Rucaparib for the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Associated with a DNA Damage Repair Gene Alteration: Final Results from the Phase 2 TRITON2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Initial TRITON2 (NCT02952534) results demonstrated the efficacy of rucaparib 600 mg BID in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) associated with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) or other DNA damage repair (DDR) gene alteration. OBJECTIVE: To present the final data from TRITON2. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: TRITON2 enrolled patients with mCRPC who had progressed on one or two lines of next-generation androgen receptor-directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; as per the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor Version 1.1/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria in patients with measurable disease by independent radiology review [IRR]); prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline [PSA50]) was a key secondary endpoint. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: As of July 27, 2021 (study closure), TRITON2 had enrolled 277 patients, grouped by mutated gene: BRCA (n = 172), ATM (n = 59), CDK12 (n = 15), CHEK2 (n = 7), PALB2 (n = 11), or other DDR gene (Other; n = 13). ORR by IRR was 46% (37/81) in the BRCA subgroup (95% confidence interval [CI], 35-57%), 100% (4/4) in the PALB2 subgroup (95% CI, 40-100%), and 25% (3/12) in the Other subgroup (95% CI, 5.5-57%). No patients within the ATM, CDK12, or CHEK2 subgroups had an objective response by IRR. PSA50 response rates (95% CI) in the BRCA, PALB2, ATM, CDK12, CHEK2, and Other subgroups were 53% (46-61%), 55% (23-83%), 3.4% (0.4-12), 6.7% (0.2-32%), 14% (0.4-58%), and 23% (5.0-54%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The final TRITON2 results confirm the clinical benefit and manageable safety profile of rucaparib in patients with mCRPC, including those with an alteration in BRCA or select non-BRCA DDR gene. PATIENT SUMMARY: Almost half of TRITON2 patients with BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer had a complete or partial tumor size reduction with rucaparib; clinical benefits were also observed with other DNA damage repair gene alterations.

Fibroblast activation protein targeted radiotherapy induces an immunogenic tumor microenvironment and enhances the efficacy of PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibition.

PURPOSE: FAP is a membrane-bound protease under investigation as a pan-cancer target, given its high levels in tumors but limited expression in normal tissues. FAP-2286 is a radiopharmaceutical in clinical development for solid tumors that consists of two functional elements: a FAP-targeting peptide and a chelator used to attach radioisotopes. Preclinically, we evaluated the immune modulation and anti-tumor efficacy of FAP-2287, a murine surrogate for FAP-2286, conjugated to the radionuclide lutetium-177 (177Lu) as a monotherapy and in combination with a PD-1 targeting antibody. METHODS: C57BL/6 mice bearing MCA205 mouse FAP-expressing tumors (MCA205-mFAP) were treated with 177Lu-FAP-2287, anti-PD-1, or both. Tumor uptake of 177Lu- FAP-2287 was assessed by SPECT/CT scanning, while therapeutic efficacy was measured by tumor volume and survival. Immune profiling of tumor infiltrates was evaluated through flow cytometry, RNA expression, and immunohistochemistry analyses. RESULTS: 177Lu-FAP-2287 rapidly accumulated in MCA205-mFAP tumors leading to significant tumor growth inhibition (TGI) and longer survival time. Significant TGI was also observed from anti-PD-1 and the combination. In flow cytometry analysis of tumors, 177Lu-FAP-2287 increased CD8+ T cell infiltration which was maintained in the combination with anti-PD-1. The increase in CD8+ T cells was accompanied by an induction of STING-mediated type I interferon response and higher levels of co-stimulatory molecules such as CD86. CONCLUSION: In a preclinical model, FAP-targeted radiotherapy enhanced anti-PD-1-mediated TGI by modulating the TME and increasing the recruitment of tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells. These findings provide a rationale for clinical studies of combined 177Lu-FAP-2286 radiotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibition in FAP-positive tumors.

Emergence of BRCA Reversion Mutations in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer After Treatment with Rucaparib.

BACKGROUND: Poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are approved in the USA for the treatment of patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutated (BRCA+) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). BRCA reversion mutations are a known mechanism of acquired resistance to PARP inhibitors in multiple cancer types, although their impact and prevalence in mCRPC remain unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of BRCA reversion mutations in the plasma of patients with BRCA+ mCRPC after progression on rucaparib. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men with BRCA+ mCRPC enrolled in Trial of Rucaparib in Prostate Indications 2 (TRITON2) were treated with rucaparib after progressing on one to two lines of androgen receptor-directed and one taxane-based therapy. Cell-free DNA from the plasma of 100 patients, collected at the end of treatment after confirmed progression before May 5, 2020, was queried for BRCA reversion mutations using next-generation sequencing (NGS). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association of clinical efficacy and postprogression genomics was measured in 100 patients with BRCA+ mCRPC treated with rucaparib. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: No baseline BRCA reversion mutations were observed in 100 BRCA+ patients. NGS identified somatic BRCA reversion mutations in 39% (39/100) of patients after progression. Reversion rates were similar for BRCA2 and BRCA1, irrespective of germline or somatic status, but higher in samples with a high tumor DNA fraction. Most patients with reversions (74%, 29/39) had two or more reversion mutations occurring subclonally at lower allele frequencies than the original BRCA mutations. The incidence of BRCA reversion mutations increased with the duration of rucaparib treatment. The frequency of reversion mutations was higher in patients with an objective (58%) or a prostate-specific antigen (69%) response compared with those without either (39% and 29%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that BRCA reversion mutations are a significant mechanism of acquired resistance to rucaparib in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC, with evidence of subclonal convergence promoting systemic resistance. PATIENT SUMMARY: Men with BRCA mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer enrolled in TRITON2 were treated with rucaparib after progressing on one to two lines of androgen receptor-directed and one taxane-based therapy. Cell-free DNA from the plasma of 100 patients, collected after radiographic or prostate-specific antigen progression before May 5, 2020, was analyzed by next-generation sequencing and queried for BRCA reversion mutations.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Rucaparib.

Rucaparib is an oral small-molecule poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor indicated for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer in the maintenance and treatment settings and for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Rucaparib has a manageable safety profile; the most common adverse events reported were fatigue and nausea in both indications. Accumulation in plasma exposure occurred after repeated administration of the approved 600-mg twice-daily dosage. Steady state was achieved after continuous twice-daily dosing for a week. Rucaparib has moderate oral bioavailability and can be dosed with or without food. Although a high-fat meal weakly increased maximum concentration and area under the curve, the effect was not clinically significant. A mass balance analysis indicated almost a complete dose recovery of rucaparib over 12 days, with metabolism, renal, and hepatic excretion as the elimination routes. A population pharmacokinetic analysis of rucaparib revealed no effect of age, sex, race, or body weight. No starting dose adjustments were necessary for patients with mild-to-moderate hepatic or renal impairment; the effect of severe organ impairment on rucaparib exposure has not been evaluated. In patients, rucaparib moderately inhibited cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 and weakly inhibited CYP3As, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19. Rucaparib weakly increased systemic exposures of oral contraceptives and oral rosuvastatin and marginally increased the exposure of oral digoxin (a P-glycoprotein substrate). In vitro studies suggested that rucaparib inhibits transporters MATE1, MATE2-K, OCT1, and OCT2. No clinically meaningful drug interactions with rucaparib as a perpetrator were observed. An exposure-response analysis revealed dose-dependent changes in selected clinical efficacy and safety endpoints. Overall, this article provides a comprehensive review of the clinical pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug-drug interactions, effects of intrinsic and extrinsic factors, and exposure-response relationships of rucaparib.

The Multi-Kinase Inhibitor Lucitanib Enhances the Antitumor Activity of Coinhibitory and Costimulatory Immune Pathway Modulators in Syngeneic Models.

Lucitanib is a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor whose targets are associated with angiogenesis and other key cancer and immune pathways. Its antiangiogenic properties are understood, but lucitanib's immunomodulatory activity is heretofore unknown. Lucitanib exhibited such activity in vivo, increasing CD3 + , CD8 + , and CD4 + T cells and decreasing dendritic cells and monocyte-derived suppressor cells in mouse spleens. Depletion of CD8 + T cells from syngeneic MC38 colon tumor-bearing mice reduced the antitumor efficacy of lucitanib and revealed a CD8 + T-cell-dependent component of lucitanib's activity. The combination of lucitanib and costimulatory immune pathway agonists targeting 4-1BB, glucocorticoid-induced TNFR (GITR), inducible T-cell co-stimulator (ICOS), or OX40 exhibited enhanced antitumor activity compared with each single agent in immunocompetent tumor models. Lucitanib combined with blockade of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) or programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) coinhibitory immune pathways also showed enhanced antitumor activity over the single agents in multiple models. In CT26 tumors, lucitanib, alone or combined with anti-PD-1, reduced CD31 + vessels and depleted F4/80 + macrophages. Combination treatment also increased the number of intratumoral T cells. Gene expression in pathways associated with immune activity was upregulated by lucitanib in MC38 tumors and further potentiated by combination with anti-PD-1. Accordingly, lucitanib, alone or combined with anti-PD-1, increased intratumoral CD8 + T-cell abundance. Lucitanib's antitumor and pharmacodynamic activity, alone or combined with anti-PD-1, was not recapitulated by specific vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR2) inhibition. These data indicate that lucitanib can modulate vascular and immune components of the tumor microenvironment and cooperate with immunotherapy to enhance antitumor efficacy. They support the clinical development of lucitanib combined with immune pathway modulators to treat cancer.

Preclinical evaluation of FAP-2286 for fibroblast activation protein targeted radionuclide imaging and therapy.

PURPOSE: Fibroblast activation protein (FAP) is a membrane-bound protease that has limited expression in normal adult tissues but is highly expressed in the tumor microenvironment of many solid cancers. FAP-2286 is a FAP-binding peptide coupled to a radionuclide chelator that is currently being investigated in patients as an imaging and therapeutic agent. The potency, selectivity, and efficacy of FAP-2286 were evaluated in preclinical studies. METHODS: FAP expression analysis was performed by immunohistochemistry and autoradiography on primary human cancer specimens. FAP-2286 was assessed in biochemical and cellular assays and in in vivo imaging and efficacy studies, and was further evaluated against FAPI-46, a small molecule-based FAP-targeting agent. RESULTS: Immunohistochemistry confirmed elevated levels of FAP expression in multiple tumor types including pancreatic, breast, and sarcoma, which correlated with FAP binding by FAP-2286 autoradiography. FAP-2286 and its metal complexes demonstrated high affinity to FAP recombinant protein and cell surface FAP expressed on fibroblasts. Biodistribution studies in mice showed rapid and persistent uptake of 68Ga-FAP-2286, 111In-FAP-2286, and 177Lu-FAP-2286 in FAP-positive tumors, with renal clearance and minimal uptake in normal tissues. 177Lu-FAP-2286 exhibited antitumor activity in FAP-expressing HEK293 tumors and sarcoma patient-derived xenografts, with no significant weight loss. In addition, FAP-2286 maintained longer tumor retention and suppression in comparison to FAPI-46. CONCLUSION: In preclinical models, radiolabeled FAP-2286 demonstrated high tumor uptake and retention, as well as potent efficacy in FAP-positive tumors. These results support clinical development of 68Ga-FAP-2286 for imaging and 177Lu-FAP-2286 for therapeutic use in a broad spectrum of FAP-positive tumors.

Population pharmacokinetics of rucaparib in patients with advanced ovarian cancer or other solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To develop a population pharmacokinetics (PPK) model for rucaparib, an oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. METHODS: The PPK analysis used PK data from patients in Study 1014 (NCT01009190, n = 35), Study 10 (NCT01482715, n = 123), and ARIEL2 (NCT01891344, n = 300), including intensive intravenous data (12-40 mg), intensive and sparse oral data (12-360 mg single-dose, 40-500 mg once daily, and 240-840 mg twice daily [BID]), and intensive single-dose oral data under fasted conditions and after a high-fat meal (40, 300, and 600 mg). RESULTS: Rucaparib PK was well described by a two-compartment model with sequential zero-order release and first-order absorption and first-order elimination. A high-fat meal slightly increased bioavailability at 600 mg but not at lower doses; this is not considered clinically significant, and rucaparib can be taken with or without food. Covariate effects of baseline creatinine clearance and albumin on rucaparib clearance were identified. Despite numerical increases in exposure with renal impairment, no dose adjustment is recommended for patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. No statistically significant relationships were detected for demographics, hepatic function (normal versus mild impairment), CYP1A2 and CYP2D6 phenotypes, or strong CYP1A2 or CYP2D6 inhibitors. Concomitant proton pump inhibitors showed no clinically significant effect on absorption. External validation of the model with data from ARIEL3 (NCT01968213) and TRITON2 (NCT02952534) studies showed no clinically meaningful PK differences across indications or sex. CONCLUSION: The PPK model adequately described rucaparib PK, and none of the covariates evaluated had a clinically relevant effect. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: Study 1014 (NCT01009190), Study 10 (NCT01482715), ARIEL2 (NCT01891344), ARIEL3 (NCT01968213), and TRITON2 (NCT02952534).

Response to Rucaparib in BRCA-Mutant Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Identified by Genomic Testing in the TRITON2 Study.

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.

Population exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety analyses for rucaparib in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma from Study 10 and ARIEL2.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate correlations between rucaparib exposure and selected efficacy and safety endpoints in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma using pooled data from Study 10 and ARIEL2. METHODS: Efficacy analyses were limited to patients with carcinomas harboring a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation who had received ≥2 prior lines of chemotherapy. Safety was evaluated in all patients who received ≥1 rucaparib dose. Steady-state daily area under the concentration-time curve (AUCss) and maximum concentration (Cmax,ss) for rucaparib were calculated for each patient and averaged by actual dose received over time (AUCavg,ss and Cmax,avg,ss) using a previously developed population pharmacokinetic model. RESULTS: Rucaparib exposure was dose-proportional and not associated with baseline patient weight. In the exposure-efficacy analyses (n = 121), AUCavg,ss was positively associated with independent radiology review-assessed RECIST response in the subgroup of patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent disease (n = 75, p = 0.017). In the exposure-safety analyses (n = 393, 40 mg once daily to 840 mg twice daily [BID] starting doses), most patients received a 600 mg BID rucaparib starting dose, with 27% and 21% receiving 1 or ≥2 dose reductions, respectively. Cmax,ss was significantly correlated with grade ≥2 serum creatinine increase, grade ≥3 alanine transaminase/aspartate transaminase increase, platelet decrease, fatigue/asthenia, and maximal hemoglobin decrease (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The exposure-response analyses provide support for the approved starting dose of rucaparib 600 mg BID for maximum clinical benefit with subsequent dose modification only following the occurrence of a treatment-emergent adverse event in patients with BRCA-mutated recurrent ovarian carcinoma.

Rucaparib in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Harboring a BRCA1 or BRCA2 Gene Alteration.

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.

Evaluation of in vitro absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion and assessment of drug-drug interaction of rucaparib, an orally potent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor.

1. The absorption, distribution, metabolism, elimination, and drug-drug interaction (DDI) potential of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib was characterised in vitro.2. Rucaparib showed moderate cellular permeability, moderate human plasma protein binding (70.2%), and slow metabolism in human liver microsomes (HLMs). In HLMs, cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 and CYP3A contributed to the metabolism of rucaparib to its major metabolite M324 with estimated fractions of metabolism catalysed by CYP (fm,CYP) of 0.27 and 0.64, respectively. Rucaparib reversibly inhibited CYP1A2, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, and CYP3As (IC50, 3.55, 12.9, 5.42, 41.6, and 17.2-22.9 µM [2 substrates], respectively), but not CYP2B6 or CYP2C8 (>190 µM). No time-dependent inhibition of any CYP was observed. In cultured human hepatocytes, rucaparib showed concentration-dependent induction of CYP1A2 mRNA and downregulation of CYP3A4 and CYP2B6 mRNA. In transfected cells expressing drug transporters, rucaparib was a substrate for P-gp and BCRP, but not for OATP1B1, OATP1B3, OAT1, OAT3, or OCT2. Rucaparib inhibited P-gp and BCRP (IC50, 169 and 55 µM, respectively) and slightly inhibited OATP1B1, OATP1B3, OAT1, and OAT3 (66%, 58%, 58%, and 42% inhibition, respectively) at 300 µM. Rucaparib inhibited OCT1, OCT2, MATE1, and MATE2-K (IC50, 4.3, 31, 0.63, and 0.19 µM, respectively).3. DDI risk assessment using static models suggested potential CYP-related DDIs, with rucaparib as a perpetrator. Caution is advised when co-administering rucaparib with sensitive substrates of MATEs, OCT1, and OCT2.

Polyclonal BRCA2 mutations following carboplatin treatment confer resistance to the PARP inhibitor rucaparib in a patient with mCRPC: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are approved for the treatment of breast cancer susceptibility genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/2) mutant ovarian and breast cancers, and are now being evaluated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Reversion mutations that restore BRCA1/2 function have been shown to be responsible for resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy and PARP inhibitors, however there is no information on the sequential use of these agents in prostate cancer. CASE PRESENTATION: A patient with mCRPC associated with a germline BRCA2 mutation was sequentially treated with carboplatin and the PARP inhibitor rucaparib. Genomic profiling of the available baseline tumor and progression blood samples using next-generation sequencing panel tests identified polyclonal BRCA2 reversion mutations post carboplatin treatment but prior to rucaparib treatment. A total of 12 somatic reversion mutations were detected and ranged from small indels to larger deletions of up to 387 amino acids. These alterations are all predicted to restore the BRCA2 open reading frame and potentially protein function. The patient received limited benefit while on rucaparib, likely due to these reversion mutations observed prior to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Here we report a case of a patient with prostate cancer who received a platinum agent and PARP inhibitor sequentially and in whom polyclonal BRCA2 reversion mutations were identified as the likely mechanism of acquired resistance to carboplatin and primary resistance to PARP inhibition. These findings suggest caution is warranted in sequencing these agents.

Non-BRCA DNA Damage Repair Gene Alterations and Response to the PARP Inhibitor Rucaparib in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Analysis From the Phase II TRITON2 Study.

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.

Aurora kinase A drives the evolution of resistance to third-generation EGFR inhibitors in lung cancer.

Although targeted therapies often elicit profound initial patient responses, these effects are transient due to residual disease leading to acquired resistance. How tumors transition between drug responsiveness, tolerance and resistance, especially in the absence of preexisting subclones, remains unclear. In epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant lung adenocarcinoma cells, we demonstrate that residual disease and acquired resistance in response to EGFR inhibitors requires Aurora kinase A (AURKA) activity. Nongenetic resistance through the activation of AURKA by its coactivator TPX2 emerges in response to chronic EGFR inhibition where it mitigates drug-induced apoptosis. Aurora kinase inhibitors suppress this adaptive survival program, increasing the magnitude and duration of EGFR inhibitor response in preclinical models. Treatment-induced activation of AURKA is associated with resistance to EGFR inhibitors in vitro, in vivo and in most individuals with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma. These findings delineate a molecular path whereby drug resistance emerges from drug-tolerant cells and unveils a synthetic lethal strategy for enhancing responses to EGFR inhibitors by suppressing AURKA-driven residual disease and acquired resistance.

Cell-Free DNA Next-Generation Sequencing Prediction of Response and Resistance to Third-Generation EGFR Inhibitor.

INTRODUCTION: The genomic alterations driving resistance to third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are not well established, and collecting tissue biopsy samples poses potential complications from invasive procedures. Cell-free circulating DNA (cfDNA) testing provides a noninvasive approach to identify potentially targetable mechanisms of resistance. Here we utilized a 70-gene cfDNA next-generation sequencing test to interrogate pretreatment and progression samples from 77 EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with a third-generation EGFR TKI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Rociletinib was evaluated in advanced or metastatic (second line or higher) disease with EGFR T790M-positive NSCLC in the TIGER-X (NCT01526928) and TIGER-2 (NCT02147990) studies. Plasma samples were collected at baseline and at the time of systemic progression while receiving rociletinib. The critical exons in 70 genes were sequenced in cfDNA isolated from plasma samples to elucidate a comprehensive genomic profile of alterations for each patient. RESULTS: Plasma-based cfDNA analysis identified 93% of the initial EGFR activating and 85% of the EGFR T790M resistance mutations in pretreatment samples with detectable tumor DNA. Profiling of progression samples revealed significant heterogeneity, with different variant types (eg, mutations, amplifications, and fusions) detected in multiple genes (EGFR, MET, RB1) that may be driving resistance in patients. Novel alterations not previously described in association with resistance to third-generation TKIs were also detected, such as an NTRK1 fusion. CONCLUSION: cfDNA next-generation sequencing identified initial EGFR activating and secondary T790M resistance mutations in NSCLC patients with high sensitivity, predicted treatment response equivalent to tissue analysis, and identified multiple novel and established resistance alterations.

Evolution and clinical impact of co-occurring genetic alterations in advanced-stage EGFR-mutant lung cancers.

A widespread approach to modern cancer therapy is to identify a single oncogenic driver gene and target its mutant-protein product (for example, EGFR-inhibitor treatment in EGFR-mutant lung cancers). However, genetically driven resistance to targeted therapy limits patient survival. Through genomic analysis of 1,122 EGFR-mutant lung cancer cell-free DNA samples and whole-exome analysis of seven longitudinally collected tumor samples from a patient with EGFR-mutant lung cancer, we identified critical co-occurring oncogenic events present in most advanced-stage EGFR-mutant lung cancers. We defined new pathways limiting EGFR-inhibitor response, including WNT/ß-catenin alterations and cell-cycle-gene (CDK4 and CDK6) mutations. Tumor genomic complexity increases with EGFR-inhibitor treatment, and co-occurring alterations in CTNNB1 and PIK3CA exhibit nonredundant functions that cooperatively promote tumor metastasis or limit EGFR-inhibitor response. This study calls for revisiting the prevailing single-gene driver-oncogene view and links clinical outcomes to co-occurring genetic alterations in patients with advanced-stage EGFR-mutant lung cancer.

Secondary Somatic Mutations Restoring RAD51C and RAD51D Associated with Acquired Resistance to the PARP Inhibitor Rucaparib in High-Grade Ovarian Carcinoma.

High-grade epithelial ovarian carcinomas containing mutated BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) homologous recombination (HR) genes are sensitive to platinum-based chemotherapy and PARP inhibitors (PARPi), while restoration of HR function due to secondary mutations in BRCA1/2 has been recognized as an important resistance mechanism. We sequenced core HR pathway genes in 12 pairs of pretreatment and postprogression tumor biopsy samples collected from patients in ARIEL2 Part 1, a phase II study of the PARPi rucaparib as treatment for platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian carcinoma. In 6 of 12 pretreatment biopsies, a truncation mutation in BRCA1, RAD51C, or RAD51D was identified. In five of six paired postprogression biopsies, one or more secondary mutations restored the open reading frame. Four distinct secondary mutations and spatial heterogeneity were observed for RAD51CIn vitro complementation assays and a patient-derived xenograft, as well as predictive molecular modeling, confirmed that resistance to rucaparib was associated with secondary mutations.Significance: Analyses of primary and secondary mutations in RAD51C and RAD51D provide evidence for these primary mutations in conferring PARPi sensitivity and secondary mutations as a mechanism of acquired PARPi resistance. PARPi resistance due to secondary mutations underpins the need for early delivery of PARPi therapy and for combination strategies. Cancer Discov; 7(9); 984-98. ©2017 AACR.See related commentary by Domchek, p. 937See related article by Quigley et al., p. 999See related article by Goodall et al., p. 1006This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 920.

Inactivation of Capicua drives cancer metastasis.

Metastasis is the leading cause of death in people with lung cancer, yet the molecular effectors underlying tumor dissemination remain poorly defined. Through the development of an in vivo spontaneous lung cancer metastasis model, we show that the developmentally regulated transcriptional repressor Capicua (CIC) suppresses invasion and metastasis. Inactivation of CIC relieves repression of its effector ETV4, driving ETV4-mediated upregulation of MMP24, which is necessary and sufficient for metastasis. Loss of CIC, or an increase in levels of its effectors ETV4 and MMP24, is a biomarker of tumor progression and worse outcomes in people with lung and/or gastric cancer. Our findings reveal CIC as a conserved metastasis suppressor, highlighting new anti-metastatic strategies that could potentially improve patient outcomes.

Circulating tumour DNA profiling reveals heterogeneity of EGFR inhibitor resistance mechanisms in lung cancer patients.

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) analysis facilitates studies of tumour heterogeneity. Here we employ CAPP-Seq ctDNA analysis to study resistance mechanisms in 43 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with the third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor rociletinib. We observe multiple resistance mechanisms in 46% of patients after treatment with first-line inhibitors, indicating frequent intra-patient heterogeneity. Rociletinib resistance recurrently involves MET, EGFR, PIK3CA, ERRB2, KRAS and RB1. We describe a novel EGFR L798I mutation and find that EGFR C797S, which arises in ∼33% of patients after osimertinib treatment, occurs in <3% after rociletinib. Increased MET copy number is the most frequent rociletinib resistance mechanism in this cohort and patients with multiple pre-existing mechanisms (T790M and MET) experience inferior responses. Similarly, rociletinib-resistant xenografts develop MET amplification that can be overcome with the MET inhibitor crizotinib. These results underscore the importance of tumour heterogeneity in NSCLC and the utility of ctDNA-based resistance mechanism assessment.