Characteristics, Treatment, and Outcomes of Real-World Talazoparib-Treated Patients With Germline BRCA-Mutated Advanced HER2-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Talazoparib is a poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved for the treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), HER2-negative, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (LA/mBC), with approval based on the EMBRACA trial. To date, there are no published data on talazoparib use in the real-world United States (USA) setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of real-world US patients with gBRCAm HER2-negative LA/mBC treated with talazoparib monotherapy were collected via retrospective chart review and summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Among 84 eligible patients, 35.7% had hormone receptor-positive tumors and 64.3% had triple-negative LA/mBC (TNBC). At talazoparib initiation, 29.8% had ECOG PS of ≥2 and 19.0% had brain metastasis. Mutations in gBRCA1 or 2 were detected among 64.3% and 35.7% of patients, respectively. Talazoparib was given as 1st-line therapy in 14.3% of patients, 2nd-line in 40.5%, and 3rd- or 4th-line in 45.2%. Median time to talazoparib treatment failure was 8.5 months (95% CI, 8.0-9.7), median progression-free survival was 8.7 months (95% CI, 8.0-9.9), the median time from initiation to chemotherapy was 12.2 months (95% CI, 10.5-20.1), and the overall response rate was 63.1%. No differences in clinical outcomes were observed between patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative LA/mBC and patients with TNBC by using unadjusted statistical comparisons. Brain metastasis and ECOG PS ≥2 at talazoparib initiation were associated with treatment failure and progression or mortality. CONCLUSION: Overall, talazoparib clinical outcomes in this real-world population are consistent with findings from EMBRACA.

Real-world outcomes associated with afatinib use in patients with solid tumors harboring NRG1 gene fusions.

OBJECTIVES: Neuregulin-1 (NRG1) fusions may drive oncogenesis via constitutive activation of ErbB signaling. Hence, NRG1 fusion-driven tumors may be susceptible to ErbB-targeted therapy. Afatinib (irreversible pan-ErbB inhibitor) has demonstrated activity in individual patients with NRG1 fusion-positive solid tumors. This study collected real-world data on demographics, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes in this patient population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, multicenter, non-comparative cohort study, physicians in the US-based Cardinal Health Oncology Provider Extended Network collected data from medical records of patients with NRG1 fusion-positive solid tumors who received afatinib (afatinib cohort) or other systemic therapies (non-afatinib cohort) in any therapy line. Objectives included demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes (overall response rate [ORR], progression-free survival [PFS], and overall survival [OS]). RESULTS: Patients (N = 110) with a variety of solid tumor types were included; 72 received afatinib, 38 other therapies. In the afatinib cohort, 70.8 % of patients received afatinib as second-line treatment and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) was 2-4 in 69.4 % at baseline. In the non-afatinib cohort, 94.7 % of patients received systemic therapy as first-line treatment and ECOG PS was 2-4 in 31.6 % at baseline. In the afatinib cohort, ORR was 37.5 % overall (43.8 % when received as first-line therapy); median PFS and OS were 5.5 and 7.2 months, respectively. In the non-afatinib cohort, ORR was 76.3 %; median PFS and OS were 12.9 and 22.6 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study provides real-world data on the characteristics of patients with NRG1 fusion-positive solid tumors treated with afatinib or other therapies; durable responses were observed in both groups. However, there were imbalances between the cohorts, and the study was not designed to compare outcomes. Further prospective/retrospective trials are required.

Distinct resistance mechanisms arise to allosteric vs. ATP-competitive AKT inhibitors.

The AKT kinases have emerged as promising therapeutic targets in oncology and both allosteric and ATP-competitive AKT inhibitors have entered clinical investigation. However, long-term efficacy of such inhibitors will likely be challenged by the development of resistance. We have established prostate cancer models of acquired resistance to the allosteric inhibitor MK-2206 or the ATP-competitive inhibitor ipatasertib following prolonged exposure. While alterations in AKT are associated with acquired resistance to MK-2206, ipatasertib resistance is driven by rewired compensatory activity of parallel signaling pathways. Importantly, MK-2206 resistance can be overcome by treatment with ipatasertib, while ipatasertib resistance can be reversed by co-treatment with inhibitors of pathways including PIM signaling. These findings demonstrate that distinct resistance mechanisms arise to the two classes of AKT inhibitors and that combination approaches may reverse resistance to ATP-competitive inhibition.