Germline and somatic mutations in prostate cancer: Implications for treatment.

Genetic testing is an integral part of the workup of metastatic prostate cancer, in part, because the results can have a profound impact on the subsequent management of this disease. There are now several Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approved therapeutics available for patients with prostate cancer and certain genetic abnormalities - most notably, mutations in DNA damage repair (DDR) pathways such mismatch repair (MMR) and homologous recombination repair (HRR). In this review of the current literature, we discuss the indications for somatic and germline testing, the genetic changes of particular clinical relevance, the associated therapeutic options, and the clinical data supporting their use. We also highlight select trials-in-progress and future directions for the field.

Mixed Adenosquamous Cell Carcinoma of the Prostate with Paired Sequencing on the Primary and Liver Metastasis.

This report aims to shed light on the intricate challenges encountered during the diagnosis and treatment of an uncommon variant of prostate cancer-mixed adenosquamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. Prostate cancers of this nature pose distinctive diagnostic and therapeutic dilemmas due to their rarity and complex histological composition. We present a case of a 63-year-old man with metastatic prostate cancer, featuring adenocarcinoma with squamous cell differentiation, who underwent a multimodal treatment approach. The patient responded to first-line carboplatin, docetaxel, and androgen deprivation therapy, followed by androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) maintenance. However, disease progression led to radiation therapy and a subsequent switch to Lutetium (177Lu) vipivotide tetraxetan after chemotherapy challenges. Comprehensive genetic profiling revealed shared mutations in the prostate and liver lesions, emphasizing the role of targeted therapies. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted therapy resulted in a notable PSA decline. This case highlights the evolving treatment landscape for rare prostate cancers, integrating genetic insights for tailored interventions. In conclusion, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the prostate is rare, emphasizing the imperative for enhanced comprehension in diagnosis and management. Our case suggests the potential efficacy of ARPI and PSMA-targeted therapies. Our findings advocate for a more nuanced approach to the management of this rare prostate cancer variant, leveraging genomic insights for personalized treatment strategies. This exploration serves as a foundation for further research and clinical considerations in addressing the challenges posed by mixed adenosquamous cell carcinoma of the prostate.

Co-occurring BRCA2/SPOP Mutations Predict Exceptional Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor Sensitivity in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: BRCA2 mutations in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) confer sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. However, additional factors predicting PARP inhibitor efficacy in mCRPC are needed. Preclinical studies support a relationship between speckle-type POZ protein (SPOP) inactivation and PARP inhibitor sensitivity. We hypothesized that SPOP mutations may predict enhanced PARP inhibitor response in BRCA2-altered mCRPC. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study involving 13 sites. We identified 131 patients with BRCA2-altered mCRPC treated with PARP inhibitors, 14 of which also carried concurrent SPOP mutations. The primary efficacy endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% PSA decline). The secondary endpoints were biochemical progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), clinical/radiographic progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). These were compared by multivariable Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for age, tumor stage, baseline PSA level, Gleason sum, prior therapies, BRCA2 alteration types, and co-occurring mutations. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. PSA responses were observed in 60% (70/117) of patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPwt disease and in 86% (12/14) of patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPmut disease (p = 0.06). The median time on PARP inhibitor treatment was 24.0 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 19.2 mo to not reached) in this group versus 8.0 mo (95% CI 6.1-10.9 mo) in patients with BRCA2 mutation alone (p = 0.05). In an unadjusted analysis, patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPmut disease experienced longer PSA-PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33 [95% CI 0.15-0.72], p = 0.005) and clinical/radiographic PFS (HR 0.4 [95% CI 0.18-0.86], p = 0.02), and numerically longer OS (HR 0.4 [95% CI 0.15-1.12], p = 0.08). In a multivariable analysis including histology, Gleason sum, prior taxane, prior androgen receptor pathway inhibitor, stage, PSA, BRCA2 alteration characteristics, and other co-mutations, patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPmut disease experienced longer PSA-PFS (HR 0.16 [95% CI 0.05-0.47], adjusted p = 0.001), clinical/radiographic PFS (HR 0.28 [95% CI 0.1-0.81], adjusted p = 0.019), and OS (HR 0.19 [95% CI 0.05-0.69], adjusted p = 0.012). In a separate cohort of patients not treated with a PARP inhibitor, there was no difference in OS between patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPmut versus BRCA2mut/SPOPwt disease (HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.40-2.4], p = 0.94). In a genomic signature analysis, Catalog of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) SBS3 scores predictive of homologous recombination repair (HRR) defects were higher for BRCA2mut/SPOPmut than for BRCA2mut/SPOPwt disease (p = 0.04). This was a retrospective study, and additional prospective validation cohorts are needed. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In this retrospective analysis, PARP inhibitors appeared more effective in patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPmut than in patients with BRCA2mut/SPOPwt mCRPC. This may be related to an increase in HRR defects in coaltered disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we demonstrate that co-alteration of both BRCA2 and SPOP predicts superior clinical outcomes to treatment with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors than BRCA2 alteration without SPOP mutation.

Internet-Based Germline Genetic Testing for Men With Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Germline mutations in DNA repair genes are present in approximately 10% of men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), and guidelines recommend genetic germline testing. Notable barriers exist, including access to genetic counseling, insurance coverage, and out-of-pocket costs. The GENTleMEN study was designed to determine the feasibility of an Internet-based, patient-driven germline genetic testing approach for men with mPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, men with mPC provided informed consent via an Internet-based platform and completed a questionnaire including demographics and family cancer history. Supporting medical data were also collected. Genetic testing was performed using the Color Genomics 30-gene targeted panel of cancer predisposition genes on a mailed saliva sample. Men whose test results identified a germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant received results by phone or telehealth genetic counseling; other participants received results by email with an option for phone-based or telehealth genetic counseling. RESULTS: As of August 18, 2021, 816 eligible men were consented, of whom 68% (551) completed genetic testing, and 8.7% (48 of 551) were found to carry a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a germline DNA repair gene: CHEK2 (17), BRCA2 (15), ATM (6), NBN1 (3), BRCA1 (2), PALB2 (2), PMS2 (2), and MSH6 (1). Participants were more likely to complete the testing process if they were non-Hispanic White, married, highly educated, or from a higher-income bracket. CONCLUSION: Here, we show the feasibility of delivering germline (inherited) genetic testing by a voluntary, patient-driven, Internet-based platform to men with mPC. Preliminary results show rates of germline DNA repair mutations, consistent with other cohorts. Although feasible for some, reduced steps for participation, more dedicated diverse outreach and participant support, and identification and addressing of additional barriers is needed to ensure equitable access and optimization.

Differential Activity of PARP Inhibitors in BRCA1- Versus BRCA2-Altered Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

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. PSA50 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.

Efficacy of systemic therapies in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer harboring germline ATM versus BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: Among men with metastatic prostate cancer, about 10% have germline alterations in DNA damage response genes. Most studies have examined BRCA2 alone or an aggregate of BRCA1/2 and ATM. Emerging data suggest that ATM mutations may have distinct biology and warrant individual evaluation. The objective of this study is to determine whether response to prostate cancer systemic therapies differs between men with germline mutations in ATM (gATM) and BRCA2 (gBRCA2). METHODS: This is an international multicenter retrospective matched cohort study of men with prostate cancer harboring gATM or gBRCA2. PSA50 response (≥50% decline in prostate-specific antigen) was compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The study included 45 gATM and 45 gBRCA2 patients, matched on stage and year of germline testing. Patients with gATM and gBRCA2 had similar age, Gleason grade, and PSA at diagnosis. We did not observe differences in PSA50 responses to abiraterone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer between the two groups; however, 0/7 with gATM and 12/14 with gBRCA2 achieved PSA50 response to PARPi (p < .001). Median (95% confidence interval) overall survival from diagnosis to death was 10.9 years (9.5-not reached) versus 9.9 years (7.1-not reached, p = .07) for the gATM and gBRCA2 cohorts, respectively. Limitations include the retrospective design and lack of mutation zygosity data. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional therapies can be effective in gATM carriers and should be considered before PARPi, which shows limited efficacy in this group. Men with gATM mutations warrant prioritization for novel treatment strategies.

Genetic Contribution to Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Recent studies show that the prevalence of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (also known as mutations) in DNA repair genes in metastatic prostate cancer is higher than previously recognized and higher than in unaffected men. Specific gene dysfunction is important in prostate cancer initiation and/or evolution to metastases. This article reviews key literature on individual genes, recognizing BRCA2 as the gene most commonly altered in the metastatic setting. This article discusses the importance of representative and diverse inclusion, and efforts to advance management for at-risk carrier populations to maximize clinical benefit.

Comparison of germline mutations in African American and Caucasian men with metastatic prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study is to evaluate germline genetic variants in African American men with metastatic prostate cancer as compared to those in Caucasian men with metastatic prostate cancer in an effort to understand the role of genetic factors in these populations. METHODS: African American and Caucasian men with metastatic prostate cancer who had germline testing using multigene panels were used to generate comparisons. Germline genetic results, clinical parameters, and family histories between the two populations were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 867 patients were included in this retrospective study, including 188 African American and 669 Caucasian patients. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of a pathogenic or likely-pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) between African American and Caucasian patients (p = .09). African American patients were more likely to have a variant of unknown significance than Caucasians (odds ratio [OR] = 1.95; p < .0001). BRCA1 PV/LPVs were higher in African Americans (OR = 4.86; p = .04). African American patients were less likely to have a PV/LPV in non-BRCA DNA repair genes (OR = 0.30; p = .008). Family history of breast (OR = 2.09; p = .002) or ovarian cancer (OR = 2.33; p = .04) predicted PV/LPVs in Caucasians but not African-Americans. This underscores the limitations of family history in AA men and the importance of personal history to guide germline testing in AA men. CONCLUSIONS: In metastatic prostate cancer patients, PV/LPVs of tested genes did not vary by race, BRCA1 PV/LPVs were more common in the African American subset. However, PV/LPVs in non-BRCA DNA repair genes were less likely to be encountered in African Americans. Family history associated with genetic testing results in Caucasians only.

Association of Clonal Hematopoiesis in DNA Repair Genes With Prostate Cancer Plasma Cell-free DNA Testing Interference.

IMPORTANCE: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing is increasingly used in the treatment of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) can interfere with cfDNA testing and cause incorrect interpretation of results. There is an urgent need to better understand this problem following recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of poly(ADP) ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) for metastatic prostate cancer based on variants in DNA repair genes that can be affected by CHIP. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of clinically relevant CHIP interference in prostate cancer cfDNA testing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We report a case series of 69 patients with advanced prostate cancer (metastatic disease or with rising PSA following localized therapy) who had cfDNA variant testing with a large panel cancer next generation sequencing assay (UW-OncoPlexCT). To determine the source of variants in plasma, we tested paired cfDNA and whole blood control samples. The study was carried out in an academic medical center system reference laboratory. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Prevalence and gene spectrum of CHIP interference in patients with prostate cancer undergoing cfDNA testing. RESULTS: We detected CHIP variants at 2% or more variant fraction in cfDNA from 13 of 69 men with prostate cancer (19%; 95% CI, 10%-30%). Seven men (10%; 95% CI, 4%-20%) had CHIP variants in DNA repair genes used to determine PARPi candidacy, including ATM (n = 5), BRCA2 (n = 1), and CHEK2 (n = 1). Overall, CHIP variants accounted for almost half of the somatic DNA repair gene variants detected. Participant CHIP variants were exponentially correlated with older age (R2 = 0.82). CHIP interference variants could be distinguished from prostate cancer variants using a paired whole-blood control. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this case series, approximately 10% of men with advanced prostate cancer had CHIP interference in plasma cfDNA in DNA repair genes that are used for eligibility of PARPi therapy, most frequently in ATM. Clinical cfDNA testing should include a paired whole-blood control to exclude CHIP variants and avoid misdiagnosis.

Gender Differences in Faculty Rank and Subspecialty Choice among Academic Medical Oncologists.

Gender parity within academic oncology is important. We hypothesized that gender differences exist in subspecialty choice and academic rank among medical oncologists. We performed a cross-sectional study of adult medical oncologists at the top 15 cancer centers. Gender, rank, subspecialty (breast, thoracic, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary) and board certification year were recorded. 570 medical oncologists were identified (60% men; 40% women). More women practice breast oncology (OR 3.1, p < 0.001), but less practice genitourinary oncology (OR 0.37, p < 0.001). 22% of women were full professors vs 34% of men (OR 0.55, p = 0.001). Gender differences persist in academic adult medical oncology.

Impact of mutations in homologous recombination repair genes on treatment outcomes for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: A significant proportion of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harbor mutations in homologous recombination (HR) repair genes, with some of these mutations associating with increased tumor susceptibility to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy. While mutations in some HR repair genes (e.g., BRCA1/2) have been associated with a more aggressive clinical course, prior studies correlating HR mutational status with treatment response to androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) or taxane-based chemotherapy have yielded conflicting results. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis to assess clinical outcomes to conventional, regulatory-approved therapies in mCRPC patients with somatic (monoallelic and biallelic) and/or germline HR repair mutations compared to patients without alterations as determined by clinical-grade next-generation sequencing assays. The primary endpoint was PSA30/PSA50 response, defined as ≥30%/≥50% prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction from baseline. Secondary endpoints of PSA progression-free survival (pPFS) and clinical/radiographic progression-free survival (crPFS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: A total of 90 consecutively selected patients were included in this analysis, of which 33 (37%) were identified to have HR repair gene mutations. Age, race, Gleason score, prior surgery, and receipt of prior radiation therapy were comparable between carriers and non-carriers. There was no evidence that PSA30/PSA50 differed by HR gene mutational status. Median pPFS and crPFS ranged 3-14 months across treatment modalities, but there was no evidence either differed by HR gene mutational status (all p>0.05). There was also no difference in outcomes between those with BRCA2 or PALB2 mutations (n = 17) compared to those without HR repair mutations. CONCLUSION: HR gene mutational status was associated with comparable clinical outcomes following treatment with ARSIs or taxane-based chemotherapy. Additional prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Complexities of Next-Generation Sequencing in Solid Tumors: Case Studies.

With the promise and potential of clinical next-generation sequencing for tumor and germline testing to impact treatment and outcomes of patients with cancer, there are also risks of oversimplification, misinterpretation, and missed opportunities. These issues risk limiting clinical benefit and, at worst, perpetuating false conclusions that could lead to inappropriate treatment selection, avoidable toxicity, and harm to patients. This report presents 5 case studies illustrating challenges and opportunities in clinical next-generation sequencing interpretation and clinical application in solid tumor oncologic care. First is a case that dissects the origin of an ATM mutation as originating from a hematopoietic clone rather than the tumor. Second is a case illustrating the potential for tumor sequencing to suggest germline variants associated with a hereditary cancer syndrome. Third are 2 cases showing the potential for variant reclassification of a germline variant of uncertain significance when considered alongside family history and tumor sequencing results. Finally, we describe a case illustrating challenges with using microsatellite instability for predicting tumor response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. The common theme of the case studies is the importance of examining clinical context alongside expert review and interpretation, which together highlight an expanding role for contextual examination and multidisciplinary expert review through molecular tumor boards.

Honing in on PARPi Response in Prostate Cancer: from HR Pathway to Gene-by-Gene Granularity.

PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are promising in BRCA2-altered prostate cancer. Data were presented on PARPi efficacy in prostate cancers with alterations in other DNA damage repair genes which suggest low response rates in ATM-, CHEK2-, CDK12-altered tumors and promising results in PALB2-, RAD51B-, FANCA-, and BRIP1-altered tumors.See related article by Abida et al., p. 2487.

Genetic Testing in Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes recent advances in prostate cancer (PCa) genetics. RECENT FINDINGS: Upwards of 20% of metastatic castration-resistant prostate tumors (mCRPC) carry homologous recombination (HR) repair gene mutations, of which ~ 10% are germline (inherited). Another ~ 5% exhibit microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and/or mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd). Pembrolizumab is approved for tumors with MMRd, thus patients with mCRPC and MMRd are candidates for pembrolizumab. Emerging data indicate that platinum chemotherapy and poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are effective in PCa exhibiting HR deficiency. NCCN guidelines now recommend germline and somatic tumor testing in specific clinical scenarios due to treatment and family implications. Genetic testing in PCa patients may inform prognosis, treatment options, and have implications for family counseling. PARPi, platinum chemotherapy, and immune checkpoint inhibitors are promising targeted therapies for PCa with specific molecular features. Therapeutic advances, along with importance to relatives, are driving genetic testing in prostate cancer.

Germline and Somatic Mutations in Prostate Cancer for the Clinician.

It is increasingly important for clinicians involved in the management of prostate cancer to understand the relevance of heritable (germline) mutations that, for select patients, affect prostate cancer risk and cancer biology, and acquired (somatic) mutations that occur in prostate cancer cells. In the advanced disease setting, mutations in homologous recombination repair genes (eg, BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, CHEK2, PALB2) suggest candidacy for platinum chemotherapy and PARP inhibitor trials. Similarly, microsatellite instability and mismatch repair deficiency, which may arise in the setting of MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 mutations, suggest potential vulnerability to PD-1 inhibitors. Germline genetic testing has potential importance in the treatment and assessment of familial risk, and tumor-directed somatic sequencing may guide treatment decision-making. This review provides clinicians with knowledge of basic genetic terminology, awareness of the importance of family history of cancer (not limited to prostate cancer), contrasts between the different but potentially related objectives of germline versus somatic testing of tumor tissue, and indications for genetic counseling. Specific clinical scenarios, objectives of testing, and nature of the assays are reviewed. Germline and somatic mutations of known and potential relevance to prostate cancer are discussed in the context of treatment options, and algorithms to assist clinicians in approaching this area are proposed.

Differential Response to Olaparib Treatment Among Men with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Harboring BRCA1 or BRCA2 Versus ATM Mutations.

BACKGROUND: Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, such as olaparib, are being explored as a treatment option for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in men harboring mutations in homologous recombination DNA-repair genes. Whether responses to PARP inhibitors differ according to the affected gene is currently unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether responses to PARP inhibitors differ between men with BRCA1/2 and those with ATM mutations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a multicenter retrospective review of 23 consecutive men with mCRPC and pathogenic germline and/or somatic BRCA1/2 or ATM mutations treated with olaparib at three academic sites in the USA. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The proportion of patients achieving a ≥50% decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA50 response) was compared using Fisher's exact test. Clinical and radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analyses and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The study included two men with BRCA1 mutations, 15 with BRCA2 mutations, and six with ATM mutations. PSA50 responses to olaparib were achieved in 76% (13/17) of men with BRCA1/2 versus 0% (0/6) of men with ATM mutations (Fisher's exact test; p=0.002). Patients with BRCA1/2 mutations had median PFS of 12.3mo versus 2.4mo for those with ATM mutations (hazard ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.05-0.57; p=0.004). Limitations include the retrospective design and relatively small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Men with mCRPC harboring ATM mutations experienced inferior outcomes to PARP inhibitor therapy compared to those harboring BRCA1/2 mutations. Alternative therapies should be explored for patients with ATM mutations. PATIENT SUMMARY: Mutations in BRCA1/2 and ATM genes are common in metastatic prostate cancer. In this study we compared outcomes for men with BRCA1/2 mutations to those for men with ATM mutations being treated with olaparib. We found that men with ATM mutations do not respond as well as men with BRCA1/2 mutations.