantly improved rPFS vs either DTX or ABI/ENZ; safety was consistent with prior reports. Interim OS results suggest a trend towards improvement for rucaparib vs DTX or ABI/ENZ in pts with mCRPC and BRCA alterations. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Purpose: The PARP inhibitor rucaparib is approved in the United States for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and a deleterious germline and/or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alteration. While sequencing of tumor tissue is considered the standard for identifying patients with BRCA alterations (BRCA+), plasma profiling may provide a minimally invasive option to select patients for rucaparib treatment. Here, we report clinical efficacy in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC identified through central plasma, central tissue, or local genomic testing and enrolled in TRITON2. Patients and Methods: Patients had progressed after next-generation androgen receptor–directed and taxane-based therapies for mCRPC and had BRCA alterations identified by central sequencing of plasma and/or tissue samples or local genomic testing. Concordance of plasma/tissue BRCA status and objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates were summarized. Results: TRITON2 enrolled 115 patients with BRCA+ identified by central plasma (n = 34), central tissue (n = 37), or local (n = 44) testing. Plasma/tissue concordance was determined in 38 patients with paired samples and was 47% in 19 patients with a somatic BRCA alteration. No statistically significant differences were observed between objective and PSA response rates to rucaparib across the 3 assay groups. Patients unable to provide tissue samples and tested solely by plasma assay responded at rates no different from patients identified as BRCA+ by tissue testing. Conclusions: Plasma, tissue, and local testing of mCRPC patients can be used to identify men with BRCA+ mCRPC who can benefit from treatment with the PARP inhibitor rucaparib.

PURPOSE BRCA1 or BRCA2 ( BRCA) alterations are common in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and may confer sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. We present results from patients with mCRPC associated with a BRCA alteration treated with rucaparib 600 mg twice daily in the phase II TRITON2 study. METHODS We enrolled patients who progressed after one to two lines of next-generation androgen receptor–directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Efficacy and safety populations included patients with a deleterious BRCA alteration who received ≥ 1 dose of rucaparib. Key efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 in patients with measurable disease as assessed by blinded, independent radiology review and by investigators) and locally assessed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline) rate. RESULTS Efficacy and safety populations included 115 patients with a BRCA alteration with or without measurable disease. Confirmed ORRs per independent radiology review and investigator assessment were 43.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 56.7%; 27 of 62 patients) and 50.8% (95% CI, 38.1% to 63.4%; 33 of 65 patients), respectively. The confirmed PSA response rate was 54.8% (95% CI, 45.2% to 64.1%; 63 of 115 patients). ORRs were similar for patients with a germline or somatic BRCA alteration and for patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 alteration, while a higher PSA response rate was observed in patients with a BRCA2 alteration. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (25.2%; 29 of 115 patients). CONCLUSION Rucaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC and a deleterious BRCA alteration, but with a manageable safety profile consistent with that reported in other solid tumor types.

Abstract Purpose: Genomic alterations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes other than BRCA may confer synthetic lethality with PARP inhibition in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). To test this hypothesis, the phase II TRITON2 study of rucaparib included patients with mCRPC and deleterious non-BRCA DDR gene alterations. Patients and Methods: TRITON2 enrolled patients who had progressed on one or two lines of next-generation androgen receptor–directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Key endpoints were investigator-assessed radiographic response per modified RECIST/PCWG3 and PSA response (≥50% decrease from baseline). Results: TRITON2 enrolled 78 patients with a non-BRCA DDR gene alteration [ATM (n = 49), CDK12 (n = 15), CHEK2 (n = 12), and other DDR genes (n = 14)]. Among patients evaluable for each endpoint, radiographic and PSA responses were observed in a limited number of patients with an alteration in ATM [2/19 (10.5%) and 2/49 (4.1%), respectively], CDK12 [0/10 (0%) and 1/15 (6.7%), respectively], or CHEK2 [1/9 (11.1%) and 2/12 (16.7%), respectively], including no radiographic or PSA responses in 11 patients with confirmed biallelic ATM loss or 11 patients with ATM germline mutations. Responses were observed in patients with alterations in the DDR genes PALB2, FANCA, BRIP1, and RAD51B. Conclusions: In this prospective, genomics-driven study of rucaparib in mCRPC, we found limited radiographic/PSA responses to PARP inhibition in men with alterations in ATM, CDK12, or CHEK2. However, patients with alterations in other DDR-associated genes (e.g., PALB2) may benefit from PARP inhibition. See related commentary by Sokolova et al., p. 2439

5031 Background: The phase 2 TRITON2 study (NCT02952534) is evaluating the PARP inhibitor rucaparib in patients with mCRPC who have a deleterious germline or somatic alteration in BRCA ( BRCA1 or BRCA2) or 1 of 13 other DNA damage repair genes. Here we present analyses of tumor genomics and baseline clinical characteristics in mCRPC patients with a deleterious alteration in BRCA. Methods: Plasma (baseline) and tissue (archival or baseline) samples from patients with a deleterious alteration in BRCA were analyzed using Foundation Medicine next-generation sequencing assays. The alterations and zygosity of the alterations that were detected, as well as the somatic/germline status from Color Genomics testing, were summarized. Associations between genomic alterations, DNA yield, allele frequency, and baseline clinical characteristics were investigated. Results: Results are shown in the Table for a cohort of 40 BRCA2 and 5 BRCA1 patients enrolled in TRITON2 (Abida W et al. Presented at ESMO 2018. Abst 793PD). A biallelic alteration was observed in 21 of the 22 BRCA2 patients (95%) for whom alteration zygosity could be determined. Among the 5 BRCA1 patients, 1 alteration was monoallelic and 4 were of unknown zygosity. Co-occurring alterations in cancer-related or DNA damage repair genes were observed in many patients with BRCA alterations. At baseline, cell-free DNA (cfDNA) yield correlated positively with the sum of target lesions (STL; P= 0.04), but not with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels ( P= 0.86). No correlation was observed between allele frequency of the BRCA alteration baseline STL ( P= 0.68) or PSA levels ( P= 0.97). Conclusions: Patients with a BRCA mutation enrolled in TRITON2 demonstrate a profile of genomic alterations consistent with that of prior studies of patients with mCRPC. Plasma cfDNA profiling showed a correlation between baseline cfDNA yield and measurable tumor burden, but not baseline PSA. Clinical trial information: NCT02952534. [Table: see text]

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.