PARP inhibitors for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Biological rationale and current evidence

Population Pharmacokinetics of Niraparib/Abiraterone Acetate Administered as Single-Agent Combination and Dual-Acting Tablets Plus Prednisone for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Use of niraparib and abiraterone acetate (AA; abiraterone prodrug) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) targets two oncogenic drivers: homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations and the androgen-receptor axis. Fixed-dose niraparib/AA combination is available as regular-strength dual-action tablets (RS-DAT; 200 mg/1000 mg) and low-strength DAT (LS-DAT; 100 mg/1000 mg, enabling niraparib dose reduction). We characterized the population pharmacokinetics (PPK) of niraparib and abiraterone, administered alone or in combination, in patients with mCRPC.

METHODS

PPK modeling and covariate analysis using a non-linear mixed-effect modeling approach were conducted using pooled PK data from patients with mCRPC enrolled in the BEDIVERE (NCT02924766), GALAHAD (NCT02854436), QUEST (NCT03431350), and MAGNITUDE (NCT03748641) studies and in a study of relative bioavailability for LS-DAT and bioequivalence for RS-DAT. In all but GALAHAD (niraparib monotherapy), AA + prednisone was given alone or with niraparib. Overall, 9935 and 6289 niraparib and abiraterone plasma PK samples from 916 and 954 patients, respectively, were available.

RESULTS

Niraparib and abiraterone PK were adequately described by an open two-compartment disposition model with linear elimination, with a zero-order rate of drug release into the depot compartment followed by first-order absorption (via two transit compartments for abiraterone) into the central compartment. For niraparib, identified covariates were creatinine clearance on apparent oral clearance; LS-DAT on zero-order drug-release duration and apparent oral bioavailability; HRR status on apparent oral clearance; race on first-order absorption-rate constant, intercompartmental clearance, and peripheral compartment volume of distribution. Covariate effects had no clinically relevant impact on niraparib exposure, warranting no dose adjustments. For abiraterone, RS-DAT was the only newly identified covariate on apparent oral bioavailability, first-order absorption-rate constant, and zero-order drug-release duration; however, effect magnitude was deemed not clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

PPK analyses support the selected clinical dosage of RS-DAT (200-mg niraparib/1000-mg AA) plus 10-mg prednisone daily for treating patients with mCRPC and HRR gene alterations.

DNA Repair Capacity and Clinicopathological Characteristics in Puerto Rican Hispanic/Latino Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) accounts for 22% of the new cases diagnosed in Hispanic/Latino (H/L) men in the US. PCa has the highest incidence (38.3%) and mortality (16.4%) among all types of cancer diagnosed in Puerto Rico. We previously showed that PCa patients (n = 41) have a significant reduction of 59% in their levels of DNA repair capacity (DRC) when compared to controls (n = 14). This study aimed to evaluate DRC levels through the nucleotide excision repair (NER) pathway for the first time in 16 Puerto Rican H/L men with metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPCa) while establishing comparisons with controls and PCa patients with indolent and aggressive disease.

METHODS

Blood samples and clinicopathological data from PCa cases (n = 71) and controls (n = 25) were evaluated. PCa cases were stratified into mCRPCa (n = 16), aggressive (n = 31), and indolent (n = 24). DRC levels through NER were measured in lymphocytes with the CometChip assay. The stratification by Gleason score (GS) was GS6 (n = 7), GS7 (n = 23), GS ≥ 8 (n = 20), and mCRPCa patients (n = 16).

RESULTS

Significant statistical differences were found when comparing the DRC values of the controls with any other of the four PCa patient groups. mCRPCa patients had the lowest mean DRC level of all four patient groups studied. The mean DRC level of mCRPCa patients was 6.65%, and compared to the controls, this represented a statistically significant reduction of 62% (p < 0.0001). Further analysis was performed to evaluate the contributions of age, anthropometric measurements, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels to the DRC. Kaplan-Meier curves of mCRPCa revealed that survival probability decreased by approximately 50% by 30 months. This pilot study uses a blood-based phenotypic assay to present the first report of mCRPCa in Puerto Rican men and at a global level of DRC levels of mCRPCa patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study evaluated DRC levels through the NER pathway for the first time in 16 Puerto Rican H/L men with mCRPCa. Significant differences in DRC values were found between the controls and the three PCa patient groups. Kaplan-Meier curves revealed that survival probability decreased by approximately 50% by 30 months, and only 20% of the cohort was alive at 50 months, confirming the lethality of mCRPCa in this H/L population. This pilot study represents the first report of metastatic PCa in Puerto Rican men at a global level of DRC levels of mCRPCa patients using a blood-based phenotypic assay.

Preliminary Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety Analysis of Darolutamide for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Single-Center, Open-Label Study

INTRODUCTION

Darolutamide is a structurally unique second-generation androgen receptor antagonist that has been approved for indications in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) and metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). The aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of Darolutamide for mCRPC.

METHODS

In this single-center, open-label study, patients with previously untreated mCRPC were enrolled and received androgen deprivation therapy (goserelin acetate 3.6 mg every 28 days) and docetaxel (75 mg per square meter of body surface area every 21 days) with Denosumab (120 mg every 28 days) for bone metastases, Darolutamide (300 mg orally twice daily) in the experimental group, and the control group received the corresponding of placebo. Serum PSA changes were detected and recorded, and imaging changes and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. The primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and antitumor efficacy, and the second endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients with mCRPC were enrolled. The median time to PSA50 in the Darolutamide group was 1.5 months (95% CI: 0.2619-0.9545), significantly lower than that in the placebo group (3.0 months [95% CI: 1.048-3.818], p = 0.0259). The median time to PSA90 in the experimental group was 4 months (95% CI: 0.3094-1.437), 2 months shorter than that in the placebo group (6.0 months [95% CI: 0.6961-3.232]). With the median follow-up of 6 months, the median decrease in serum PSA was -81.8% (range -60.4 to -99.9%) in the Darolutamide group and -69.4% (range -50.3 to -89.6%) in the placebo group. Tumor-related pain and AEs were not increased, and the median rPFS was not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of Darolutamide and docetaxel was well tolerated with more clinically beneficial than docetaxel alone in previously untreated mCRPC. Darolutamide rapidly reduced PSA levels and prolonged rPFS and did not increase the incidence of AEs.

Olaparib Combined with Abiraterone versus Olaparib Monotherapy for Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Progressing after Abiraterone and Harboring DNA Damage Repair Deficiency: A Multicenter Real-world Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Olaparib + abiraterone has a combined antitumor effect in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), but the efficacy of this combination in patients with DNA damage repair (DDR)-deficient mCRPC progressing after abiraterone is unknown. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of olaparib + abiraterone versus olaparib monotherapy for patients with DDR-deficient mCRPC progressing after abiraterone.

METHODS

The study included 86 consecutive patients with DDR-deficient mCRPC progressing after abiraterone: 34 received olaparib + abiraterone, and 52 received olaparib monotherapy. DDR-deficient status was defined as the presence of a DDR gene with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (DDR-PV), or with a variant of unknown significance (DDR-VUS). We assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using the Kaplan-Meier method. Potential factors influencing PFS and OS were compared between the treatment arms using Cox proportional-hazards models. The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, the treatment effect across subgroups, and adverse events (AEs) were also evaluated.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Median follow-up was 9 mo. In the overall cohort, median PFS and OS were significantly longer in the combination arm than in the monotherapy arm (PFS: 6.0 vs 3.0 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.67; p < 0.01; OS: 25.0 vs 12.0 mo; HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14-0.67; p < 0.01). PSA responses were significantly higher following combination therapy versus monotherapy. Combination therapy had significantly better efficacy in the DDR-PV and DDR-VUS subgroups, and was an independent predictor of better PFS and OS. AE rates were acceptable. The retrospective nature, small sample size, and short follow-up are limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Olaparib + abiraterone resulted in better PFS and OS than olaparib alone for patients with DDR-deficient mCRPC progressing after abiraterone. These results need to be confirmed by a large-scale prospective randomized controlled trial.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our study shows that the drug combination of olaparib plus abiraterone improved survival over olaparib alone for patients who have mutations in genes affecting DNA repair and metastatic prostate cancer resistant to hormone therapy. The results provide evidence of a synergistic effect of the two drugs in these patients.

Primary Results of Patients with Genitourinary Malignancies Presented at a Molecular Tumor Board

INTRODUCTION

Personalized medicine poses great opportunities and challenges. While the therapeutic landscape markedly expands, descriptions about status, clinical implementation and real-world benefits of precision oncology and molecular tumor boards (MTB) remain sparse, particularly in the field of genitourinary (GU) cancer. Hence, this study characterized urological MTB cases to better understand the potential role of MTB in uro-oncology.

METHODS

We analyzed patients with complete data sets being reviewed at an MTB from January 2019 to October 2022, focusing on results of molecular analysis and treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

We evaluated 102 patients with GU cancer with a mean patient age of 61.7 years. Prostate cancer (PCa) was the most frequent entity with 52.9% (54/102), followed by bladder cancer (18.6%, 19/102) and renal cell carcinoma (14.7%, 15/102). On average, case presentation at MTB took place 54.9 months after initial diagnosis and after 2.7 previous lines of therapy. During the study period, 49.0% (50/102) of patients deceased. Additional MTB-based treatment recommendations were achieved in a majority of 68.6% (70/102) of patients, with a recommendation for targeted therapy in 64.3% (45/70) of these patients. Only 6.7% (3/45) of patients - due to different reasons - received the recommended MTB-based therapy though, with 33% (1/3) of patients reaching disease control. Throughout the MTB study period, GU cancer case presentations and treatment recommendations increased, while the time interval between initial presentation and final therapy recommendation were decreasing over time.

CONCLUSION

Presentation of uro-oncological patients at the MTB is a highly valuable measure for clinical decision-making. Prospectively, earlier presentation of patients at the MTB and changing legislative issues regarding comprehensive molecular testing and targeted treatment approval might further improve patients' benefits from comprehensive molecular diagnostics.

The Current Therapeutic Landscape for Metastatic Prostate Cancer

In 2024, there will be an estimated 1,466,718 cases of prostate cancer (PC) diagnosed globally, of which 299,010 cases are estimated to be from the US. The typical clinical approach for PC involves routine screening, diagnosis, and standard lines of treatment. However, not all patients respond to therapy and are subsequently diagnosed with treatment emergent neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC). There are currently no approved treatments for this form of aggressive PC. In this review, a compilation of the clinical trials regimen to treat late-stage NEPC using novel targets and/or a combination approach is presented. The novel targets assessed include DLL3, EZH2, B7-H3, Aurora-kinase-A (AURKA), receptor tyrosine kinases, PD-L1, and PD-1. Among these, the trials administering drugs Alisertib or Cabozantinib, which target AURKA or receptor tyrosine kinases, respectively, appear to have promising results. The least effective trials appear to be ones that target the immune checkpoint pathways PD-1/PD-L1. Many promising clinical trials are currently in progress. Consequently, the landscape of successful treatment regimens for NEPC is extremely limited. These trial results and the literature on the topic emphasize the need for new preventative measures, diagnostics, disease specific biomarkers, and a thorough clinical understanding of NEPC.

Precision Medicine in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Advances, Challenges, and the Landscape of PARPi Therapy-A Narrative Review

After recent approvals, poly-adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) have emerged as a frontline treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Unlike their restricted use in breast or ovarian cancers, where approval is limited to those with BRCA1/2 alterations, PARPis in mCRPC are applied across a broader spectrum of genetic aberrations. Key findings from the phase III PROPEL trial suggest that PARPis' accessibility may broaden, even without mandatory testing. An increasing body of evidence underscores the importance of distinct alterations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes, revealing unique sensitivities to PARPis. Nonetheless, despite the initial effectiveness of PARPis in treating BRCA-mutated tumors, resistance to therapy is frequently encountered. This review aims to discuss patient stratification based on biomarkers and genetic signatures, offering insights into the nuances of first-line PARPis' efficacy in the intricate landscape of mCRPC.

Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Context: Several recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported on the survival benefits of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) compared to standard-of-care (SOC) treatment (enzalutamide, abiraterone, or docetaxel) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, there is a limited integrated analysis of high-quality evidence comparing the efficacy and safety of PARPi and SOC treatments in this context. Objective: This study aims to comprehensively analyze the survival benefits and adverse events associated with PARPi and SOC treatments through a head-to-head meta-analysis in mCRPC. Evidence acquisition: A systematic review search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Clinical trials, and the Central Cochrane Registry in July 2023. RCTs were assessed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The systematic review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023441034). Evidence synthesis: A total of 8 studies, encompassing 2341 cases in the PARPi treatment arm and 1810 cases in the controlled arm, were included in the qualitative synthesis. The hazard ratio (HR) for radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) were 0.74 (95% CI, 0.61-0.90) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.80-0.99), respectively, in the intention-to-treatment patients. For subgroup analysis, HRs for rPFS and OS in the BRCA-mutated subgroup were 0.39 (95% CI, 0.28-0.55) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.38-0.99), while in the HRR-mutated subgroup, HR for rPFS was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.48-0.69) and for OS was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.64-0.93). The odds ratio (OR) for all grades of adverse events (AEs) and AEs with severity of at least grade 3 were 3.86 (95% CI, 2.53-5.90) and 2.30 (95% CI, 1.63-3.26), respectively. Conclusions: PARP inhibitors demonstrate greater effectiveness than SOC treatments in HRR/BRCA-positive patients with mCRPC. Further research is required to explore ways to reduce adverse event rates and investigate the efficacy of HRR/BRCA-negative patients.

PARP inhibitors combined with radiotherapy: are we ready?

PARP was an enzyme found in the nucleus of eukaryotic cells that played a crucial role in repairing damaged DNA. Recently, PARP inhibitors have demonstrated great potential in cancer treatment. Thus, the FDA has approved several small-molecule PARP inhibitors for cancer maintenance therapy. The combination of PARP inhibitors and radiotherapy relies on synthetic lethality, taking advantage of the flaws in DNA repair pathways to target cancer cells specifically. Studies conducted prior to clinical trials have suggested that the combination of PARP inhibitors and radiotherapy can enhance the sensitivity of cancer cells to radiation, intensify DNA damage, and trigger cell death. Combining radiotherapy with PARP inhibitors in clinical trials has enhanced the response rate and progression-free survival of diverse cancer patients. The theoretical foundation of PARP inhibitors combined with radiotherapy is explained in detail in this article, and the latest advances in preclinical and clinical research on these inhibitors for tumor radiotherapy are summarized. The problems in the current field are recognized in our research and potential therapeutic applications for tumors are suggested. Nevertheless, certain obstacles need to be tackled when implementing PARP inhibitors and radiotherapies in clinical settings. Factors to consider when using the combination therapy are the most suitable schedule and amount of medication, identifying advantageous candidates, and the probable adverse effects linked with the combination. The combination of radiotherapy and PARP inhibitors can greatly enhance the effectiveness of cancer treatment.

Niraparib plus abiraterone acetate with prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair gene alterations: second interim analysis of the randomized phase III MAGNITUDE trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and BRCA alterations have poor outcomes. MAGNITUDE found patients with homologous recombination repair gene alterations (HRR+), particularly BRCA1/2, benefit from first-line therapy with niraparib plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP). Here we report longer follow-up from the second prespecified interim analysis (IA2).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mCRPC were prospectively identified as HRR+ with/without BRCA1/2 alterations and randomized 1 : 1 to niraparib (200 mg orally) plus AAP (1000 mg/10 mg orally) or placebo plus AAP. At IA2, secondary endpoints [time to symptomatic progression, time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy, overall survival (OS)] were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 212 HRR+ patients received niraparib plus AAP (BRCA1/2 subgroup, n = 113). At IA2 with 24.8 months of median follow-up in the BRCA1/2 subgroup, niraparib plus AAP significantly prolonged radiographic progression-free survival {rPFS; blinded independent central review; median rPFS 19.5 versus 10.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.78]; nominal P = 0.0007} consistent with the first prespecified interim analysis. rPFS was also prolonged in the total HRR+ population [HR = 0.76 (95% CI 0.60-0.97); nominal P = 0.0280; median follow-up 26.8 months]. Improvements in time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy were observed with niraparib plus AAP. In the BRCA1/2 subgroup, the analysis of OS with niraparib plus AAP demonstrated an HR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.58-1.34; nominal P = 0.5505); the prespecified inverse probability censoring weighting analysis of OS, accounting for imbalances in subsequent use of poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase inhibitors and other life-prolonging therapies, demonstrated an HR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.33-0.90; nominal P = 0.0181). No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

MAGNITUDE, enrolling the largest BRCA1/2 cohort in first-line mCRPC to date, demonstrated improved rPFS and other clinically relevant outcomes with niraparib plus AAP in patients with BRCA1/2-altered mCRPC, emphasizing the importance of identifying this molecular subset of patients.

Complexing the Oncolytic Adenoviruses Ad∆∆ and Ad-3∆-A20T with Cationic Nanoparticles Enhances Viral Infection and Spread in Prostate and Pancreatic Cancer Models

Oncolytic adenoviruses (OAd) can be employed to efficiently eliminate cancer cells through multiple mechanisms of action including cell lysis and immune activation. Our OAds, AdΔΔ and Ad-3∆-A20T, selectively infect, replicate in, and kill adenocarcinoma cells with the added benefit of re-sensitising drug-resistant cells in preclinical models. Further modifications are required to enable systemic delivery in patients due to the rapid hepatic elimination and neutralisation by blood factors and antibodies. Here, we show data that support the use of coating OAds with gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) as a possible new method of virus modification to help augment tumour uptake. The pre-incubation of cationic AuNPs with AdΔΔ, Ad-3∆-A20T and wild type adenovirus (Ad5wt) was performed prior to infection of prostate/pancreatic cancer cell lines (22Rv, PC3, Panc04.03, PT45) and a pancreatic stellate cell line (PS1). Levels of viral infection, replication and cell viability were quantified 24–72 h post-infection in the presence and absence of AuNPs. Viral spread was assessed in organotypic cultures. The presence of AuNPs significantly increased the uptake of Ad∆∆, Ad-3∆-A20T and Ad5wt in all the cell lines tested (ranging from 1.5-fold to 40-fold), compared to virus alone, with the greatest uptake observed in PS1, a usually adenovirus-resistant cell line. Pre-coating the AdΔΔ and Ad-3∆-A20T with AuNPs also increased viral replication, leading to enhanced cell killing, with maximal effect in the most virus-insensitive cells (from 1.4-fold to 5-fold). To conclude, the electrostatic association of virus with cationic agents provides a new avenue to increase the dose in tumour lesions and potentially protect the virus from detrimental blood factor binding. Such an approach warrants further investigation for clinical translation.

PARP Inhibitors: A New Horizon for Patients with Prostate Cancer

The introduction of PARP inhibitors (PARPi) in prostate cancer is a milestone and provides a pathway to hope in fighting this disease. It is the first time that drugs, based on the concept of synthetic lethality, have been approved for prostate cancer. In addition, it is also the first time that genetic mutation tests have been included in the therapeutic algorithm of this disease, representing a significant step forward for precision and personalized treatment of prostate cancer. The objectives of this review are: (1) understanding the mechanism of action of PARPi in monotherapy and combinations; (2) gaining insights on patient selection for PARPi; (3) exposing the pivotal studies that have allowed its approval, and; (4) offering an overview of the ongoing trials. Nevertheless, many unsolved questions remain, such as the number of patients who could potentially benefit from PARPi, whether to use PARPi in monotherapy or in combination, and when is the best time to use them in advanced or localized disease. To answer these and other questions, many clinical trials are underway. Some of them have recently demonstrated promising results that may favor the introduction of new combinations in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.