[The efficacy and safety of anlotinib combined with niraparib in treating patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer].

Objectives: To investigate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib combined with niraparib in treating patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Methods: Thirty-five patients with pathological confirmed platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who experienced progression after receiving at least two lines of standard treatment were eligible. All of them were treated with anlotinib combined with niraparib between September 2019 and October 2021. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The second endpoints included overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test, and influence factor analysis was performed using Cox proportional risk regression models. Results: The best overall response showed that partial response was observed in 14 patients, stable disease was noted within 13 patients, and progressive disease was found in 8 patients. Therefore, the ORR and DCR of these 35 patients were 40.0% (95% CI:22.9%-57.1%) and 77.1% (95% CI:62.9%-91.4%), respectively. The median follow-up duration was 18.9 months (6.9-32.2). The median PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI:5.35-7.66). Multivariate Cox regression analysis for PFS indicated that age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, and BRCA mutation status were independent factors influencing PFS (P＜0.05). Additionally, the PFS in patients with BRCA mutation who have never received PARP inhibitor treatment was significantly longer than that in patients without BRCA mutation who have been exposed to prior PARPi treatment (15.0 vs 6.0 month, P=0.029). The most common treatment-related adverse reactions were fatigue (85.7%), hematologic toxic (85.7%) and hypertension (74.3%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusion: Anlotinib combined with niraparib shows a promising efficacy and tolerable safety in platinum-resistant ROC patients.

Phase 1b study to assess the safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of pamiparib in combination with temozolomide in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Pamiparib is a potent, selective, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1/2 inhibitor that demonstrates synthetic lethality in cells with breast cancer susceptibility gene mutations or other homologous recombination deficiency. This two-stage phase 1b study (NCT03150810) assessed pamiparib in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) in adult patients with histologically confirmed locally advanced and metastatic solid tumors. METHODS: Oral pamiparib 60 mg was administered twice daily. During the dose-escalation stage, increasing doses of TMZ (40-120 mg once daily pulsed or 20-40 mg once daily continuous) were administered to determine the recommended dose to be administered in the dose-expansion stage. The primary objectives were to determine safety and tolerability, maximum tolerated/administered dose, recommended phase 2 dose and schedule, and antitumor activity of pamiparib in combination with TMZ. Pharmacokinetics of pamiparib and TMZ and biomarkers were also assessed. RESULTS: Across stages, 139 patients were treated (dose escalation, n = 66; dose expansion, n = 73). The maximum tolerated dose of TMZ, which was administered during dose expansion, was 7-day pulsed 60 mg once daily. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were anemia (dose escalation, 56.1%; dose expansion, 63.0%), nausea (dose escalation, 54.5%; dose expansion, 49.3%), and fatigue (dose escalation, 48.5%; dose expansion, 47.9%). In the dose-escalation stage, four patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (three neutropenia and one neutrophil count decreased). No TEAEs considered to be related to study drug treatment resulted in death. Antitumor activity was modest, indicated by confirmed overall response rate (dose escalation, 13.8%; dose expansion, 11.6%), median progression-free survival (3.7 and 2.8 months), and median overall survival (10.5 and 9.2 months). Administration of combination therapy did not notably impact pamiparib or TMZ pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSIONS: Pamiparib in combination with TMZ had a manageable safety profile. Further investigation of the efficacy of this combination in tumor types with specific DNA damage repair deficiencies is warranted.

Safety assessments and clinical features of PARP inhibitors from real-world data of Japanese patients with ovarian cancer.

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors have been increasingly used in ovarian cancer treatment. However, the real-world safety data of these drugs in Japanese patients are limited. This retrospective study included 181 patients with ovarian cancer who received olaparib or niraparib at two independent hospitals in Japan between May 2018 and December 2022. Clinical information and blood sampling data were collected. Regarding patient backgrounds, the olaparib group had higher proportions of patients with serous carcinoma, BRCA positivity, homologous recombination deficiency, and those receiving maintenance therapy after recurrence treatment than the niraparib group. Regarding toxicity properties, the most common reasons for discontinuation in the olaparib group were anemia, fatigue, and nausea, while the reason in the niraparib was thrombocytopenia. Thrombocytopenia caused by niraparib treatment occurred earlier than anemia caused by olaparib treatment. Patients with a low body mass index or who had undergone several previous treatment regimens were more likely to discontinue treatment within the first 3 months. Although we analyzed blood collection data, predicting treatment interruptions due to blood toxicity was challenging. In this study, we revealed the characteristics of patients and the timing of interruptions for each drug, highlighting the importance of carefully managing adverse effects.

The efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors in mCRPC with HRR mutation in second-line treatment: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP- ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) has been increasingly adopted for metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with homologous recombination repair deficiency (HRD). However, it is unclear which PARPi is optimal in mCRPC patients with HRD in 2nd -line setting. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review of trials regarding PARPi- based therapies on mCRPC in 2nd -line setting and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) was assessed as primary outcome. PSA response and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed according to specific genetic mutation. RESULTS: Four RCTs comprised of 1024 patients (763 harbored homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations) were identified for quantitative analysis. Regarding rPFS, olaparib monotherapy, rucaparib and cediranib plus olaparib showed significant improvement compared with ARAT. Olaparib plus cediranib had the highest surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores (87.5%) for rPFS, followed by rucaparib, olaparib and olaparib plus abiraterone acetate prednisone. For patients with BRCA 1/2 mutations, olaparib associated with the highest probability (98.1%) of improved rPFS. For patients with BRCA-2 mutations, olaparib and olaparib plus cediranib had similar efficacy. However, neither olaparib nor rucaparib showed significant superior effectiveness to androgen receptor-axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) in patients with ATM mutations. For safety, olaparib showed significantly lower ≥ 3 AE rate compared with cediranib plus olaparib (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.97), while olaparib plus cediranib was associated with the highest risk of all-grade AE. CONCLUSION: PARPi-based therapy showed considerable efficacy for mCRPC patients with HRD in 2nd -line setting. However, patients should be treated accordingly based on their genetic background as well as the efficacy and safety of the selected regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42023454079.

Synthetic Lethality Beyond BRCA: A Phase I Study of Rucaparib and Irinotecan in Metastatic Solid Tumors With Homologous Recombination-Deficiency Mutations Beyond BRCA1/2.

PURPOSE: Combining poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) and topoisomerase I inhibitors has demonstrated synergistic effects in in vivo models. This phase I trial evaluated rucaparib and irinotecan in metastatic solid tumors with homologous recombination deficiency. METHODS: This study enrolled patients in three cohorts to determine the tolerability and preliminary efficacy of (1) rucaparib 400 mg PO twice a day (days 1-7, 15-21) and irinotecan 65 mg/m2 intravenously once every 2 weeks; (2) rucaparib 400 mg PO twice a day (D1-7, 15-21) and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks; and (3) rucaparib 400 mg per os twice a day (D1-7) and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled: 95% with previous platinum, 40% with previous irinotecan, and 20% with previous PARP inhibitor. The maximally tolerated was determined as rucaparib 400 mg twice a day days 1-7 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. Four dose-limiting toxicities (all grade 3-4 neutropenia) occurred during dose escalation with only neutropenia as other grade 3-4 toxicities (25%; grade 3 [n = 3], grade 4 [n = 2]). Treatment-related grade 1-2 adverse events included neutropenia (45%), diarrhea (45%), nausea (40%), and fatigue (30%). Of 17 patients with evaluable disease, six patients (35%) derived clinical benefit (n = 2 with PR, n = 4 with stable disease for over 6 months). Three patients remained on study >1 year: two with ATM mutations (small bowel carcinoma and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor) and one patient with a PALB2 mutation (primary peritoneal cancer). CONCLUSION: Pulse dosing of rucaparib and once every 3 weeks irinotecan was well tolerated for up to 18 months with durable responses in BRCA-, PALB2-, and ATM-mutated cancers despite progression on previous platinum.

Senaparib as first-line maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial.

Poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors as maintenance therapy after first-line chemotherapy have improved progression-free survival in women with advanced ovarian cancer; however, not all PARP inhibitors can provide benefit for a biomarker-unselected population. Senaparib is a PARP inhibitor that demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with solid tumors, including ovarian cancer, in phase 1 studies. The multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial FLAMES randomized (2:1) 404 females with advanced ovarian cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III-IV) and response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy to senaparib 100 mg (n = 271) or placebo (n = 133) orally once daily for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median progression-free survival was not reached with senaparib and was 13.6 months with placebo (hazard ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.58; P < 0.0001). The benefit with senaparib over placebo was consistent in the subgroups defined by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation or homologous recombination status. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 179 (66%) and 27 (20%) patients, respectively. Senaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer after response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, irrespective of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status and with consistent benefits observed between homologous recombination subgroups, and was well tolerated. These results support senaparib as a maintenance treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer after a response to first-line chemotherapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04169997 .

Safety and hematological toxicities of PARP inhibitors in patients with cancer: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and a pharmacovigilance analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to estimate the toxicities of PARP inhibitors (PARPis), based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched from inception to 16 April 2024, for RCTs of approved PARPis. The primary and secondary outcomes were grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) and grade 3-5 hematological AE, respectively. We conducted network meta-analyses to calculate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of outcomes. A disproportionality analysis was conducted to estimate the signals of hematological AEs associated with PARPis from the FAERS database. RESULTS: Overall, 27 RCTs involving 11,067 patients with cancer were included. Olaparib had the best safety profile for any grade 3-5 AEs and hematological AEs among four approved PARPis. Olaparib did not increase the risk of thrombocytopenia (RR: 1.48; 95%CI: 0.64-3.39), but other PARPis did. Furthermore 14,780 hematological AE reports associated with PARPis were identified in the FAERS database, and all PARPis were associated with strong hematological AE signals. Hematological AEs mainly occurred within the first 3 months (80.84%) after PARPi initiation. CONCLUSION: Olaparib had the best safety profile among five PARPis. PARPi-associated hematological AEs mainly occurred within the first 3 months. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42022385274).

Olaparib for childhood tumors harboring defects in DNA damage repair genes: arm H of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial.

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) precision oncology platform trial enrolled children aged 1-21 years with treatment-refractory solid tumors and predefined actionable genetic alterations. Patients with tumors harboring alterations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes were assigned to receive olaparib. METHODS: Tumor and blood samples were submitted for centralized molecular testing. Tumor and germline sequencing were conducted in parallel. Olaparib was given twice daily for 28-day cycles starting at a dose 30% lower than the adult recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). The primary endpoint was the objective response. RESULTS: Eighteen patients matched (1.5% of those screened) based on the presence of a deleterious gene alteration in BRCA1/2, RAD51C/D, or ATM detected by tumor sequencing without germline subtraction or analysis of loss of heterozygosity (LOH). Eleven (61%) harbored a germline mutation, with only one exhibiting LOH. Six patients enrolled and received the olaparib starting dose of 135 mg/m2/dose. Two participants were fully evaluable; 4 were inevaluable because <85% of the prescribed dose was administered during cycle 1. There were no dose-limiting toxicities or responses. Minimal hematologic toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Most DDR gene alterations detected in Pediatric MATCH were germline, monoallelic, and unlikely to confer homologous recombination deficiency predicting sensitivity to olaparib monotherapy. The study closed due to poor accrual. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03233204. IRB approved: initial July 24, 2017.

Comparing niraparib versus platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with newly diagnosed homologous recombination-deficient stage III/IV ovarian cancer: study protocol for cohort C of the open-label, phase 2, randomized controlled multicenter OPAL trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy with niraparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, has been shown to extend progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, regardless of biomarker status. However, there are limited data on niraparib's efficacy and safety in the neoadjuvant setting. The objective of Cohort C of the OPAL trial (OPAL-C) is to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of neoadjuvant niraparib treatment compared with neoadjuvant platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer with confirmed homologous recombination-deficient tumors. METHODS: OPAL is an ongoing global, multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial. In OPAL-C, patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive three 21-day cycles of either neoadjuvant niraparib or platinum-taxane doublet neoadjuvant chemotherapy per standard of care. Patients with a complete or partial response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) will then undergo interval debulking surgery; patients with stable disease may proceed to interval debulking surgery or alternative therapy at the investigator's discretion. Patients with disease progression will exit the study treatment and proceed to alternative therapy at the investigator's discretion. After interval debulking surgery, all patients will receive up to three 21-day cycles of platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy followed by niraparib maintenance therapy for up to 36 months. Adult patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer eligible to receive neoadjuvant platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery may be enrolled. Patients must have tumors that are homologous recombination-deficient. The primary endpoint is the pre-interval debulking surgery unconfirmed overall response rate, defined as the investigator-assessed percentage of patients with unconfirmed complete or partial response on study treatment before interval debulking surgery per RECIST v1.1. DISCUSSION: OPAL-C explores the use of niraparib in the neoadjuvant setting as an alternative to neoadjuvant platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy to improve postsurgical residual disease outcomes for patients with ovarian cancer with homologous recombination-deficient tumors. Positive findings from this approach could significantly impact preoperative ovarian cancer therapy, particularly for patients who are ineligible for primary debulking surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03574779. Registered on February 28, 2022.

Association of PARP inhibitor treatment on the prevalence and progression of clonal hematopoiesis in patients with advanced prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are approved for the treatment of some men with advanced prostate cancer. Rare but serious side effects include myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The impact of PARP inhibitors on clonal hematopoiesis (CH), a potential precursor lesion associated with MDS and AML, is incompletely understood in prostate cancer. We hypothesized that PARP inhibitors would increase CH prevalence and abundance. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled participants with advanced prostate cancer treated with PARP inhibitors. The presence of CH was assessed from leukocytes using an ultra-deep error-corrected dual unique molecular identifiers sequencing method targeting 49 genes most commonly mutated in CH and myeloid malignancies. Variant allele frequencies (VAF) of ≥0.5% were considered clinically significant. Blood samples were collected before and after PARP inhibitor treatment. RESULTS: Ten men were enrolled; mean age of 67 years. Six patients had Gleason 7 disease, and four had Gleason ≥8 disease at diagnosis. Nine had localized disease at diagnosis, and eight had prior treatment with radiation. The mean time between pre- and post-treatment blood samples was 11 months (range 2.6-31 months). Six patients (60%) had CH identified prior to PARP inhibitor treatment, three with multiple clones. Of 11 CH clones identified in follow-up, 5 (45%) appeared or increased after treatment. DNMT3A, TET2, and PPM1D were the most common CH alterations observed. The largest post-treatment increase involved the PPM1D gene. CONCLUSION: CH alterations are frequently found after treatment with PARP inhibitors in patients with prostate cancer and this may be one mechanism by which PARP inhibitors lead to increased risk of MDS/AML.

Veliparib­Induced Toxicity in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta­Analysis.

In this study, we investigate the veliparib­induced toxicity in cancer patients. Databases were searched for RCTs treated with veliparib. We found veliparib could increase the risk of hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicities. Anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and nausea were the most common toxicities. Patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal tumors tend to have a higher risk of high-grade neutropenia; patients in the first-line setting tend to have a higher risk of high-grade anemia and neutropenia than those in the ≥ second line setting. Patients receiving higher dosage of veliparib tend to have a higher risk of all-grade anemia. Veliparib could also increase the risk of insomnia, myalgia, pneumonia, dyspnea, hyponatremia, and fatigue.

Thromboembolic risk in prostate cancer patients treated with PARP inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have been associated with thrombotic events, although the association with thrombosis risk in different cancers remains poorly defined. METHODS: This meta-analysis included phase II and phase III clinical trials in which patients with metastatic prostate cancer were treated with PARPi either as monotherapy or in combination. The primary endpoints were the rates of thromboembolic events in prostate cancer patients. RESULTS: A total of 2210 and 1662 patients with prostate cancer were compared in the PARP inhibitor and control groups, respectively. 96 (4.3 %) and 37 (2.2 %) patients had thrombosis in the PARPi and control groups, respectively. PARPi had a statistically significant increased risk of thrombosis in prostate cancer patients (Odds Ratio (OR)=1.98, 95 % CI: 1.06-3.70, P=0.030). CONCLUSION: The heightened thrombotic risk associated with PARPi treatment in prostate cancer emphasizes the need for comprehensive management protocols to effectively reduce the risk and ensure safer outcomes.

Health-related quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib vs placebo: Results from the phase 3 randomized PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with ovarian cancer (OC) who received niraparib as first-line maintenance therapy. METHODS: PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) enrolled patients with newly diagnosed advanced OC who responded to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomized (2:1) to niraparib or placebo once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or death. HRQoL was assessed as a prespecified secondary end point using patient-reported responses to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Ovarian Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-OV28), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom Index (FOSI), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Assessments were collected at baseline and every 8 weeks (±7 days) for 56 weeks, beginning on cycle 1/day 1, then every 12 weeks (±7 days) thereafter while the patient received study treatment. RESULTS: Among trial participants (niraparib, n = 487; placebo, n = 246), PRO adherence exceeded 80% for all instruments across all cycles. Patients reported no decline over time in HRQoL measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL and FOSI overall scores. Scores for abdominal/gastrointestinal symptoms (EORTC QLQ-OV28) and nausea and vomiting, appetite loss, and constipation (EORTC QLQ-C30) were higher (worse symptoms) in niraparib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients; except for constipation, these differences resolved over time. Patients did not self-report any worsening from baseline of fatigue, headache, insomnia, or abdominal pain on questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some early, largely transient increases in gastrointestinal symptoms, patients with OC treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy reported no worsening in overall HRQoL.

Comparison of Adverse Events Between PARP Inhibitors in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) as maintenance treatment for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), a comparative analysis of clinical events of interest (CEIs) of different PARPi is scarce. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the safety of different PARPi in patients with EOC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Through analyzing the Korean National Health Insurance Service from January 2009 to January 2022, this study involved BRCA-mutated, platinum-sensitive patients with EOC treated with olaparib (tablet), niraparib, and olaparib (capsule) as first-line or second-line maintenance treatment. CEIs were identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9/10 codes, with additional outcomes being dose modification and persistence. RESULTS: In the first-line maintenance treatment [118 niraparib, 104 olaparib (tablet) patients], no significant differences were noted in CEIs, dose reduction, or 6-month discontinuation rate. For second-line maintenance treatment [303 niraparib, 126 olaparib (tablet), and 675 olaparib (capsule) patients], niraparib was associated with a higher risk of hematologic CEIs, particularly anemia, compared with olaparib (tablet) (0.51 [0.26-0.98] and 0.09 [0.01-0.74], respectively), and higher rate of discontinuation rate at 6 months. Of note, patients over 60 years old showed an increased risk of CEIs with niraparib, as indicated by the hazard ratio divergence in restricted cubic spline plots. CONCLUSIONS: No differences were observed among the PARPi during first-line maintenance treatment. However, in the second-line maintenance treatment, significant differences were observed in the risk of experiencing CEIs, dose alteration possibilities, and discontinuation of PARPi between niraparib and olaparib (tablets). Moreover, our findings suggest that an age of 60 years may be a critical factor in selecting PARPi to reduce CEI incidence.

Successful Management of Ovarian Cancer Progressing on Olaparib by Niraparib Following Cytoreduction: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Polyadenosine 5'-diphosphoribose polymerase inhibitors (PARP-Is) are novel, effective agents for treating newly diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). However, the effect of PARP-I on the progression of recurrent EOC has not yet been determined. In particular, there is limited evidence regarding retreatment with PARP-I for recurrent EOC that has progressed on PARP-I in the short term. CASE REPORT: A 69-year-old woman with a BRCA1 mutated EOC relapsed five months after starting olaparib maintenance following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery. Although the platinum-free interval was within six months, secondary cytoreductive surgery was performed because the tumor was locoregional. Following two cycles of weekly nedaplatin, niraparib induced a complete response, and the patient maintained a progression-free status for 15 months. CONCLUSION: Even with short-term progression on PARP-I, local control combined with different platinum agents and PARP-I can be used to achieve good responses.

Arterial hypertension associated with PARPi: A meta-analysis of 41 placebo randomized controlled trials combined with a World Health Organization's pharmacovigilance study.

BACKGROUND: Arterial hypertension has been recently reported from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi). OBJECTIVE: In a context of increasing use of PARPi, it is crucial to properly assess risk and incidence of this adverse event for clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis in MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov up to January 4, 2023 with an ongoing surveillance up to June 7, 2023. RCTs comparing PARPi to placebo in adult patients with solid tumors were included if hypertension was reported. The primary outcome was the summary risk ratio (RR, with 95% CIs) of any hypertension of PARPi class in placebo RCTs. Secondary outcomes were the summary risk and incidence of hypertension of each individual PARPi. To provide clinical features of PARPi-associated hypertension, we independently queried the WHO's pharmacovigilance database, up to September 1, 2022. RESULTS: In total, 41 placebo RCTs (n = 15 264 adult patients) were included. PARPi class was not associated with an increased risk of hypertension compared with placebo. In individual analyses, the risk of hypertension was lower with olaparib than placebo (RR 0.77 [95% CI: 0.68-0.86], P < 0.01; I2 = 19%, χ2 P = 0.26). Niraparib monotherapy increased the risk of any (RR 2.84 [95% CI: 1.76-4.57], P < 0.01; I2 = 66%, χ2 P = 0.01) hypertension with a summary incidence of 19.87% (95% CI: 15.23-25.50). In real-life setting, niraparib-associated hypertension occurs within 20 days and was serious in 66%. Co-prescription of at least one antihypertensive or therapy-induced hypertension was reported in 20.5% or 14.4% of cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a context of extensive assessment of niraparib in combination, these data reinforce the need of a close monitoring of this adverse event to preserve its clinical benefit on patients' survival.

Concurrent Olaparib and Radiation Therapy in Older Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: The Phase 1 Dose-Escalation PARADIGM Trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with glioblastoma who are older or have poor performance status (PS) experience particularly poor clinical outcomes. At the time of study initiation, these patients were treated with short-course radiation therapy (40 Gy in 15 fractions). Olaparib is an oral inhibitor of the DNA repair enzyme poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) that is well tolerated as a single agent but exacerbates acute radiation toxicity in extracranial sites. Preclinical data predicted that PARP inhibitors would enhance radiosensitivity in glioblastoma without exacerbating adverse effects on the normal brain. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Phase 1 of the PARADIGM trial was a 3+3 dose-escalation study testing olaparib in combination with radiation therapy (40 Gy 15 fractions) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma who were unsuitable for radical treatment either because they were aged 70 years or older (World Health Organization PS 0-1) or aged 18 to 69 years with PS 2. The primary outcome was the recommended phase 2 dose of olaparib. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability, overall survival, and progression-free survival. Effects on cognitive function were assessed via the Mini Mental State Examination. RESULTS: Of 16 eligible patients (56.25% male; median age, 71.5 years [range, 44-78]; 75% PS 0-1), 1 dose-limiting toxicity was reported (grade 3 agitation). Maximum tolerated dose was not reached and the recommended phase 2 dose was determined as 200 mg twice daily. Median overall survival and progression-free survival were 10.8 months (80% CI, 7.3-11.4) and 5.5 months (80% CI, 3.9-5.9), respectively. Mini Mental State Examination plots indicated that cognitive function was not adversely affected by the olaparib-radiation therapy combination. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib can be safely combined with hypofractionated brain radiation therapy and is well tolerated in patients unsuitable for radical chemoradiation. These results enabled initiation of a randomized phase 2 study and support future trials of PARP inhibitors in combination with radiation therapy for patients with brain tumors.

PARP Inhibitors in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Existing Evidence.

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) represent an option in selected cases of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of approved (Olaparib, Rucaparib) and investigational (Talazoparib, Niraparib, Veliparib) PARPi in mCRPC patients. Three databases were queried for studies analyzing oncological outcomes and adverse events of mCRPC patients receiving PARPi. Primary outcome was a PSA decline ≥ 50% from baseline. Secondary outcomes were objective response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), radiological PFS, overall survival (OS), conversion of circulating tumor cell count, and time to PSA progression. The number and rate of any grade adverse events (AEs), grade ≥ 3 AEs, and most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were registered. A subanalysis of outcomes per mutation type, prospective trials, and studies adopting combination therapies was performed. Overall, 31 studies were included in this systematic review, 28 of which are available for meta-analysis. The most frequently investigated drug was Olaparib. The most frequent mutation was BRCA2. A PSA decline rate of 43% (95% CI 0.32-0.54) was observed in the overall population. Mean OS was 15.9 (95% CI 12.9-19.0) months. In BRCA2 patients, PSA decline rate was 66% (95% CI 0.57-0.7) and OS 23.4 months (95% CI 22.8-24.1). Half of the patients suffered from grade 3 and 4 AEs (0.50 [95% CI 0.39-0.60]). Most common AEs were hematological, the most frequent being anemia (21.5%). PARP inhibitors represent a viable option for mCRPC patients. Current evidence suggests an increased effectiveness in homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene mutation carriers, especially BRCA2.

Comparison of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) as maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer with BRCA mutational status: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) treatment for ovarian cancer (OC) are ever-changing. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and overall safety of available PARPi as maintenance therapy for BRCA mutation status in patients with newly diagnosed and platinum-sensitive recurrent (PSR) OC patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Relevant RCTs were systematically retrieved from PubMed and Embase until 31 May 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) based on BRCA mutation status and adverse events (AEs) regardless of mutation were efficacy and safety endpoints. RESULTS: In newly diagnosed BRCAm-OC patients, olaparib (HR: 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25, 0.43) and other PARPis [niraparib (HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.29, 0.55), rucaparib (HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.76) and veliparib (HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.28, 0.69)] had a statistically significant effect on PFS versus placebo. In BRCAm-PSROC patients, Olaparib exhibited significant benefit (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.88) for OS compared to other PARPis. In BRCAwt-PSR OC patients, Olaparib showed a favorable OS benefit than other PARPis (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.57,1.22). Overall, safety profile of all PARPis was acceptable. CONCLUSION: All PARPis showed significant benefit, with olaparib showing greater benefit in newly diagnosed and PSR OC women. REGISTRATION: CRD42021288932.

Real world data of niraparib in platinum sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer: A multicenter experience of the MITO group.

OBJECTIVE: PARP (poly adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose polymerase) inhibitors are approved as maintenance therapy in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer (OC), in first line and in the recurrent setting, regardless of BRCA mutational status. Real-world data after the introduction of these agents are needed to evaluate whether the benefit observed in phase III randomized clinical trials can be translated into clinical practice. The aim of our study was to provide real-life data on efficacy and safety of niraparib administered as maintenance in platinum sensitive relapsed OC patients (PSROC). METHODS: This retrospective/prospective observational study included relapsed OC patients that received niraparib as maintenance, at the time of platinum sensitive recurrence within the Italian expanded-access program. Clinical data at the time of diagnosis and at the time of recurrence were collected and analyzed. Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated as the time from start of niraparib treatment to subsequent radiologically confirmed relapse and death or last contact, respectively. RESULTS: Among 304 eligible patients, 260 (85%) had BRCA wild-type tumor and 36. (11.9%) were BRCA mutated. Median PFS was 9.1 months (95% CI: 6.9-11.2) and 10.3 months (95% CI: 7.0-13.5) in the BRCAwt and BRCAmut cohorts, respectively. Furthermore, median OS was 41.7 months (95% CI: 31.6-41.9) and 34.6 months (95% CI: N.E.) in the BRCAwt and BRCAmut cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSION: Data from this large real-life dataset suggested that maintenance with niraparib in the real-life setting of platinum sensitive OC recurrence is effective and well tolerated.