Phase I Safety, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Study of the Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase (PARP) Inhibitor Veliparib (ABT-888) in Combination with Irinotecan in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

PARP inhibitors: enhancing efficacy through rational combinations

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have significantly changed the treatment landscape for tumours harbouring defects in genes involved in homologous repair (HR) such as BRCA1 and BRCA2. Despite initial responsiveness to PARPi, tumours eventually develop resistance through a variety of mechanisms. Rational combination strategies involving PARPi have been explored and are in various stages of clinical development. PARPi combinations have the potential to enhance efficacy through synergistic activity, and also potentially sensitise innately PARPi-resistant tumours to PARPi. Initial combinations involving PARPi with chemotherapy were hindered by significant overlapping haematologic toxicity, but newer combinations with fewer toxicities and more targeted approaches are undergoing evaluation. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of PARPi resistance and review the rationale and clinical evidence for various PARPi combinations including combinations with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapies. We also highlight emerging PARPi combinations with promising preclinical evidence.

Targeting Replication Stress and Chemotherapy Resistance with a Combination of Sacituzumab Govitecan and Berzosertib: A Phase I Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Despite promising preclinical studies, toxicities have precluded combinations of chemotherapy and DNA damage response (DDR) inhibitors. We hypothesized that tumor-targeted chemotherapy delivery might enable clinical translation of such combinations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a phase I trial, we combined sacituzumab govitecan, antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) that delivers topoisomerase-1 inhibitor SN-38 to tumors expressing Trop-2, with ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related (ATR) inhibitor berzosertib. Twelve patients were enrolled across three dose levels.

RESULTS

Treatment was well tolerated, with improved safety over conventional chemotherapy-based combinations, allowing escalation to the highest dose. No dose-limiting toxicities or clinically relevant ≥grade 4 adverse events occurred. Tumor regressions were observed in 2 patients with neuroendocrine prostate cancer, and a patient with small cell lung cancer transformed from EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

ADC-based delivery of cytotoxic payloads represents a new paradigm to increase efficacy of DDR inhibitors. See related commentary by Berg and Choudhury, p. 3557.

Efficacy and safety of veliparib plus chemotherapy for the treatment of lung cancer: A systematic review of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

As a poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, veliparib has been identified as a potential therapeutic agent for lung cancer. The present study aimed to conduct a systematic review of clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of veliparib for treating lung cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, the Web of Science, and Google Scholar were systematically searched up to October 30, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy or safety of veliparib in the treatment of lung cancer patients were included. Studies were excluded if they were not RCTs, enrolled healthy participants or patients with conditions other than lung cancer, or investigated therapeutic approaches other than veliparib. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

The seven RCTs (n = 2188) showed that patients treated with a combination of veliparib and chemotherapy had a significantly higher risk of adverse events, when compared to the control arm. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) between those treated with veliparib plus chemotherapy and those receiving the standard therapies. Only two trials demonstrated an improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), and only one study found an increase in objective response rate (ORR). Furthermore, adding veliparib to standard chemotherapy showed no benefit in extending the duration of response (DoR) in any of the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small number of studies have found veliparib to be effective, in terms of improved OS, PFS, and ORR, while the majority of studies found no benefit for veliparib over standard treatment.

Enhancing the anti-tumor response by combining DNA damage repair inhibitors in the treatment of solid tumors

The anti-cancer efficacy of anti-malignancy therapies is related to DNA damage. However, DNA damage-response mechanisms can repair DNA damage, failing anti-tumor therapy. The resistance to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and immunotherapy remains a clinical challenge. Thus, new strategies to overcome these therapeutic resistance mechanisms are needed. DNA damage repair inhibitors (DDRis) continue to be investigated, with polyadenosine diphosphate ribose polymerase inhibitors being the most studied inhibitors. Evidence of their clinical benefits and therapeutic potential in preclinical studies is growing. In addition to their potential as a monotherapy, DDRis may play an important synergistic role with other anti-cancer therapies or in reversing acquired treatment resistance. Here we review the impact of DDRis on solid tumors and the potential value of combinations of different treatment modalities with DDRis for solid tumors.

Design, synthesis and development of a dual inhibitor of Topoisomerase 1 and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 for efficient killing of cancer cells

Combinatorial inhibition of Topoisomerase 1 (TOP1) and Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) is an attractive therapeutic strategy which is under active investigation to address chemoresistance to TOP1 inhibitors. However, this combinatorial regimen suffers from severe dose limiting toxicities. Dual inhibitors often offer significant advantages over combinatorial therapies involving individual agents by minimizing toxicity and providing conducive pharmacokinetic profiles. In this study, we have designed, synthesized and evaluated a library of 11 candidate conjugated dual inhibitors for PARP1 and TOP1, named as DiPT-1 to DiPT-11. Our extensive screening showed that one of the hits i.e.DiPT-4 has promising cytotoxicity profile against multiple cancers with limited toxicities towards normal cells. DiPT-4 induces extensive DNA double stand breaks (DSBs), cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in cancer cells. Mechanistically, DiPT-4 has the propensity to bind catalytic pockets of TOP1 and PARP1, leading to significant inhibition of both TOP1 and PARP1 at in vitro and cellular level. Interestingly, DiPT-4 causes extensive stabilization of TOP1-DNA covalent complex (TOP1cc), a key lethal intermediate associated with induction of DSBs and cell death. Moreover, DiPT-4 inhibited poly (ADP-ribosylation) i.e. PARylation of TOP1cc, leading to long lived TOP1cc with a slower kinetics of degradation. This is one of the important molecular processes which helps in overcoming resistance in cancer in response to TOP1 inhibitors. Together, our investigation showed DiPT-4 as a promising dual inhibitor of TOP1 and PARP1, which may have the potential to offer significant advantages over combinatorial therapy in clinical settings.

NCI 7977: A Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Intermittent Oral ABT-888 (Veliparib) plus Intravenous Irinotecan Administered in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Purpose

Veliparib is a PARP inhibitor (PARPi) with activity in BRCA 1/2/PALB2-deficient tumors. Preclinical observations reveal topoisomerase inhibitors like irinotecan are synergistic with PARPi irrespective of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), potentially expanding the role for PARPi.

Experimental Design

NCI 7977 was a multicohort phase I clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of multiple dose schedules of veliparib with irinotecan for solid tumors. In the intermittent veliparib cohort, escalating doses of veliparib were given twice daily at dose level (DL) 1 (50 mg) and DL 2 (100 mg) days 1-4 and 8-11 with irinotecan 100 mg/m2 days 3 and 10 in 21-day cycles.

Results

Fifteen patients enrolled, 8 of 15 (53%) received ≥4 prior systemic treatments. At DL1, 1 of 6 patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of diarrhea. At DL2, 9 patients were treated, with 3 unevaluable for DLT, and 2 of 6 evaluable patients experienced a DLT of grade 3 neutropenia. Irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and veliparib 50 mg twice daily was the MTD. No objective responses were observed, although 4 patients had progression-free survival >6 months.

Conclusions

The MTD of intermittent veliparib is 50 mg twice daily days 1-4 and 8-11 with weekly irinotecan 100 mg/m2 days 3 and 10 every 21 days. Multiple patients experienced prolonged stable disease irrespective of HRD and prior irinotecan. However, due to the toxicities with higher dose intermittent veliparib and irinotecan, this schedule was determined too toxic for further development and the arm was closed prematurely.

Significance

The combination of intermittent veliparib with weekly irinotecan was deemed too toxic for further development. Future PARPi combinations should focus on agents with nonoverlapping toxicities to improve tolerability. The treatment combination showed limited efficacy with prolonged stable disease observed in multiple heavily pretreated patients, but no objective responses were seen.

Rise of Antibody-Drug Conjugates: The Present and Future

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) embody a simple, but elegant, vision for cancer therapy-the delivery of a potent cytotoxic agent to tumor cells with minimal damage to normal cells-so-called smart chemo. Although there were significant challenges in achieving this milestone culminating in the first Food and Drug Administration approval in 2000, subsequent advancements in technology have led to rapid drug development with regulatory approvals for ADCs targeting a variety of tumor types. The most successful application for solid tumors has been in breast cancer, with ADCs becoming the standard of care across traditional human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)+, hormone receptor+ (HR+) and triple-negative disease subtypes. Moreover, the improved features and gains in potency with the development of ADCs have expanded the treatment-eligible population to those with low/heterogeneous expression of the target antigen on the tumor with trastuzumab deruxtecan or in the case of sacituzumab govitecan, agnostic to target expression. Despite their antibody-directed homing, these novel agents come with their share of toxicities obligating appropriate patient selection and vigilant monitoring while on treatment. As more ADCs are included in the treatment armamentarium, mechanisms of resistance need to be studied and understood for optimal sequencing. Modifying the payload to use immune-stimulating agents or combination therapies with immunotherapy and other effective targeted therapies may further extend the utility of these agents in the treatment of solid tumors.

Current and Emerging Role of Antibody-Drug Conjugates in HER2-Negative Breast Cancer

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are rapidly evolving therapies that are uniquely able to deliver potent chemotherapy specifically to cancer cells while largely sparing normal cells. ADCs have 3 components: (1) antibody targeted to a tumor-involved antigen, (2) cytotoxic payload, and (3) linker that connects the cytotoxic agent to the antibody. Once the antibody binds the target on the cell surface, the ADC is incorporated into the cell via receptor-mediated endocytosis. Inside the cells, the linker is cleaved in the lysosome and the payload is then released intracellularly. This article will review ADCs in clinical development for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

A Multicenter Phase 1 Trial Evaluating Nanoliposomal Irinotecan for Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Combined with Cytoreductive Surgery for Patients with Peritoneal Surface Disease

BACKGROUND

Nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) is a promising novel hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) agent given its enhanced efficacy against gastrointestinal tumors, safety profile, thermo-synergy, and heat stability. This report describes the first in-human phase 1 clinical trial of nal-IRI during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC.

METHODS

Patients with peritoneal surface disease (PSD) from appendiceal and colorectal neoplasms were enrolled in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation trial using nal-IRI (70-280 mg/m²) during HIPEC for 30 min at 41 ± 1 °C. The primary outcome was safety. The secondary outcomes were pharmacokinetics (PK) and disease-free survival. Adverse events (AEs) categorized as grade 2 or higher were recorded. The serious AEs (SAEs) were mortality, grade ≥ 3 AEs, and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Irinotecan and active metabolite SN38 were measured in plasma and peritoneal washings.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 18 patients, who received nal-IRI during HIPEC at 70 mg/m² (n = 3), 140 mg/m² (n = 6), 210 mg/m² (n = 3), and 280 mg/m² (n = 6). No DLT or mortality occurred. The overall morbidity for CRS/HIPEC was 39% (n = 7). Although one patient experienced neutropenia, no AE (n = 131) or SAE (n = 3) was definitively attributable to nal-IRI. At 280 mg/m², plasma irinotecan and SN38 measurements showed maximum concentrations of 0.4 ± 0.6 µg/mL and 3.0 ± 2.4 ng/mL, a median time to maximum concentration of 24.5 and 26 h, and areas under the curve of 22.6 h*µg/mL and 168 h*ng/mL, respectively. At the 6-month follow-up visit, 83% (n = 15) of the patients remained disease-free.

CONCLUSIONS

In this phase 1 HIPEC trial (NCT04088786), nal-IRI was observed to be safe, and PK profiling showed low systemic absorption overall. These data support future studies testing the efficacy of nal-IRI in CRS/HIPEC.

Combining Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) Inhibitors with Chemotherapeutic Agents: Promise and Challenges

Better understanding of molecular drivers and dysregulated pathways has furthered the concept of precision oncology and rational drug development. The role of DNA damage response (DDR) pathways has been extensively studied in carcinogenesis and as potential therapeutic targets to improve response to chemotherapy or overcome resistance. Treatment with small molecule inhibitors of PARP has resulted in clinical response and conferred survival benefit to patients with ovarian cancer, BRCA-mutant breast cancer, HRD-deficient prostate cancer and BRCA-mutant pancreatic cancer, leading to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals. However, the observed clinical benefit with single agent PARP inhibitors is limited to few tumor types within the relevant genetic context. Since DDR pathways are essential for repair of damage caused by cytotoxic agents, PARP inhibitors have been evaluated in combination with various chemotherapeutic agents to broaden the therapeutic application of this class of drugs. In this chapter, we discuss the combination of PARP inhibitors with different chemotherapeutics agents, clinical experience to date, lessons learnt, and future directions for this approach.

Dose Adjustment of Poly (ADP‑Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors in Patients with Hepatic or Renal Impairment

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are small-molecule inhibitors of PARP enzymes (including PARP1, PARP2, and PARP3) that exhibit activity against tumor cells with defects in DNA repair. In recent years, five PARP inhibitors, olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, talazoparib and veliparib, have been developed for the treatment of solid tumors, particularly in patients with breast-related cancer antigen (BRCA) 1/2 mutations, or those without a functional homologous recombination repair pathway. These novel treatments exhibit improved efficacy and toxicity when compared to conventional chemotherapy agents. The five PARP inhibitors are eliminated primarily via the liver and kidneys, hepatic or renal impairment may significantly affect their pharmacokinetics (PK). Therefore, it is important to know the effects of hepatic or renal impairment on the PK and safety of PARP inhibitors. In this review, we characterize and summarize the effects of hepatic and renal function on the PK of PARP inhibitors and provide specific recommendations for clinicians when prescribing PARP inhibitors in patients with hepatic or renal impairment.

Synthesis of Morpholine-, Piperidine-, and N-Substituted Piperazine-Coupled 2-(Benzimidazol-2-yl)-3-arylquinoxalines as Novel Potent Antitumor Agents

A novel series of 2-(benzimidazol-2-yl)quinoxalines with three types of pharmacophore groups, namely, piperazine, piperidine, and morpholine moieties, which are part of known antitumor drugs, was designed and synthesized. The compounds have been characterized by NMR and IR spectroscopy, high- and low-resolution mass spectrometry, and X-ray crystallography. 2-(Benzimidazol-2-yl)quinoxalines with N-methylpiperazine substituents showed promising activity against a wide range of cancer lines, without causing hemolysis and showing little cytotoxicity against normal human Wi-38 cells (human fetal lung). A mixture of regioisomers 2-(benzimidazol-2-yl)-3-(4-fluorophenyl)-6(and 7)-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)quinoxalines (mri BIQ 13da/14da) showed a highly selective cytotoxic effect against human lung adenocarcinoma (cell line A549) with a half-maximal inhibitory concentration at the level of doxorubicin with a selectivity index of 12. The data obtained by flow cytometry, fluorescence microscopy, and multiparametric fluorescence analysis suggested that the mechanism of the cytotoxic effect of the mri BIQ 13da/14da on A549 cells may be associated with the stopping of the cell cycle in phase S and inhibition of DNA synthesis as well as with the induction of mithochondrial apoptosis. Thus, mri BIQ 13da/14da can be considered as a leading compound deserving further study, optimization, and development as a new anticancer agent.

A phase I study of talazoparib (BMN 673) combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCI9782)

Background

Inhibitors of poly(ADP‐ribose) polymerase (PARP) proteins potentiate antitumor activity of platinum chemotherapy. This study sought to determine the safety and tolerability of PARP inhibitor talazoparib with carboplatin and paclitaxel.

Methods

We conducted a phase I study of talazoparib with carboplatin AUC5‐6 and paclitaxel 80 mg/m² days 1, 8, 15 of 21‐day cycles in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients enrolled using a 3 + 3 design in two cohorts with talazoparib for 7 (schedule A) or 3 days (schedule B). After induction with 4–6 cycles of triplet therapy, patients received one of three maintenance options: (a) continuation of triplet (b) carboplatin/talazoparib, or (c) talazoparib monotherapy.

Results

Forty‐three patients were treated. The MTD for both schedules was talazoparib 250mcg daily. The main toxicity was myelosuppression including grade 3/4 hematologic treatment‐related adverse events (TRAEs). Dose modification occurred in 87% and 100% of patients for schedules A and B, respectively. Discontinuation due to TRAEs was 13% in schedule A and 10% in B. Ten out of 22 evaluable patients in schedule A and 5/16 patients in schedule B had a complete or partial response. Twelve out of 43 patients received ≥6 cycles of talazoparib after induction, with a 13‐month median duration of maintenance.

Conclusion

We have established the recommended phase II dose of Talazoparib at 250mcg on a 3‐ or 7‐day schedule with carboplatin AUC6 and paclitaxel 80 mg/m² on days 1, 8, 15 of 21‐day cycles. This regimen is associated with significant myelosuppression, and in addition to maximizing supportive care, modification of the chemotherapy component would be a consideration for further development of this combination with the schedules investigated in this study.

Poly Adenosine Diphosphate-Ribose Polymerase (PARP) Inhibitors in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death in the United States and eleventh worldwide. The majority of patients present with advanced disease with five-year overall survival of less than 10%. Traditional chemotherapy has been the mainstay treatment for years, with limited improvement in survival. Relative success has been achieved with agents targeting the DNA damage repair (DDR) mechanisms with poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. The initial benefit was observed in patients with germline breast cancer-associated (BRCA) mutations. Multiple trials are now underway exploring PARP inhibitors in other DDR mutations such as the ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) gene and the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) gene (familial atypical multiple mole and melanoma syndrome), mismatch repair genes (Lynch syndrome), and others. PARP inhibitors are being evaluated as a single agent or combination chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and maintenance after chemotherapy. Here, we review current clinical trials targeting various DDR mutations and treatment strategies.

A phase I study of veliparib with cyclophosphamide and veliparib combined with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in advanced malignancies

PURPOSE

Veliparib (V), an oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, potentiates effects of alkylating agents and topoisomerase inhibitors in preclinical tumor models. We conducted a phase I trial of V with iv cyclophosphamide (C) and V plus iv doxorubicin (A) and C.

METHODS

Objectives were to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combinations, characterize V pharmacokinetics (PK) in the presence and absence of C, measure PAR in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and γH2AX in circulating tumor cells (CTCs). In Group 1, dose escalations of V from 10 to 50 mg every 12 h Days 1-4 plus C 450 to 750 mg/m² Day 3 in 21-day cycles were evaluated. In Group 2, V doses ranged from 50 to 150 mg every 12 h Days 1-4 with AC (60/600 mg/m²) Day 3 in 21-day cycles. In Group 3, patients received AC Day 1 plus V Days 1-7, and in Group 4, AC Day 1 plus V Days 1-14 was given in 21-day cycles to evaluate effects on γH2AX foci.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were enrolled. MTD was not reached for V and C. MTD for V and AC was V 100 mg every 12 h Days 1-4 with AC (60/600 mg/m2) Day 3 every 21 days. V PK appears to be dose-dependent and has no effect on the PK of C. Overall, neutropenia and anemia were the most common adverse events. Objective response in V and AC treated groups was 22% (11/49). Overall clinical benefit rate was 31% (25/80). PAR decreased in PBMCs. Percentage of γH2AX-positive CTCs increased after treatment with V and AC.

CONCLUSION

V and AC can be safely combined. Activity was observed in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Translation of DNA Damage Response Inhibitors as Chemoradiation Sensitizers From the Laboratory to the Clinic

Combination therapies with agents targeting the DNA damage response (DDR) offer an opportunity to selectively enhance the therapeutic index of chemoradiation or eliminate use of chemotherapy altogether. The successful translation of DDR inhibitors to clinical use requires investigating both their direct actions as (chemo)radiosensitizers and their potential to stimulate tumor immunogenicity. Beginning with high-throughput screening using both viability and DNA damage-reporter assays, followed by validation in gold-standard radiation colony-forming assays and in vitro assessment of mechanistic effects on the DDR, we describe proven strategies and methods leading to the clinical development of DDR inhibitors both with radiation alone and in combination with chemoradiation. Beyond these in vitro studies, we discuss the impact of key features of human xenograft and syngeneic mouse models on the relevance of in vivo tumor efficacy studies, particularly with regard to the immunogenic effects of combined therapy with radiation and DDR inhibitors. Finally, we describe recent technological advances in radiation delivery (using the small animal radiation research platform) that allow for conformal, clinically relevant radiation therapy in mouse models. This overall approach is critical to the successful clinical development and ultimate Food and Drug Administration approval of DDR inhibitors as (chemo)radiation sensitizers.

Randomized Phase II Study of PARP Inhibitor ABT-888 (Veliparib) with Modified FOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI as Second-line Treatment of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: SWOG S1513

PURPOSE

PARP inhibitors synergize with topoisomerase inhibitors, and veliparib plus modified (m) FOLFIRI (no 5-FU bolus) had preliminary activity in metastatic pancreatic cancers. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of second-line treatment with veliparib and mFOLFIRI versus FOLFIRI (control) for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This randomized phase II clinical trial led by the SWOG Cancer Research Network enrolled patients between September 1, 2016 and December 13, 2017. The median follow-up was 9 months (IQR 1-27). BRCA1/2 and homologous recombination DNA damage repair (HR-DDR) genetic defects were tested in blood and tumor biopsies. Patients received veliparib 200 mg twice daily, days 1-7 with mFOLFIRI days 3-5, or FOLFIRI in 14-day cycles.

RESULTS

After 123 of planned 143 patients were accrued, an interim futility analysis indicated that the veliparib arm was unlikely to be superior to control, and the study was halted. Median overall survival (OS) was 5.4 versus 6.5 months (HR, 1.23; P = 0.28), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.1 versus 2.9 months (HR, 1.39; P = 0.09) with veliparib versus control. Grade 3/4 toxicities were more common with veliparib (69% vs. 58%, P = 0.23). For cancers with HR-DDR defects versus wild-type, median PFS and OS were 7.3 versus 2.5 months (P = 0.05) and 10.1 versus 5.9 months (P = 0.17), respectively, with FOLFIRI, and 2.0 versus 2.1 months (P = 0.62) and 7.4 versus 5.1 months (P = 0.10), respectively, with veliparib plus mFOLFIRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Veliparib plus mFOLFIRI did not improve survival for metastatic pancreatic cancer. FOLFIRI should be further studied in pancreatic cancers with HR-DDR defects.

Metabolism‑related pharmacokinetic drug‑drug interactions with poly (ADP‑ribose) polymerase inhibitors (Review)

Poly (ADP‑ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, including olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, talazoparib and veliparib, have emerged as one of the most exciting new treatments for solid tumors, particularly in patients with breast‑related cancer antigen 1/2 mutations. Oral administration is convenient and shows favorable compliance with the majority of patients, but it may be affected by numerous factors, including food, metabolic enzymes and transporters. These interactions may be associated with serious adverse drug reactions or may reduce the treatment efficacy of PARP inhibitors. In fact, numerous pharmacokinetic (PK)‑based drug‑drug interactions (DDIs) involve the metabolism of PARP inhibitors, particularly those metabolized via cytochrome P450 enzymes. The present review aims to characterize and summarize the metabolism‑related PK‑based DDIs of PARP inhibitors, and to provide specific recommendations for reducing the risk of clinically significant DDIs.

The Novel Dual Topoisomerase Inhibitor P8-D6 Shows Anti-myeloma Activity In Vitro and In Vivo

P8-D6 is a novel dual inhibitor of human topoisomerase I (TOP1) and II (TOP2) with broad pro-apoptotic antitumor activity. NCI-60 screening revealed markedly improved cytotoxicity of P8-D6 against solid and leukemia cell lines compared with other single and dual topoisomerase inhibitors, for example, irinotecan, doxorubicin, or pyrazoloacridine. In this study, we investigated the capacity of P8-D6 to inhibit myeloma cell growth in vitro and in vivo Growth inhibition assays demonstrated significant anti-myeloma effects against different myeloma cell lines with IC₅₀ values in the low nanomolar range. Freshly isolated plasma cells of patients with multiple myeloma were killed by P8-D6 with similar doses. P8-D6 activated caspase 3/7 and induced significant apoptosis of myeloma cells. Supportive effects of bone marrow stromal cells on IL6-dependent INA-6 myeloma cells were abrogated by P8-D6 and apoptosis occurred in a time- and dose-dependent manner. Of note, healthy donor peripheral blood mononuclear cells and human umbilical vein endothelial cells were not affected at concentrations toxic for malignant plasma cells. Treatment of myeloma xenografts in immunodeficient SCID/beige mice by intravenous and, notably, also oral application of P8-D6 markedly inhibited tumor growths, and significantly prolonged survival of tumor-bearing mice.

Targeting BRCA and DNA Damage Repair Genes in GI Cancers: Pathophysiology and Clinical Perspectives

Mutated germline alleles in the DNA damage repair (DDR) genes “breast cancer gene 1” (BRCA1) and BRCA2 have originally been identified as major susceptibility genes in breast and ovarian cancers. With the establishment and approval of more cost-effective gene sequencing methods, germline and somatic BRCA mutations have been detected in several cancers. Since the approval of poly (ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) for BRCA-mutated cancers, BRCA mutations gained rising therapeutic implications. The impact and significance of BRCA mutations have been evaluated extensively in the last decades. Moreover, other genes involved in the DDR pathway, such as ATM, ATR, or CHK1, have emerged as potential new treatment targets, as inhibitors of these proteins are currently under clinical investigation. This review gives a concise overview on the emerging clinical implications of mutations in the DDR genes in gastrointestinal cancers with a focus on BRCA mutations.

Discovery of the PARP (poly ADP-ribose polymerase) inhibitor 2-(1-(4,4-difluorocyclohexyl)piperidin-4-yl)-1H-benzo[d]imidazole-4-carboxamide for the treatment of cancer

In this work, two series of cyclic amine-containing benzimidazole carboxamide derivatives were designed and synthesized as potent anticancer agents. PARP1/2 inhibitory activity assays indicated that most of the compounds showed significant activity. The in vitro antiproliferative activity of these compounds was investigated against four human cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-436, MDA-MB-231, MCF-7 and CAPAN-1), and several compounds exhibited strong cytotoxicity to tumor cells. Among them, 2-(1-(4,4-difluorocyclohexyl)piperidin-4-yl)-1H-benzo[d]imidazole-4-carboxamide (17d) was found to be effective PARP1/2 inhibitors (IC50 = 4.30 and 1.58 nM, respectively). In addition, 17d possessed obvious selective antineoplastic activity and noteworthy microsomal metabolic stability. What's more, further studies revealed that 17d was endowed with an excellent ADME profile. These combined results indicated that 17d could be a promising candidate for the treatment of cancer.

The evolving role of PARP inhibitors in advanced ovarian cancer

The field of ovarian cancer has been revolutionized with the use of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, which present greater inhibition effect in epithelial subtype due to high rates of homologous recombination deficiency. PARP inhibition exploits this cancer pitfall by disrupting DNA repair, leading to genomic instability and apoptosis. Three PARP inhibitors (olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib) are now approved for use in women with epithelial ovarian cancer, while others are under development. Among women with BRCA1/2 mutations, maintenance PARP therapy has led to a nearly fourfold prolongation of PFS, while those without BRCA1/2 mutations experience an approximately twofold increase in PFS. Differences in trial design, patient selection and primary analysis population affect the conclusions on PARP inhibitors. Limited OS data have been published and there is also limited experience regarding long-term safety. With regard to toxicity profile, there are no differences in serious adverse events between the experimental and control groups. However, combining adverse event data from maintenance phases, a trend towards more events in the experimental group, compared with controls, has been shown. The mechanisms of PARP-inhibitor resistance include restoration of HR through reversion mutations in HR genes, leading to resumed HR function. Other mechanisms that sustain sufficient DNA repair are discussed as well. PARP inhibitors play a pivotal role in the management of ovarian cancer, affecting the future treatment choices. Defining exactly which patients will benefit from them is a challenge and the need for HRD testing to define ‘BRCA-ness’ will add additional costs to treatment.

Tumor-selective, antigen-independent delivery of a pH sensitive peptide-topoisomerase inhibitor conjugate suppresses tumor growth without systemic toxicity

Topoisomerase inhibitors are potent DNA damaging agents which are widely used in oncology, and they demonstrate robust synergistic tumor cell killing in combination with DNA repair inhibitors, including poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. However, their use has been severely limited by the inability to achieve a favorable therapeutic index due to severe systemic toxicities. Antibody-drug conjugates address this issue via antigen-dependent targeting and delivery of their payloads, but this approach requires specific antigens and yet still suffers from off-target toxicities. There is a high unmet need for a more universal tumor targeting technology to broaden the application of cytotoxic payloads. Acidification of the extracellular milieu arises from metabolic adaptions associated with the Warburg effect in cancer. Here we report the development of a pH-sensitive peptide-drug conjugate to deliver the topoisomerase inhibitor, exatecan, selectively to tumors in an antigen-independent manner. Using this approach, we demonstrate potent in vivo cytotoxicity, complete suppression of tumor growth across multiple human tumor models, and synergistic interactions with a PARP inhibitor. These data highlight the identification of a peptide-topoisomerase inhibitor conjugate for cancer therapy that provides a high therapeutic index, and is applicable to all types of human solid tumors in an antigen-independent manner.

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) as target for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer: what to know

INTRODUCTION

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are being developed in maintenance and recurrence treatment settings of epithelial ovarian cancers (EOCs) with BRCA 1-2 gene mutation. PARP inhibitors are the first example of drugs targeting the loss of a gene suppressor: they block base-excision repair in the cancer cells, which have lost homologous recombination due to BRCA-mutation, resulting in loss of DNA repair and cell death, also known as synthetic lethality.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides an overview of PARP inhibitors in OC treatment and also an extensive section on the combined strategies of PARP inhibitors, including approved as well as currently investigated drugs. It also offers a section on the use of predictive biomarkers for PARP inhibitors treatment. Ongoing trials, including novel combinations, are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

In recent years, there is increasing evidence that PARP inhibitor therapy can have life-long percussion in the treatment of EOC, even if some questions have to be solved yet, such as its use in combination therapy, the possibility to retreat with a PARP inhibitor, and finally how to overcome a resistance mechanism to this therapy. In this way, PARP inhibitors can obtain an important role in making a personalized therapeutic program in the case of first-line, neoadjuvant, platinum-sensitive, and resistant high-grade serous OC treatment.

Top1-PARP1 association and beyond: from DNA topology to break repair

Selective trapping of human topoisomerase 1 (Top1) on the DNA (Top1 cleavage complexes; Top1cc) by specific Top1-poisons triggers DNA breaks and cell death. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) is an early nick sensor for trapped Top1cc. New mechanistic insights have been developed in recent years to rationalize the importance of PARP1 beyond the repair of Top1-induced DNA breaks. This review summarizes the progress in the molecular mechanisms of trapped Top1cc-induced DNA damage, PARP1 activation at DNA damage sites, PAR-dependent regulation of Top1 nuclear dynamics, and PARP1-associated molecular network for Top1cc repair. Finally, we have discussed the rationale behind the synergy between the combination of Top1 poison and PARP inhibitors in cancer chemotherapies, which is independent of the ‘PARP trapping’ phenomenon.

SARC025 arms 1 and 2: A phase 1 study of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor niraparib with temozolomide or irinotecan in patients with advanced Ewing sarcoma

Background

In preclinical Ewing sarcoma (ES) models, poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors were identified as a potential therapeutic strategy with synergy in combination with cytotoxic agents. This study evaluated the safety and dosing of the PARP1/2 inhibitor niraparib (NIR) with temozolomide (TMZ; arm 1) or irinotecan (IRN; arm 2) in patients with pretreated ES.

Methods

Eligible patients in arm 1 received continuous NIR daily and escalating TMZ (days 2‐6 [D2‐6]) in cohort A. Subsequent patients received intermittent NIR dosing (cohort B), with TMZ re‐escalation in cohort C. In arm 2, patients were assigned to NIR (days 1‐7 [D1‐7]) and escalating doses of IRN (D2‐6).

Results

From July 2014 to May 2018, 29 eligible patients (23 males and 6 females) were enrolled in arms 1 and 2, which had 7 dose levels combined. Five patients experienced at least 1 dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) in arm 1 (grade 4 [G4] neutropenia for >7 days or G4 thrombocytopenia), and 3 patients experienced at least 1 DLT in arm 2 (grade 3 [G3] colitis, G3 anorexia, or G3 alanine aminotransferase elevation). The maximum tolerated dose was NIR at 200 mg every day on D1‐7 plus TMZ at 30 mg/m² every day on D2‐6 (arm 1) or NIR at 100 mg every day on D1‐7 plus IRN at 20 mg/m² every day on D2‐6 (arm 2). One confirmed partial response was observed in arm 2; the median progression‐free survival was 9.0 weeks (95% CI, 7.0‐10.1 weeks) and 16.3 weeks (95% CI, 5.1‐69.7 weeks) in arms 1 and 2, respectively. The median decrease in tumor poly(ADP‐ribose) activity was 89% (range, 83%‐98%).

Conclusions

The combination of NIR and TMZ or IRN was tolerable, but at lower doses in comparison with conventional cytotoxic combinations. A triple‐combination study of NIR, IRN, and TMZ has commenced.

Preclinical evaluations have identified the EWS‐FLI1 translocation, pathognomonic of Ewing sarcoma, as a predictive factor of response to poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with synergistic cell death in vivo with DNA damaging agents. This phase 1 study examines the dosing and safety of a combination of the PARP inhibitor niraparib with temozolomide or irinotecan.

Development of new poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in ovarian cancer: Quo Vadis?

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the fifth leading cause of cancer mortality among women, potentially due to ineffectiveness of screening tests for early detection. Patients typically present with advanced disease at diagnosis, whereas, up to 80% relapse and the estimated median progression-free survival (PFS) is approximately 12–18 months. Increased knowledge on the molecular biology of EOC resulted in the development of several targeted therapies, including poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. These agents have changed the therapeutic approach of the EOC and exploit homologous recombination (HR) deficiency through synthetic lethality, especially in breast cancer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/2) mutation carriers. Furthermore, BRCA wild-type patients with other defects in the HR repair pathway, or those with platinum-resistant tumors may obtain benefit from this treatment. While PARP inhibitors as a class display many similarities, several differences in structure can translate into differences in tolerability and antitumor activity. Currently, olaparib, rucaparib, and niraparib have been approved by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and/or European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the treatment of EOC, while veliparib is in the late stage of clinical development. Finally, since October 2018 talazoparib is FDA and EMA approved for BRCA carriers with metastatic breast cancers. In this article, we explore the mechanisms of DNA repair, synthetic lethality, efficiency of PARP inhibition, and provide an overview of early and ongoing clinical investigations of the novel PARP inhibitors veliparib and talazoparib.

BET, SRC, and BCL2 family inhibitors are synergistic drug combinations with PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Homologous recombination deficiencies (HRD) are present in approximately half of epithelial ovarian cancers, for which PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are becoming a preferred treatment option. However, a considerable proportion of these carcinomas acquire resistance or harbour de novo resistance, posing a significant challenge to treatment.

METHODS

To identify new combinatorial therapeutics to overcome resistance to PARPi, we employed high-throughput conditional RNAi and drug screening of patient-derived ovarian cancer cells. To prioritise clinically relevant drug combinations, we integrated empirical validation with analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) datasets to nominate candidate targets and drugs, reaching three main findings.

FINDINGS

Firstly, we found that the PARPi rucaparib enhanced the effect of BET inhibitors (CPI-203 & CPI-0610) irrespective of clinical subtype or HRD status. Additional drug combination screens identified that dasatinib, a non-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, augmented the effects of rucaparib and BET inhibitors, proposing a potential broadly applicable triple-drug combination for high-grade serous and clear cell ovarian carcinomas. Secondly, rucaparib synergised with the BCL2 family inhibitor navitoclax, with preferential activity in ovarian carcinomas that harbour alterations in BRCA1/2, BARD1, or MSH2/6. Thirdly, we identified potentially antagonistic drug combinations between the PARPi rucaparib and vinca alkaloids, anthracyclines, and antimetabolites, cautioning their use in the clinic.

INTERPRETATION

These findings propose therapeutic strategies to address PARP inhibitor resistance using agents that are already approved or are in clinical development, with the potential for rapid translation to benefit a broad population of ovarian cancer patients.

Olaparib Suppresses MDSC Recruitment via SDF1α/CXCR4 Axis to Improve the Anti-tumor Efficacy of CAR-T Cells on Breast Cancer in Mice

A hostile tumor microenvironment is one of the major obstacles for the efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor modified T (CAR-T) cells, and combination treatment might be a potential way to overcome this obstacle. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) has demonstrated tremendous potential in breast cancer. In this study, we explored the possible combination of the PAPRi olaparib with EGFRvIII-targeted CAR (806-28Z CAR) T cells in immunocompetent mouse models of breast cancer. The results indicated that the administration of olaparib could significantly enhance the efficacy of 806-28Z CAR-T cells in vivo. Interestingly, we observed that olaparib could suppress myeloid-derived suppressor cell (MDSC) migration and promote the survival of CD8⁺ T cells in tumor tissue. Mechanistically, olaparib was shown to reduce the expression of SDF1α released from cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) and thereby decreased MDSC migration through CXCR4. Taken together, this study demonstrated that olaparib could increase the antitumor activities of CAR-T cell therapy at least partially through inhibiting MDSC migration via the SDF1α/CXCR4 axis. These findings uncover a novel mechanism of PARPi function and provide additional mechanistic rationale for combining PARPi with CAR-T cells for the treatment of breast cancer.

PARP inhibition in treatment of pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Tumor control and survival of patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has improved with more effective polychemotherapies. The identification of novel therapeutic targets is strongly needed in order to propose maintenance therapies that improve quality of life while maintaining tumor control.

AREAS COVERED

PDAC with mutations in homologous recombination repair genes such as BRCA are particularly sensitive to platinum agents. Recently, the potential role of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors was suggested. The POLO study has shown that olaparib was efficient and well-tolerated as maintenance therapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutation and a metastatic PDAC controlled after a platinum-based induction chemotherapy.

EXPERT OPINION

The demonstration of olaparib efficacy in patients with metastatic PDAC and BRCA germline mutation has paved the way for maintenance with a targeted therapy. Further studies are needed to assess; the potential role for PARPI in earlier forms of PDAC, those with somatic or more rare BRACness signatures, to overcome primary or secondary resistances to PARPi, and to combine them with other antitumoral agents.

Targeting Six Hallmarks of Cancer in Ovarian Cancer Therapy

Normal cells must overcome multiple protective mechanisms to develop into cancer cells. Their new capabilities include self-sufficiency in growth signals and insensitivity to antigrowth signals, evasion of apoptosis, a limitless replicative potential, sustained angiogenesis, and tissue invasion and metastasis; these are also termed the six hallmarks of cancer. A deep understanding of the genetic and protein alterations involved in these processes has enabled the development of targeted therapeutic strategies and clinical trial design in the search for ovarian cancer treatments. Clinically, significantly longer progression-free survival has been observed in the single use of PARP, MEK, VEGF and Chk1/Chk2 inhibitors. However, the clinical efficacy of the targeted agents is still restricted to specific molecular subtypes and no trials illustrate a benefit in overall survival. Exploring novel drug targets or combining current feasible biological agents hold great promise to further improve outcomes in ovarian cancer. In this review, we intend to provide a comprehensive description of the molecular alterations involved in ovarian cancer carcinogenesis and of emerging biological agents and combined strategies that target aberrant pathways, which might shed light on future ovarian cancer treatment.

A phase I trial of talazoparib and irinotecan with and without temozolomide in children and young adults with recurrent or refractory solid malignancies

BACKGROUND

Talazoparib combined with irinotecan and temozolomide demonstrated efficacy in a murine Ewing sarcoma model. Based on these data, we conducted a phase I trial of talazoparib and irinotecan with/without temozolomide in paediatric patients with recurrent/refractory solid malignancies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cohorts of 3-6 patients with recurrent/refractory solid malignancies received escalating doses of oral talazoparib and intravenous irinotecan (arm A) and oral talazoparib, oral temozolomide and intravenous irinotecan (arm B) in a 3 + 3 design. Talazoparib was administered on days 1-6, and intravenous irinotecan and oral temozolomide were administered on days 2-6, of a 21-day course. Serum for talazoparib and irinotecan pharmacokinetics was obtained during course 1. UGT1A1 polymorphism and Schlafen family member 11 (SLFN11) immunohistochemical staining were performed.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients (20 males; median age, 14.6 years; 24 with recurrent disease) were evaluable for dose escalation. Twenty-nine and 12 patients were treated on arm A and arm B, respectively, for a total of 208 courses. The most common diagnosis was Ewing sarcoma (53%). The most common ≥grade III haematologic toxicities in arms A and B included neutropenia (78% and 31%, respectively) and thrombocytopenia (42% and 31%, respectively). In arms A and B, febrile neutropenia (24% and 14%, respectively) and diarrhoea (21% and 7%, respectively) were the most common ≥grade III non-hematologic toxicities. Six patients (Ewing sarcoma [5 patients] and synovial sarcoma [1 patient]) had a response (1 with a complete response, 5 with a partial response). The objective response rates were 10.3% (arm A) and 25% (arm B). Pharmacokinetic testing demonstrated no evidence of drug-drug interaction between talazoparib and irinotecan. UGT1A1 was not related to response. SLFN11 positivity was associated with best response to therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of talazoparib and irinotecan with/without temozolomide is feasible and active in Ewing sarcoma, and further investigation is warranted.

Development of new medical treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer recurrence

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the scariest gynaecological cancer. Many advances have been done with evolving knowledge, leading to the introduction of new drugs, most in maintenance setting. The antiangiogenic Bevacizumab and the three approved PARP-inhibitors-olaparib, niraparib and rucaparib-are gradually improving PFS of patients with EOC, with initial effects on OS too. But recurrence is still a heavy sentence and lethality continues to be high. Ovarian cancer is a complex disease, with different clinical presentation, histological aspect, and molecular expression, leading to disappointing results, when using a single drug. Implementation of biobanking and analysis of patients' tumour samples, before starting a treatment, could be a promising way to better understand molecular aspects of this disease, to identify markers predictive of response and to allow a better use of experimental drugs, as immunomodulators, targeted therapies, and combinations of these, to fight tumour growth and clinical progression. We reviewed the literature on the updated treatments for recurrent ovarian cancer, summarizing all the available drugs and combinations to treat patients with this diagnosis, and focusing the attention on the new approved molecules and the contemporary Clinical Trials, investigating new target therapies and new associations.

Biomarker-Guided Development of DNA Repair Inhibitors

Anti-cancer drugs targeting the DNA damage response (DDR) exploit genetic or functional defects in this pathway through synthetic lethal mechanisms. For example, defects in homologous recombination (HR) repair arise in cancer cells through inherited or acquired mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, or other genes in the Fanconi anemia/BRCA pathway, and these tumors have been shown to be particularly sensitive to inhibitors of the base excision repair (BER) protein poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP). Recent work has identified additional genomic and functional assays of DNA repair that provide new predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers for these targeted therapies. Here, we examine the development of selective agents targeting DNA repair, including PARP inhibitors; inhibitors of the DNA damage kinases ataxia-telangiectasia and Rad3 related (ATR), CHK1, WEE1, and ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM); and inhibitors of classical non-homologous end joining (cNHEJ) and alternative end joining (Alt EJ). We also review the biomarkers that guide the use of these agents and current clinical trials with these therapies.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of veliparib, a PARP inhibitor, and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in recurrent gynecologic cancer and triple negative breast cancer with long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Poly(ADP-ribosyl) polymerases (PARPs) are nuclear enzymes with roles in DNA damage recognition and repair. PARP1 inhibition enhances the effects of DNA-damaging agents like doxorubicin. We sought to determine the recommended phase two dose (RP2D) of veliparib with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in breast and recurrent gynecologic cancer patients.

METHODS

Veliparib and PLD were administered in a standard phase 1, 3 + 3 dose-escalation design starting at 50 mg veliparib BID on days 1-14 with PLD 40 mg/mg² on day 1 of a 28-day cycle. Dose escalation proceeded in two strata: A (prior PLD exposure) and B (no prior PLD exposure). Patients underwent limited pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling; an expansion PK cohort was added.

RESULTS

44 patients with recurrent ovarian or triple negative breast cancer were enrolled. Median age 56 years; 23 patients BRCA mutation carriers; median prior regimens four. Patients received a median of four cycles of veliparib/PLD. Grade 3/4 toxicities were observed in 10% of patients. Antitumor activity was observed in both sporadic and BRCA-deficient cancers. Two BRCA mutation carriers had complete responses. Two BRCA patients developed oral squamous cell cancers after completing this regimen. PLD exposure was observed to be higher when veliparib doses were > 200 mg BID.

CONCLUSIONS

The RP2D is 200 mg veliparib BID on days 1-14 with 40 mg/m² PLD on day 1 of a 28-day cycle. Anti-tumor activity was seen in both strata. However, given development of long-term squamous cell cancers and the PK interaction observed, efforts should focus on other targeted combinations to improve efficacy.

Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors in Pancreatic Cancer: A New Treatment Paradigms and Future Implications

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy. Most of the patients of PDAC present at later stages of disease and have a five-year survival rate of less than 10%. About 5-10% PDAC cases are hereditary in nature and have DNA damage repair (DDR) mutations such as BRCA 1 and 2. Besides having implications on screening and prevention strategies, these mutations can confer sensitivity to platinum-based therapies and determine eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). In the presence of DDR mutations and PARPi, the cells are unable to utilize the error-free process of homologous recombination repair, leading to accumulation of double stranded DNA breaks and cell death eventually. Various PARPi are in clinical development in PDAC in different subgroup of patients as monotherapies and in combination with other therapeutics. This review would focus on the mechanism of action of PARPi, history of development in PDAC, resistance mechanisms and future directions.

Veliparib in ovarian cancer: a new synthetically lethal therapeutic approach

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) accounts for nearly 90% of all ovarian malignancies. The standard therapeutic strategy includes cytoreductive surgery and neo (adjuvant) platinum-based chemotherapy. Relapse of advanced high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is related to the development of drug resistance. A defective DNA damage response is a defining hallmark of HGSOC. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors exploit this deficiency through synthetic lethality and have emerged as promising anticancer therapies, especially in breast cancer gene (BRCA1 or BRCA2) mutation carriers. Apart from inducing synthetic lethality, PARP inhibitors have also been shown to trap PARP1 and PARP2 on DNA, leading to PARP-DNA complexes. This "PARP trapping" potentiates synergism between PARP inhibition and both alkylating agents and platinum-based chemotherapy. However, there are remarkable differences in the ability of PARP inhibitors to trap PARP, based on the size and structure of each separate molecule. Since monotherapy with PARP inhibitors is unlikely to induce cancer cell death in BRCA-proficient tumors, the efficacy of PARP inhibitors could be potentially optimized when combined with DNA-damaging agents, or with molecular targeted agents that also impair mechanisms of DNA repair. Olaparib, rucaparib, and niraparib have all obtained US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and/or European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval in ovarian cancer in different settings. Veliparib does not yet have an approved label; nevertheless, there are currently promising results available in preclinical and early clinical settings. This comprehensive review summarizes the mechanism of action of veliparib and provides an overview of its early and ongoing clinical investigations.

Choosing wisely: Selecting PARP inhibitor combinations to promote anti-tumor immune responses beyond BRCA mutations

PARP inhibitors have transformed the management of advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Despite the overwhelming success of PARP inhibition, particularly in BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer, several limitations and unanswered questions remain. With PARP inhibitors now being used in earlier treatment settings, the issue of both de novo and acquired resistance mechanisms and appropriate post-PARP management are pressing concerns. In addition, the population appropriate to target with PARP inhibitors and their use in patients without BRCA mutations is controversial and evolving. In this review we will discuss exciting PARP combinations and biologic rationale for the development and selection of PARP inhibitor combinations.

Topoisomerases and cancer chemotherapy: recent advances and unanswered questions

DNA topoisomerases are enzymes that catalyze changes in the torsional and flexural strain of DNA molecules. Earlier studies implicated these enzymes in a variety of processes in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, including DNA replication, transcription, recombination, and chromosome segregation. Studies performed over the past 3 years have provided new insight into the roles of various topoisomerases in maintaining eukaryotic chromosome structure and facilitating the decatenation of daughter chromosomes at cell division. In addition, recent studies have demonstrated that the incorporation of ribonucleotides into DNA results in trapping of topoisomerase I (TOP1)–DNA covalent complexes during aborted ribonucleotide removal. Importantly, such trapped TOP1–DNA covalent complexes, formed either during ribonucleotide removal or as a consequence of drug action, activate several repair processes, including processes involving the recently described nuclear proteases SPARTAN and GCNA-1. A variety of new TOP1 inhibitors and formulations, including antibody–drug conjugates and PEGylated complexes, exert their anticancer effects by also trapping these TOP1–DNA covalent complexes. Here we review recent developments and identify further questions raised by these new findings.

Recent Advances in Use of Topoisomerase Inhibitors in Combination Cancer Therapy

Inhibitors targeting human topoisomerase I and topoisomerase II alpha have provided a useful chemotherapy option for the treatment of many patients suffering from a variety of cancers. While the treatment can be effective in many patient cases, use of these human topoisomerase inhibitors is limited by side-effects that can be severe. A strategy of employing the topoisomerase inhibitors in combination with other treatments can potentially sensitize the cancer to increase the therapeutic efficacy and reduce resistance or adverse side effects. The combination strategies reviewed here include inhibitors of DNA repair, epigenetic modifications, signaling modulators and immunotherapy. The ongoing investigations on cellular response to topoisomerase inhibitors and newly initiated clinical trials may lead to adoption of novel cancer therapy regimens that can effectively stop the proliferation of cancer cells while limiting the development of resistance.

Targeting Topoisomerase I in the Era of Precision Medicine

Irinotecan and topotecan have been widely used as anticancer drugs for the past 20 years. Because of their selectivity as topoisomerase I (TOP1) inhibitors that trap TOP1 cleavage complexes, camptothecins are also widely used to elucidate the DNA repair pathways associated with DNA-protein cross-links and replication stress. This review summarizes the basic molecular mechanisms of action of TOP1 inhibitors, their current use, and limitations as anticancer agents. We introduce new therapeutic strategies based on novel TOP1 inhibitor chemical scaffolds including the indenoisoquinolines LMP400 (indotecan), LMP776 (indimitecan), and LMP744, and on tumor-targeted delivery TOP1 inhibitors using liposome, PEGylation, and antibody-drug conjugates. We also address how tumor-specific determinants such as homologous recombination defects (HRD and BRCAness) and Schlafen 11 (SLFN11) expression can be used to guide clinical application of TOP1 inhibitors in combination with DNA damage response inhibitors including PARP, ATR, CHEK1, and ATM inhibitors.

Exploiting DNA repair defects in breast cancer: from chemotherapy to immunotherapy

Introduction: Impaired DNA damage response (DDR) and subsequent genomic instability are associated with the carcinogenic process itself, but it also results in sensitivity of tumor cells to certain drugs and can be exploited to treat cancer by inducing deadly mutations or mitotic catastrophe. Exploiting DDR defects in breast cancer cells has been one of the main strategies in both conventional chemotherapy, targeted therapies, or immunotherapies. Areas covered: In this review, the authors first discuss DDR mechanisms in healthy cells and DDR defects in breast cancer, then focus on current therapies and developments in the treatment of DDR-deficient breast cancer. Expert opinion: Among conventional chemotherapeutics, platinum-based regimens, in particular, seem to be effective in DDR-deficient patients. PARP inhibitors represent one of the successful models of translational research in this area and clinical data showed high efficacy and reasonable toxicity with these agents in patients with breast cancer and BRCA mutation. Recent studies have underlined that some subtypes of breast cancer are highly immunogenic. Promising activity has been shown with immunotherapeutic agents, particularly in DDR-deficient breast cancers. Chemotherapeutics, DNA-repair pathway inhibitors, and immunotherapies might result in further improved outcomes in certain subsets of patients with breast cancer and DDR.

Evaluation of Pharmacodynamic Responses to Cancer Therapeutic Agents Using DNA Damage Markers

PURPOSE

We sought to examine the pharmacodynamic activation of the DNA damage response (DDR) pathway in tumors following anticancer treatment for confirmation of target engagement.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We evaluated the time course and spatial activation of 3 protein biomarkers of DNA damage recognition and repair (γH2AX, pS343-Nbs1, and Rad51) simultaneously in a quantitative multiplex immunofluorescence assay (IFA) to assess DDR pathway activation in tumor tissues following exposure to DNA-damaging agents.

RESULTS

Because of inherent biological variability, baseline DDR biomarker levels were evaluated in a colorectal cancer microarray to establish clinically relevant thresholds for pharmacodynamic activation. Xenograft-bearing mice and clinical colorectal tumor biopsies obtained from subjects exposed to DNA-damaging therapeutic regimens demonstrated marked intratumor heterogeneity in the timing and extent of DDR biomarker activation due, in part, to the cell-cycle dependency of DNA damage biomarker expression.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated the clinical utility of this DDR multiplex IFA in preclinical models and clinical specimens following exposure to multiple classes of cytotoxic agents, DNA repair protein inhibitors, and molecularly targeted agents, in both homologous recombination-proficient and -deficient contexts. Levels exceeding 4% nuclear area positive (NAP) γH2AX, 4% NAP pS343-Nbs1, and 5% cells with ≥5 Rad51 nuclear foci indicate a DDR activation response to treatment in human colorectal cancer tissue. Determination of effect-level cutoffs allows for robust interpretation of biomarkers with significant interpatient and intratumor heterogeneity; simultaneous assessment of biomarkers induced at different phases of the DDR guards against the risk of false negatives due to an ill-timed biopsy.

PARP1 Trapping by PARP Inhibitors Drives Cytotoxicity in Both Cancer Cells and Healthy Bone Marrow

PARP inhibitors have recently been approved as monotherapies for the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer and metastatic BRCA-associated breast cancer, and ongoing studies are exploring additional indications and combinations with other agents. PARP inhibitors trap PARP onto damaged chromatin when combined with temozolomide and methyl methanesulfonate, but the clinical relevance of these findings remains unknown. PARP trapping has thus far been undetectable in cancer cells treated with PARP inhibitors alone. Here, we evaluate the contribution of PARP trapping to the tolerability and efficacy of PARP inhibitors in the monotherapy setting. We developed a novel implementation of the proximity ligation assay to detect chromatin-trapped PARP1 at single-cell resolution with higher sensitivity and throughput than previously reported methods. We further demonstrate that the PARP inhibitor-induced trapping appears to drive single-agent cytotoxicity in healthy human bone marrow, indicating that the toxicity of trapped PARP complexes is not restricted to cancer cells with homologous recombination deficiency. Finally, we show that PARP inhibitors with dramatically different trapping potencies exhibit comparable tumor growth inhibition at MTDs in a xenograft model of BRCA1-mutant triple-negative breast cancer. These results are consistent with emerging clinical data and suggest that the inverse relationship between trapping potency and tolerability may limit the potential therapeutic advantage of potent trapping activity. IMPLICATIONS: PARP trapping contributes to single-agent cytotoxicity of PARP inhibitors in both cancer cells and healthy bone marrow, and the therapeutic advantage of potent trapping activity appears to be limited.

Inhibitors targeting CDK4/6, PARP and PI3K in breast cancer: a review

Breast cancer is the global leading cause of cancer-related death in women and it represents a major health burden worldwide. One of the promising breast cancer therapeutic avenues is through small molecule inhibitors (SMIs) which have undergone rapid progress with successful clinical trials. Recently, three emerging and vital groups of proteins are targeted by SMIs for breast cancer treatment, namely cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6), poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K). Several of these inhibitors have been approved for the treatment of breast cancer patients or progressed into late-stage clinical trials. Thus, modeling from these successful clinical trials, as well as their limitations, is pivotal for future development and trials of other inhibitors or therapeutic regimens targeting breast cancer patients. In this review, we discuss eight recently approved or novel SMIs against CDK4/6 (palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib), PARP (olaparib, veliparib and talazoparib), and PI3K (buparlisib and alpelisib). The mechanisms of action, series of clinical trials and limitations are described for each inhibitor.

The Ewing Family of Tumors Relies on BCL-2 and BCL-XL to Escape PARP Inhibitor Toxicity

PURPOSE

It was recently demonstrated that the EWSR1-FLI1 t(11;22)(q24;12) translocation contributes to the hypersensitivity of Ewing sarcoma to PARP inhibitors, prompting clinical evaluation of olaparib in a cohort of heavily pretreated Ewing sarcoma tumors. Unfortunately, olaparib activity was disappointing, suggesting an underappreciated resistance mechanism to PARP inhibition in patients with Ewing sarcoma. We sought to elucidate the resistance factors to PARP inhibitor therapy in Ewing sarcoma and identify a rational drug combination capable of rescuing PARP inhibitor activity.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We employed a pair of cell lines derived from the same patient with Ewing sarcoma prior to and following chemotherapy, a panel of Ewing sarcoma cell lines, and several patient-derived xenograft (PDX) and cell line xenograft models.

RESULTS

We found olaparib sensitivity was diminished following chemotherapy. The matched cell line pair revealed increased expression of the antiapoptotic protein BCL-2 in the chemotherapy-resistant cells, conferring apoptotic resistance to olaparib. Resistance to olaparib was maintained in this chemotherapy-resistant model in vivo, whereas the addition of the BCL-2/X_L inhibitor navitoclax led to tumor growth inhibition. In 2 PDXs, olaparib and navitoclax were minimally effective as monotherapy, yet induced dramatic tumor growth inhibition when dosed in combination. We found that EWS-FLI1 increases BCL-2 expression; however, inhibition of BCL-2 alone by venetoclax is insufficient to sensitize Ewing sarcoma cells to olaparib, revealing a dual necessity for BCL-2 and BCL-X_L in Ewing sarcoma survival.

CONCLUSIONS

These data reveal BCL-2 and BCL-X_L act together to drive olaparib resistance in Ewing sarcoma and reveal a novel, rational combination therapy that may be put forward for clinical trial testing.

Translational Research Opportunities Regarding Homologous Recombination in Ovarian Cancer

Homologous recombination (HR) is a DNA repair pathway that is deficient in 50% of high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (HGSOC). Deficient HR (DHR) constitutes a therapeutic opportunity for these patients, thanks to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi; olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib are already commercialized). Although initially, PARPi were developed for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, robust clinical data have shown their benefit in a broader population without DHR. This breakthrough in daily practice has raised several questions that necessitate further research: How can populations that will most benefit from PARPi be selected? At which stage of ovarian cancer should PARPi be used? Which strategies are reasonable to overcome PARPi resistance? In this paper, we present a summary of the literature and discuss the present clinical research involving PARPi (after reviewing ClinicalTrials.gov) from a translational perspective. Research into the functional biomarkers of DHR and clinical trials testing PARPi benefits as first-line setting or rechallenge are currently ongoing. Additionally, in the clinical setting, only secondary restoring mutations of BRCA1/2 have been identified as events inducing resistance to PARPi. The clinical frequency of this and other mechanisms that have been described in preclinics is unknown. It is of great importance to study mechanisms of resistance to PARPi to guide the clinical development of drug combinations.