Testing Adaptive Therapy Protocols Using Gemcitabine and Capecitabine in a Preclinical Model of Endocrine-Resistant Breast Cancer.

Adaptive therapy, an ecologically inspired approach to cancer treatment, aims to overcome resistance and reduce toxicity by leveraging competitive interactions between drug-sensitive and drug-resistant subclones, prioritizing patient survival and quality of life instead of killing the maximum number of cancer cells. In preparation for a clinical trial, we used endocrine-resistant MCF7 breast cancer to stimulate second-line therapy and tested adaptive therapy using capecitabine, gemcitabine, or their combination in a mouse xenograft model. Dose modulation adaptive therapy with capecitabine alone increased survival time relative to MTD but not statistically significantly (HR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.043-1.1, p = 0.065). However, when we alternated the drugs in both dose modulation (HR = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.024-0.55, p = 0.007) and intermittent adaptive therapies, the survival time was significantly increased compared to high-dose combination therapy (HR = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.013-0.42, p = 0.003). Overall, the survival time increased with reduced dose for both single drugs (p < 0.01) and combined drugs (p < 0.001), resulting in tumors with fewer proliferation cells (p = 0.0026) and more apoptotic cells (p = 0.045) compared to high-dose therapy. Adaptive therapy favors slower-growing tumors and shows promise in two-drug alternating regimens instead of being combined.

Metastatic ER+ Breast Cancer: Mechanisms of Resistance and Future Therapeutic Approaches.

Endocrine therapy is the main treatment for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer. However, advanced tumors develop resistance to endocrine therapy, rendering it ineffective as the disease progresses. There are several molecular mechanisms of primary and secondary endocrine resistance. Resistance can develop due to either alteration of the estrogen receptor pathway (e.g., ESR1 mutations) or upstream growth factors signaling pathways (e.g., PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway). Despite progress in the development of molecularly targeted anticancer therapies, the emergence of resistance remains a major limitation and an area of unmet need. In this article, we review the mechanisms of acquired endocrine resistance in HR+ advanced breast cancer and discuss current and future investigational therapeutic approaches.

Genomic analysis of advanced breast cancer tumors from talazoparib-treated gBRCA1/2mut carriers in the ABRAZO study.

These analyses explore the impact of homologous recombination repair gene mutations, including BRCA1/2 mutations and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), on the efficacy of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor talazoparib in the open-label, two-cohort, Phase 2 ABRAZO trial in germline BRCA1/2-mutation carriers. In the evaluable intent-to-treat population (N = 60), 58 (97%) patients harbor ≥1 BRCA1/2 mutation(s) in tumor sequencing, with 95% (53/56) concordance between germline and tumor mutations, and 85% (40/47) of evaluable patients have BRCA locus loss of heterozygosity indicating HRD. The most prevalent non-BRCA tumor mutations are TP53 in patients with BRCA1 mutations and PIK3CA in patients with BRCA2 mutations. BRCA1- or BRCA2-mutated tumors show comparable clinical benefit within cohorts. While low patient numbers preclude correlations between HRD and efficacy, germline BRCA1/2 mutation detection from tumor-only sequencing shows high sensitivity and non-BRCA genetic/genomic events do not appear to influence talazoparib sensitivity in the ABRAZO trial.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02034916.

Testing Adaptive Therapy Protocols using Gemcitabine and Capecitabine on a Mouse Model of Endocrine-Resistant Breast Cancer.

Highly effective cancer therapies often face limitations due to acquired resistance and toxicity. Adaptive therapy, an ecologically inspired approach, seeks to control therapeutic resistance and minimize toxicity by leveraging competitive interactions between drug-sensitive and drug-resistant subclones, prioritizing patient survival and quality of life over maximum cell kill. In preparation for a clinical trial in breast cancer, we used large populations of MCF7 cells to rapidly generate endocrine-resistance breast cancer cell line. We then mimicked second line therapy in ER+ breast cancers by treating the endocrine-resistant MCF7 cells in a mouse xenograft model to test adaptive therapy with capecitabine, gemcitabine, or the combination of those two drugs. Dose-modulation adaptive therapy with capecitabine alone increased survival time relative to MTD, but not statistically significant (HR: 0.22, 95% CI 0.043- 1.1 P = 0.065). However, when we alternated the drugs in both dose modulation (HR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.024 - 0.55, P = 0.007) and intermittent adaptive therapies significantly increased survival time compared to high dose combination therapy (HR = 0.07, 95% CI: 0.013 - 0.42; P = 0.003). Overall, survival time increased with reduced dose for both single drugs (P < 0.01) and combined drugs (P < 0.001). Adaptive therapy protocols resulted in tumors with lower proportions of proliferating cells (P = 0.0026) and more apoptotic cells (P = 0.045). The results show that Adaptive therapy outperforms high-dose therapy in controlling endocrine-resistant breast cancer, favoring slower-growing tumors, and showing promise in two-drug alternating regimens.

Neoadjuvant Talazoparib in Patients With Germline BRCA1/2 Mutation-Positive, Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Results of a Phase II Study.

BACKGROUND: The undetermined efficacy of the current standard-of-care neoadjuvant treatment, anthracycline/platinum-based chemotherapy, in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and germline BRCA mutations emphasizes the need for biomarker-targeted treatment, such as poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, in this setting. This phase II, single-arm, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant talazoparib in patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutated early-stage TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutated early-stage TNBC received talazoparib 1 mg once daily for 24 weeks (0.75 mg for moderate renal impairment) followed by surgery. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) by independent central review (ICR). Secondary endpoints included residual cancer burden (RCB) by ICR. Safety and tolerability of talazoparib and patient-reported outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Of 61 patients, 48 received ≥80% talazoparib doses, underwent surgery, and were assessed for pCR or progressed before pCR assessment and considered nonresponders. pCR rate was 45.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.0%-60.6%) and 49.2% (95% CI, 36.7%-61.6%) in the evaluable and intent-to-treat (ITT) population, respectively. RCB 0/I rate was 45.8% (95% CI, 29.4%-63.2%) and 50.8% (95% CI, 35.5%-66.0%) in the evaluable and ITT population, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were reported in 58 (95.1%) patients. Most common grade 3 and 4 TRAEs were anemia (39.3%) and neutropenia (9.8%). There was no clinically meaningful detriment in quality of life. No deaths occurred during the reporting period; 2 deaths due to progressive disease occurred during long-term follow-up (>400 days after first dose). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant talazoparib monotherapy was active despite pCR rates not meeting the prespecified threshold; these rates were comparable to those observed with combination anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens. Talazoparib was generally well tolerated. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03499353.

Comparison of PARPi efficacy according to homologous recombination deficiency biomarkers in patients with ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in the BRCA1/2 (BRCA) genes are associated with response to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi). In addition, there are different homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) biomarkers available in clinical practice [e.g., genome-wide loss-of-heterozygosity (gLOH) and myChoice® score] that identify patients who can benefit from PARPi. Inconsistencies in biomarkers used in PARPi clinical trials make it challenging to identify clinically relevant predictive biomarkers. This study aims to compare clinically available HRD biomarkers in terms of benefits from PARPi. METHODS: We performed database search for phase II or III randomized clinical trials comparing PARPi versus chemotherapy, and meta-analysis using generic inverse variance and a Random Effects model. Patients were classified according to their HRD status: (I) BRCAm (patients with BRCA mutation of germline or somatic origin); (II) non-BRCA HRD [patients BRCA wild-type (wt) with another HRD biomarker-gLOH or myChoice®]; and (III) homologous recombination proficiency (HRP) (BRCAwt and without HRD biomarkers). From those that were BRCAwt, we compared myChoice®+ with gLOH-high. RESULTS: Five studies (3,225 patients) analyzing PARPi in first line setting were included. Patients with BRCAmut had progression-free survival (PFS) with hazard ratio (HR) 0.33 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30-0.43]; patients with non-BRCA HRD had a PFS HR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.37-0.65), and patients with HRP had a PFS HR 0.78 (95% CI: 0.58-1.03). Eight studies (5,529 patients) with PARPi including first line and recurrence settings were included. BRCAmut had PFS HR 0.37 (95% CI: 0.30-0.48), BRCAwt & HRD 0.45 (95% CI: 0.37-0.55) and HRP 0.70 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85). Patients with BRCAwt & myChoice® ≥42 had PFS HR 0.43 (95% CI: 0.34-0.56), similar to patients with BRCAwt & gLOH-high with PFS HR 0.42 (95% CI: 0.28-0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HRD derived significantly more benefit from PARPi when compared to patients with HRP. The benefit of PARPi in patients with HRP tumors was limited. Careful cost-effectiveness analysis, and alternative therapies or clinical trial enrollment should strongly be considered for patients with HRP tumors. Among patients with BRCAwt, a similar benefit was found in patients with gLOH-high and those myChoice®+. The clinical development of further HRD biomarkers (e.g., Sig3) may help identify more patients who benefit from PARPi.

PARP Inhibitors for Breast Cancer: Germline BRCA1/2 and Beyond.

Poly-adenosine diphosphate ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) are approved for BRCA1/2 carriers with HER2-negative breast cancer in the adjuvant setting with a high risk of recurrence as well as the metastatic setting. However, the indications for PARPi are broader for patients with other cancer types (e.g., prostate and ovarian cancer), involving additional biomarkers (e.g., ATM, PALB2, and CHEK) and genomic instability scores. Herein, we summarize the data on PARPi and breast cancer and discuss their use beyond BRCA carriers.

Determinants of Response to Talazoparib in Patients with HER2-Negative, Germline BRCA1/2-Mutated Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have demonstrated efficacy in tumors with germline breast cancer susceptibility genes (gBRCA) 1 and 2 mutations, but further factors influencing response to PARPi are poorly understood. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Breast cancer tumor tissue from patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations from the phase III EMBRACA trial of the PARPi talazoparib versus chemotherapy was sequenced using FoundationOne CDx. RESULTS: In the evaluable intent-to-treat population, 96.1% (296/308) had ≥1 tumor BRCA (tBRCA) mutation and there was strong concordance (95.3%) between tBRCA and gBRCA mutational status. Genetic/genomic characteristics including BRCA loss of heterozygosity (LOH; identified in 82.6% of evaluable patients), DNA damage response (DDR) gene mutational burden, and tumor homologous recombination deficiency [assessed by genomic LOH (gLOH)] demonstrated no association with talazoparib efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, BRCA LOH status, DDR gene mutational burden, and gLOH were not associated with talazoparib efficacy; however, these conclusions are qualified by population heterogeneity and low patient numbers in some subgroups. Further investigation in larger patient populations is warranted.

A Breast Radiology Department-operated, Proactive Same-day Program Identifies Pathogenic Breast Cancer Mutations in Unaffected Women.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Pathogenic mutations in some genes elevate women's breast cancer risk, necessitating risk-reduction strategies. Unfortunately, women are underscreened for cancer risk, and when identified as potentially high risk, women seldom pursue genetic counseling or testing. To improve cancer risk management, this project determined the feasibility of radiology-operated, proactive, same-day risk assessment and genetic testing programs to diagnose high-risk women undergoing breast imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Comprehensive Assessment, Risk & Education Program launched on June 5, 2019. Data was tracked through July 22, 2020. Women undergoing breast imaging completed questionnaires that calculated Tyrer-Cuzick risk and assessed genetic testing eligibility using National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. To encourage eligible women's genetic testing adherence, pretest counseling and saliva sample collection occurred that same day in the imaging center. Samples were tested by a 34-multigene panel. Genetic counselors called women with positive results. Women with negative results or variants of uncertain significance were mailed notifications. Summary statistics were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 3345 women completed questionnaires. 1080 (32.3%) met genetic testing criteria. 468/1080 (43.3%) submitted genetic samples, and 416/1080 (38.5%) completed testing. Of 416 completed tests, 269 (64.7%) tested negative, 109 (26.2%) had variants of uncertain significance, and 38 (9.1%) diagnosed pathogenic mutations. 13/38 (34.2%) women with pathogenic mutations implemented risk-reduction strategies at our institution. CONCLUSION: Breast imaging centers can operate same-day cancer risk assessment and genetic testing programs, identifying high-risk women that conventional risk assessment methods may not have diagnosed. These proactive programs add value to radiology departments' cancer care beyond traditional imaging services.

Personalized Breast Cancer Risk Assessment: Incorporation of Genetic and High-Risk Factorson Breast Cancer Risk and Management.

Breast cancer remains the second most diagnosed cancer in women worldwide and the number one cause of cancer in women in the United States. It is unfortunately the primary cause of cancerrelated deaths among women, with 14% of all cancer deaths attributed to it. Over the past decade, screening methods have matured, and imaging modalities are continuously improving. Screening mammograms remain the only modality that have been shown to improve breast cancer survival, however, more modalities like MRI, abbreviated MRI, and CT mammography are gaining in momentum. Now more than ever, providers need to identify the patient population that is at an elevated risk for breast cancer to offer them a personalized screening approach specific to their empiric risk. In this paper we shed light on risk factors of breast cancer and summarize risk assessment tools that have been recently incorporated in assessing a woman's risk of breast cancer. We also summarize new genetic testing strategies and their implications in prevention of breast cancer. And finally, we offer a personalized approach to management of women with agenetic predisposition as well as to women at elevated risk but without a genetic mutation. The hope is to identify women at increased risk and perfect a "personalized screening approach" for breast cancer.

Relations of Mindfulness and Illness Acceptance With Psychosocial Functioning in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer and Caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: To examine relationships in mindfulness and illness acceptance and psychosocial functioning in patients with metastatic breast cancer and their family caregivers. SAMPLE & SETTING: 33 dyads from an academic cancer center in the United States. METHODS & VARIABLES: Participants completed questionnaires on mindfulness, illness acceptance, relationship quality, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. Dyadic, cross-sectional data were analyzed using actor-partner interdependence models. RESULTS: Greater nonjudging, acting with awareness, and illness acceptance among caregivers were associated with patients' and caregivers' perceptions of better relationship quality. Higher levels of these processes were associated with reduced anxiety and depressive symptoms in patients and caregivers. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Aspects of mindfulness and illness acceptance in dyads confer benefits that are primarily intrapersonal in nature. Nurses may consider introducing mindfulness and acceptance-based interventions to patients and caregivers with adjustment difficulties.

Outcomes in Clinically Relevant Patient Subgroups From the EMBRACA Study: Talazoparib vs Physician's Choice Standard-of-Care Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Talazoparib is a poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that causes death in cells with breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 or 2 (BRCA1/2) mutations. METHODS: EMBRACA (NCT01945775) was a randomized phase III study comparing efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of talazoparib (1 mg) with physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCT: capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, vinorelbine) in locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with a germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) mutation. Prespecified patient subgroups were analyzed for progression-free survival, objective response, clinical benefit, duration of response, and safety. PROs were evaluated in hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subgroups. RESULTS: Of 431 patients, 287 were randomly assigned to talazoparib and 144 to PCT. Prespecified subgroup analyses showed prolonged progression-free survival with talazoparib (HR+/HER2-: hazard ratio = 0.47, 95% confidence interval = 0.32 to 0.71; TNBC: hazard ratio = 0.60, 95% confidence interval = 0.41 to 0.87) and greater objective response rate (odds ratio = 1.97 to 11.89), clinical benefit rate (odds ratio = 2.05 to 7.77), and duration of response with talazoparib in all subgroups. PROs in HR+/HER2- and TNBC subgroups showed consistent overall improvement and delay in time to definitive clinically meaningful deterioration with talazoparib vs PCT. Across subgroups, common adverse events included anemia, fatigue, and nausea with talazoparib and neutropenia, fatigue, and nausea with PCT. Seven patients (2.4%) receiving talazoparib had grade II alopecia and 22.7% had grade I alopecia. CONCLUSIONS: Across all patient subgroups with gBRCA-mutated advanced breast cancer, talazoparib demonstrated clinically significant superiority in outcomes compared with PCT.

Talazoparib in Patients with a Germline BRCA-Mutated Advanced Breast Cancer: Detailed Safety Analyses from the Phase III EMBRACA Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the EMBRACA phase III study (NCT01945775), talazoparib was associated with a significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCT) in germline BRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). Herein, the safety profile of talazoparib is explored in detail. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall, 412 patients received ≥1 dose of talazoparib (n = 286) or PCT (n = 126). Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated, including timing, duration, and potential overlap of selected AEs. The relationship between talazoparib plasma exposure and grade ≥3 anemia was analyzed. Time-varying Cox proportional hazard models assessed the impact of dose reductions on PFS. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with common AEs and health resource utilization (HRU) were assessed in both treatment arms. RESULTS: The most common AEs with talazoparib were hematologic (195 [68.2%] patients) and typically occurred within the first 3-4 months of receiving talazoparib. Grade 3-4 anemia lasted approximately 7 days for both arms. Overlapping grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were infrequent with talazoparib. Higher talazoparib exposure was associated with grade ≥3 anemia. Permanent discontinuation of talazoparib due to hematologic AEs was low (<2%). A total of 150 (52.4%) patients receiving talazoparib had AEs associated with dose reduction. Hematologic toxicities were managed by supportive care medication (including transfusion) and dose modifications. Among patients with anemia or nausea and/or vomiting AEs, PROs favored talazoparib. After accounting for the treatment-emergent period, talazoparib was generally associated with a lower rate of hospitalization and supportive care medication use compared with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Talazoparib was associated with superior efficacy, favorable PROs, and lower HRU rate versus chemotherapy in gBRCA-mutated ABC. Toxicities were manageable with talazoparib dose modification and supportive care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Talazoparib was generally well tolerated in patients with germline BRCA-mutated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer in the EMBRACA trial. Common toxicities with talazoparib were primarily hematologic and infrequently resulted in permanent drug discontinuation (<2% of patients discontinued talazoparib due to hematologic toxicity). Hematologic toxicities typically occurred during the first 3-4 months of treatment and were managed by dose modifications and supportive care measures. A significant efficacy benefit, improved patient-reported outcomes, lower rate of health resource utilization and a tolerable safety profile support incorporating talazoparib into routine management of germline BRCA-mutated locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer.

Precise and Programmable Detection of Mutations Using Ultraspecific Riboregulators.

The ability to identify single-nucleotide mutations is critical for probing cell biology and for precise detection of disease. However, the small differences in hybridization energy provided by single-base changes makes identification of these mutations challenging in living cells and complex reaction environments. Here, we report a class of de novo-designed prokaryotic riboregulators that provide ultraspecific RNA detection capabilities in vivo and in cell-free transcription-translation reactions. These single-nucleotide-specific programmable riboregulators (SNIPRs) provide over 100-fold differences in gene expression in response to target RNAs differing by a single nucleotide in E. coli and resolve single epitranscriptomic marks in vitro. By exploiting the programmable SNIPR design, we implement an automated design algorithm to develop riboregulators for a range of mutations associated with cancer, drug resistance, and genetic disorders. Integrating SNIPRs with portable paper-based cell-free reactions enables convenient isothermal detection of cancer-associated mutations from clinical samples and identification of Zika strains through unambiguous colorimetric reactions.

A Phase II Study of Talazoparib after Platinum or Cytotoxic Nonplatinum Regimens in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA1/2 Mutations (ABRAZO).

PURPOSE: To assess talazoparib activity in germline BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ABRAZO (NCT02034916) was a two-cohort, two-stage, phase II study of talazoparib (1 mg/day) in germline BRCA mutation carriers with a response to prior platinum with no progression on or within 8 weeks of the last platinum dose (cohort 1) or ≥3 platinum-free cytotoxic regimens (cohort 2) for advanced breast cancer. Primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by independent radiological assessment. RESULTS: We enrolled 84 patients (cohort 1, n = 49; cohort 2, n = 35) from May 2014 to February 2016. Median age was 50 (range, 31-75) years. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) incidence was 59% (cohort 1) and 17% (cohort 2). Median number of prior cytotoxic regimens for advanced breast cancer was two and four, respectively. Confirmed ORR was 21% [95% confidence interval (CI), 10-35; cohort 1] and 37% [95% CI, 22-55; cohort 2]. Median duration of response was 5.8 and 3.8 months, respectively. Confirmed ORR was 23% (BRCA1), 33% (BRCA2), 26% (TNBC), and 29% (hormone receptor-positive). The most common all-grade adverse events (AE) included anemia (52%), fatigue (45%), and nausea (42%). Talazoparib-related AEs led to drug discontinuation in 3 (4%) patients. In an exploratory analysis, longer platinum-free interval was associated with higher response rate in cohort 1 (0% ORR with interval <8 weeks; 47% ORR with interval >6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Talazoparib exhibited promising antitumor activity in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline BRCA mutation.

Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Breast Cancer: Emerging New Data.

Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer affecting women in the United States. Triple-negative breast cancer remains the most aggressive molecular subtype secondary to a lack of therapeutic targets. The search for a target has led us to investigate immunotherapeutic agents. Immunotherapy has recently demonstrated significant breakthroughs in various types of cancers that are refractory to traditional therapies including melanoma and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Breast cancer however remains one of the tumors that was initially least investigated because of being considered to have a low immunogenic potential and a low mutational load. Over the past few years, antiPD1/PDL1 drugs have started to make progress in the triple-negative subtype with more promising outcomes. In this report, we review the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer and specifically shed light on advances in immunotherapy and newly approved drugs in this challenging disease.

Mechanisms of resistance to BRAF and MEK inhibitors and clinical update of US Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted therapy in advanced melanoma.

Approximately 50% of melanomas harbor an activating BRAF mutation. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibitors such as dabrafenib and trametinib, vemurafenib and cobimetinib, and encorafenib and binimetinib are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved to treat patients with BRAF V600-mutated advanced melanoma. Both genetic and epigenetic alterations play a major role in resistance to BRAF inhibitors by reactivation of the MAPK and/or the PI3K-Akt pathways. The role of BRAF inhibitors in modulating the immunomicroenvironment and perhaps enhancing the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors is gaining interest. This article provides a comprehensive review of mechanisms of resistance to BRAF and MEK inhibitors in melanoma and summarizes landmark trials that led to the FDA approval of BRAF and MEK inhibitors in metastatic melanoma.

Talazoparib in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and a Germline BRCA Mutation.

BACKGROUND: The poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) inhibitor talazoparib has shown antitumor activity in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 ( BRCA1/2). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial in which patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation were assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive talazoparib (1 mg once daily) or standard single-agent therapy of the physician's choice (capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine in continuous 21-day cycles). The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Of the 431 patients who underwent randomization, 287 were assigned to receive talazoparib and 144 were assigned to receive standard therapy. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the talazoparib group than in the standard-therapy group (8.6 months vs. 5.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.71; P<0.001). The interim median hazard ratio for death was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.55 to 1.06; P=0.11 [57% of projected events]). The objective response rate was higher in the talazoparib group than in the standard-therapy group (62.6% vs. 27.2%; odds ratio, 5.0; 95% CI, 2.9 to 8.8; P<0.001). Hematologic grade 3-4 adverse events (primarily anemia) occurred in 55% of the patients who received talazoparib and in 38% of the patients who received standard therapy; nonhematologic grade 3 adverse events occurred in 32% and 38% of the patients, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes favored talazoparib; significant overall improvements and significant delays in the time to clinically meaningful deterioration according to both the global health status-quality-of-life and breast symptoms scales were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation, single-agent talazoparib provided a significant benefit over standard chemotherapy with respect to progression-free survival. Patient-reported outcomes were superior with talazoparib. (Funded by Medivation [Pfizer]; EMBRACA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01945775 .).