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

DNA Damage Repair Pathways in Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review of Molecular Mechanisms, Emerging Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets in Precision Oncology

Prostate cancer (PCa) has a distinct molecular signature, including characteristic chromosomal translocations, gene deletions and defective DNA damage repair mechanisms. One crucial pathway involved is homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and it is found in almost 20% of metastatic castrate-resistant PCa (mCRPC). Inherited/germline mutations are associated with a hereditary predisposition to early PCa development and aggressive behavior. BRCA2, ATM and CHECK2 are the most frequently HRD-mutated genes. BRCA2-mutated tumors have unfavorable clinical and pathological characteristics, such as intraductal carcinoma. PARP inhibitors, due to the induction of synthetic lethality, have been therapeutically approved for mCRPC with HRD alterations. Mutations are detected in metastatic tissue, while a liquid biopsy is utilized during follow-up, recognizing acquired resistance mechanisms. The mismatch repair (MMR) pathway is another DNA repair mechanism implicated in carcinogenesis, although only 5% of metastatic PCa is affected. It is associated with aggressive disease. PD-1 inhibitors have been used in MMR-deficient tumors; thus, the MMR status should be tested in all metastatic PCa cases. A surrogate marker of defective DNA repair mechanisms is the tumor mutational burden. PDL-1 expression and intratumoral lymphocytes have ambivalent predictive value. Few experimental molecules have been so far proposed as potential biomarkers. Future research may further elucidate the role of DNA damage pathways in PCa, revealing new therapeutic targets and predictive biomarkers.

Peripheral Neuropathy Potentially Associated to Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors: An Analysis of the Eudravigilance Database

Poly (ADP-Ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have emerged as a targeted therapy in cancer treatment with promising results in various types of cancer. This work aims to investigate the profile of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with PARPi through the reports provided by the Eudravigilance (EV) database. We also intend to analyze the potential association of peripheral neuropathy to PARPi. Data on individual case safety reports (ICSRs) were obtained by accessing the European spontaneous reporting system via the EV website. A total of 12,762 ICSRs were collected from the EV database. Serious cases of nervous system disorders were analyzed providing strong evidence that peripheral neuropathy was reported in a higher frequency in patients treated with niraparib. Most cases reported a not recovered/not resolved outcome and involved drug withdrawal. However, several studies suggest that PARPi attenuate chemotherapy-induced painful neuropathy. Unexpected ADRs such as peripheral neuropathy may also occur, mostly in patients taking niraparib. Further pharmacovigilance studies should be conducted in this area to clarify with more precision the toxicity profile of these drugs.

PBRM1 mutations might render a subtype of biliary tract cancers sensitive to drugs targeting the DNA damage repair system

Polybromo-1 (PBRM1) loss of function mutations are present in a fraction of biliary tract cancers (BTCs). PBRM1, a subunit of the PBAF chromatin-remodeling complex, is involved in DNA damage repair. Herein, we aimed to decipher the molecular landscape of PBRM1 mutated (mut) BTCs and to define potential translational aspects. Totally, 1848 BTC samples were analyzed using next-generation DNA-sequencing and immunohistochemistry (Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). siRNA-mediated knockdown of PBRM1 was performed in the BTC cell line EGI1 to assess the therapeutic vulnerabilities of ATR and PARP inhibitors in vitro. PBRM1 mutations were identified in 8.1% (n = 150) of BTCs and were more prevalent in intrahepatic BTCs (9.9%) compared to gallbladder cancers (6.0%) or extrahepatic BTCs (4.5%). Higher rates of co-mutations in chromatin-remodeling genes (e.g., ARID1A 31% vs. 16%) and DNA damage repair genes (e.g., ATRX 4.4% vs. 0.3%) were detected in PBRM1-mutated (mut) vs. PBRM1-wildtype (wt) BTCs. No difference in real-world overall survival was observed between PBRM1-mut and PBRM1-wt patients (HR 1.043, 95% CI 0.821-1.325, p = 0.731). In vitro, experiments suggested that PARP ± ATR inhibitors induce synthetic lethality in the PBRM1 knockdown BTC model. Our findings served as the scientific rationale for PARP inhibition in a heavily pretreated PBRM1-mut BTC patient, which induced disease control. This study represents the largest and most extensive molecular profiling study of PBRM1-mut BTCs, which in vitro sensitizes to DNA damage repair inhibiting compounds. Our findings might serve as a rationale for future testing of PARP/ATR inhibitors in PBRM1-mut BTCs.

Health-related quality of life in GALAHAD: A multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of niraparib for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA-repair gene defects

BACKGROUND: Niraparib is a highly selective poly (adenosine diphosphateribose) polymerase-1 and poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase-2 inhibitor indicated for select patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. The phase 2 GALAHAD trial (NCT02854436) demonstrated that niraparib monotherapy is tolerable and efficacious in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, particularly those with breast cancer gene (BRCA) alterations who had progressed on prior androgen signaling inhibitor therapy and taxane-based chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To report the prespecified patient-reported outcomes analysis from GALAHAD. METHODS: Eligible patients with alterations to BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) and with pathogenic alterations in other HRR genes (other HRR cohort) were enrolled and received niraparib 300 mg once daily. Patient-reported outcome instruments included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate and the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form. Changes from baseline were compared using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. RESULTS: On average, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved in the BRCA cohort by cycle 3 (mean change = 6.03; 95% CI = 2.76-9.29) and was maintained above baseline until cycle 10 (mean change = 2.84; 95% CI = -1.95 to 7.63), whereas the other HRR cohort showed no early change in HRQoL from baseline (mean change = -0.07; 95% CI = -4.69 to 4.55) and declined by cycle 10 (mean change = -5.10; 95% CI = -15.3 to 5.06). Median time to deterioration in pain intensity and pain interference could not be estimated in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced mCRPC and BRCA alterations treated with niraparib experienced more meaningful improvement in overall HRQoL, pain intensity, and pain interference compared with those with other HRR alterations. In this population of castrate, heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC and HRR alterations, stabilization, and improvement in HRQoL may be relevant to consider when making treatment decisions. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Janssen Research & Development, LLC (no grant number). Dr Smith has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, Janssen, and Lilly; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Sandhu has received grants from Amgen, Endocyte, and Genentech; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Merck; and has received personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck Serono. Dr George has received personal fees from the American Association for Cancer Research, Axess Oncology, Capio Biosciences, Constellation Pharma, EMD Serono, Flatiron, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Michael J. Hennessey Association, Millennium Medical Publishing, Modra Pharma, Myovant Sciences, Inc., NCI Genitourinary, Nektar Therapeutics, Physician Education Resource, Propella TX, RevHealth, LLC, and UroGPO; has received grants and personal fees from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Bayer and UroToday; has received grants from Calithera and Novartis; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Exelixis, Inc., Sanofi, and Janssen Pharma. Dr Chi has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Astellas Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, POINT Biopharma, Roche, and Sanofi; and has received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Saad has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen during the conduct of the study; and has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Bayer, Myovant, Sanofi, and Novartis. Dr Thiery-Vuillemin has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Pfizer; has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Ipsen, Roche/Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Astellas Pharma; and has received personal fees from Sanofi, Novartis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Olmos has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and has received nonfinancial support from Astellas Pharma, F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Genentech, and Ipsen. Dr Danila has received research support from the US Department of Defense, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, Stand Up to Cancer, Janssen Research & Development, Astellas Pharma, Medivation, Agensys, Genentech, and CreaTV. Dr Gafanov has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study. Dr Castro has received grants from Janssen during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Janssen, Bayer, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and has received personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Clovis. Dr Moon has received research funding from SeaGen, HuyaBio, Janssen, BMS, Aveo, Xencor, and has received personal fees from Axess Oncology, MJH, EMD Serono, and Pfizer. Dr Joshua has received nonfinancial support from Janssen; consulted or served in an advisory role for Neoleukin, Janssen Oncology, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Noxopharm, IQvia, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, and Eisai; and received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mayne Pharma, Roche/Genentech, Bayer, MacroGenics, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Corvus Pharmaceuticals. Drs Mason, Liu, Bevans, Lopez-Gitlitz, and Francis and Mr Espina are employees of Janssen Research & Development. Dr Mason owns stocks with Janssen. Dr Fizazi has participated in advisory boards and talks for Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, MSD, Novartis/AAA, Pfizer, and Sanofi, with honoraria to his institution (Institut Gustave Roussy); has participated in advisory boards for, with personal honoraria from, Arvinas, CureVac, MacroGenics, and Orion. Study registration number: NCT02854436.

Novel therapies for metastatic prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Patients with metastatic prostate cancer, especially in the castrate-resistant setting, have a poor prognosis. Many agents have been approved for metastatic prostate cancer, such as androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, taxane-based chemotherapy, radiopharmaceuticals, and immunotherapy. However, prostate cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths in nonsmoking men. Fortunately, many more novel agents are under investigation.

AREAS COVERED

We provide an overview of the broad group of novel therapies for metastatic prostate cancer, with an emphasis on active and recruiting clinical trials that have been recently published and/or presented at national or international meetings.

EXPERT OPINION

The future for patients with metastatic prostate cancer is promising, with further development of novel therapies such as radiopharmaceuticals. Based on a growing understanding of prostate cancer biology, novel agents are being designed to overcome resistance to approved therapies. There are many trials using novel agents either as monotherapy or in combination with already approved agents with potential to further improve outcomes for men with advanced prostate cancer.

Lutetium-177 PSMA for the treatment of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCPRC) remains an aggressive form of prostate cancer that no longer responds to traditional hormonal treatment alone. Despite the advent of novel anti-androgen medications, many patients continue to progress, and as a result, there is a growing need for additional treatment options.

AREAS COVERED

Lutetium-177 (177Lu) - PSMA-617 has become one of the new frontline treatment options for refractory metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer after the failure of novel anti-androgen therapy and chemotherapy. Lu-177 has been used in real-world prospective trials and is now becoming utilized in newer phase III clinical trials. Here, we present a comprehensive overview of the current literature, covering retrospective studies, prospective studies, and clinical trials that established Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 (177Lu-PSMA-617) for the treatment of mCRPC.

EXPERT OPINION

177Lu - PSMA-617 has been approved for treatment of mCRPC based on positive phase III studies. While this treatment is tolerable and effective, biomarkers are necessary to determine which patients will benefit. In the future, radioligand treatments will likely be utilized in earlier lines of therapy and potentially in combination with other prostate cancer treatments.

Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Insights on Current Therapy and Promising Experimental Drugs

The therapeutic landscape of metastatic hormone sensitive and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is rapidly changing. We reviewed the current treatment options for mCRPC, with insights on new available therapeutic strategies. Chemotherapy with docetaxel or cabazitaxel (for patients progressing on docetaxel), as well as treatment with androgen receptor axis targeted therapies, and Radium-223 are well-established treatment options for patients with mCRPC. The advent of theragnostic in prostate cancer established Lutetium-177 (177Lu)-PSMA-617 as a new standard of care for PSMA-positive mCRPC previously treated with ARAT and taxane-based chemotherapy. Olaparib, a poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, is approved for selected patients with mCRPC progressed on ARATs and in combination with abiraterone acetate as first-line treatment for mCRPC. Immunotherapy showed limited efficacy in unselected patients with mCRPC and novel immunotherapy strategies need to be explored. The search for biomarkers is a growing field of interest in mCRPC, and predictive biomarkers are needed to support the choice of treatment and the development of tailored strategies.

Impact of DNA damage repair alterations on prostate cancer progression and metastasis

Prostate cancer is among the most common diseases worldwide. Despite recent progress with treatments, patients with advanced prostate cancer have poor outcomes and there is a high unmet need in this population. Understanding molecular determinants underlying prostate cancer and the aggressive phenotype of disease can help with design of better clinical trials and improve treatments for these patients. One of the pathways often altered in advanced prostate cancer is DNA damage response (DDR), including alterations in BRCA1/2 and other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Alterations in the DDR pathway are particularly prevalent in metastatic prostate cancer. In this review, we summarise the prevalence of DDR alterations in primary and advanced prostate cancer and discuss the impact of alterations in the DDR pathway on aggressive disease phenotype, prognosis and the association of germline pathogenic alterations in DDR genes with risk of developing prostate cancer.

Acting on Actionable Mutations in Metastatic Prostate Cancer

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.Approximately a quarter of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer have genomic alterations within the homologous recombination repair pathway with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors as corresponding treatment options. How to incorporate genomic information and associated therapeutic options into treatment decision making and sequencing of therapies in prostate cancer remains challenging. Men with BRCA2 alterations seem to derive the most benefit from PARP inhibitors, and although early treatment in combination with standard therapies has not yet shown an overall survival benefit, there may be other benefits to incorporating PARP inhibitors early for some men.

Niraparib and Abiraterone Acetate for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease with current standard-of-care therapies. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, including BRCA1/2 alterations, can sensitize cancer cells to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition, which may improve outcomes in treatment-naïve mCRPC when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibition.

METHODS

MAGNITUDE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03748641) is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded study that evaluates niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (niraparib + AAP) in patients with (HRR+, n = 423) or without (HRR-, n = 247) HRR-associated gene alterations, as prospectively determined by tissue/plasma-based assays. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib + AAP or placebo + AAP. The primary end point, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) assessed by central review, was evaluated first in the BRCA1/2 subgroup and then in the full HRR+ cohort, with secondary end points analyzed for the full HRR+ cohort if rPFS was statistically significant. A futility analysis was preplanned in the HRR- cohort.

RESULTS

Median rPFS in the BRCA1/2 subgroup was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.6 v 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79; P = .001). In the overall HRR+ cohort, rPFS was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.5 v 13.7 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .022). These findings were supported by improvement in the secondary end points of time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In the HRR- cohort, futility was declared per the prespecified criteria. Treatment with niraparib + AAP was tolerable, with anemia and hypertension as the most reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Combination treatment with niraparib + AAP significantly lengthened rPFS in patients with HRR+ mCRPC compared with standard-of-care AAP.

[Media: see text].

[Precision oncology options in urological cancers]

Advancements in the molecular genetic understanding of urological tumors have enabled the identification of numerous new therapeutic targets. Based on routinely applicable tumor sequencing, individual treatment decisions have been introduced in the context of precision oncology. This work provides an overview of the latest targeted tumor therapies in the treatment of prostate cancer, urothelial carcinoma, and renal cell carcinoma. Current studies on the administration of FGFR-inhibitors ("fibroblast growth factor receptor") in metastatic urothelial carcinoma show a high tumor response in patients with selected FGFR alterations. PARP-inhibitors ("Poly-[ADP-Ribose-]Polymerase") are routinely used in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Patients with a BRCA mutation ("BReast CAncer gene") show high radiological response rates. Moreover, we discuss the latest results of the combination of PARP inhibitors with novel androgen receptor pathway inhibitors. In metastatic prostate cancer, there are numerous ongoing studies evaluating the promising drug targets PI3K/AKT/mTOR ("Phosphatidylinositol-3-Kinase")/AKT/mTOR ("mammalian target of rapamycine") and VEGF signaling pathways ("vascular endothelial growth factor"). A HIF-2a inhibitor ("hypoxia inducible factor") offers a promising new therapeutic option for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Overall, molecular diagnostics to determine the right therapy for the right patient subgroup at the right time is important for uro-oncological precision medicine.

Uncovering the Secrets of Prostate Cancer's Radiotherapy Resistance: Advances in Mechanism Research

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a critical global public health issue with its incidence on the rise. Radiation therapy holds a primary role in PCa treatment; however, radiation resistance has become increasingly challenging as we uncover more about PCa's pathogenesis. Our review aims to investigate the multifaceted mechanisms underlying radiation therapy resistance in PCa. Specifically, we will examine how various factors, such as cell cycle regulation, DNA damage repair, hypoxic conditions, oxidative stress, testosterone levels, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, and tumor stem cells, contribute to radiation therapy resistance. By exploring these mechanisms, we hope to offer new insights and directions towards overcoming the challenges of radiation therapy resistance in PCa. This can also provide a theoretical basis for the clinical application of novel ultra-high-dose-rate (FLASH) radiotherapy in the era of PCa.

Objective response rate targets for recurrent glioblastoma clinical trials based on the historic association between objective response rate and median overall survival

Durable objective response rate (ORR) remains a meaningful endpoint in recurrent cancer; however, the target ORR for single-arm recurrent glioblastoma trials has not been based on historic information or tied to patient outcomes. The current study reviewed 68 treatment arms comprising 4793 patients in past trials in recurrent glioblastoma in order to judiciously define target ORRs for use in recurrent glioblastoma trials. ORR was estimated at 6.1% [95% CI 4.23; 8.76%] for cytotoxic chemothera + pies (ORR = 7.59% for lomustine, 7.57% for temozolomide, 0.64% for irinotecan, and 5.32% for other agents), 3.37% for biologic agents, 7.97% for (select) immunotherapies, and 26.8% for anti-angiogenic agents. ORRs were significantly correlated with median overall survival (mOS) across chemotherapy (R2= 0.4078, P < .0001), biologics (R2= 0.4003, P = .0003), and immunotherapy trials (R2= 0.8994, P < .0001), but not anti-angiogenic agents (R2= 0, P = .8937). Pooling data from chemotherapy, biologics, and immunotherapy trials, a meta-analysis indicated a strong correlation between ORR and mOS (R2= 0.3900, P < .0001; mOS [weeks] = 1.4xORR + 24.8). Assuming an ineffective cytotoxic (control) therapy has ORR = 7.6%, the average ORR for lomustine and temozolomide trials, a sample size of ≥40 patients with target ORR>25% is needed to demonstrate statistical significance compared to control with a high level of confidence (P < .01) and adequate power (>80%). Given this historic data and potential biases in patient selection, we recommend that well-controlled, single-arm phase II studies in recurrent glioblastoma should have a target ORR >25% (which translates to a median OS of approximately 15 months) and a sample size of ≥40 patients, in order to convincingly demonstrate antitumor activity. Crucially, this response needs to have sufficient durability, which was not addressed in the current study.

Emerging treatment options for prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer treatment has rapidly evolved in the past few years. Androgen deprivation therapy has been the backbone of treatment for locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer, but incremental benefits in survival have been shown by adding androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) across various spectrums of disease state. In addition, docetaxel chemotherapy remains the first-line chemotherapy regimen available with survival benefits shown with triplet therapy in those who are chemotherapy eligible. However, disease progression remains inevitable and novel agents such as radioligand therapy with lutetium have shown improvement in survival.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the pivotal trials that led to the U.S. FDA approval of agents utilized in metastatic prostate cancer and explores the use of novel agents including prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeting agents, radioligands, cell-based therapy, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell, BiTE, and antibody drug conjugates.

EXPERT OPINION

Treatment landscape for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has evolved beyond additional agents with ARPI and/or docetaxel, including other treatments with sipuleucel-T, radium, cabazitaxel, PARP inhibitors, and lutetium, which have specific indications and roles in sequencing. Novel therapies remain critically needed after progression from lutetium.

The future of patient-derived xenografts in prostate cancer research

Patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) are generated by engrafting human tumours into mice. Serially transplantable PDXs are used to study tumour biology and test therapeutics, linking the laboratory to the clinic. Although few prostate cancer PDXs are available in large repositories, over 330 prostate cancer PDXs have been established, spanning broad clinical stages, genotypes and phenotypes. Nevertheless, more PDXs are needed to reflect patient diversity, and to study new treatments and emerging mechanisms of resistance. We can maximize the use of PDXs by exchanging models and datasets, and by depositing PDXs into biorepositories, but we must address the impediments to accessing PDXs, such as institutional, ethical and legal agreements. Through collaboration, researchers will gain greater access to PDXs representing diverse features of prostate cancer.

Practical Utility of Liquid Biopsies for Evaluating Genomic Alterations in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Traditional tissue-based assessments of genomic alterations in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) can be challenging. To evaluate the real-world clinical utility of liquid biopsies for the evaluation of genomic alterations in CRPC, we preemptively collected available plasma samples and archival tissue samples from patients that were being treated for clinically confirmed CRPC. The cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and tumor tissue DNA were analyzed using the AlphaLiquid^®100-HRR panel. Plasma samples from a total of 87 patients were included in this study. Somatic mutations from cfDNA were detected in 78 (89.7%) patients, regardless of the presence of overt metastasis or concomitant treatment given at the time of plasma sample collection. Twenty-three patients were found to have known deleterious somatic or germline mutations in HRR genes from their cfDNA. Archival tissue samples from 33 (37.9%) patients were available for comparative analysis. Tissue sequencing was able to yield an NGS result in only 51.5% of the tissue samples. The general sensitivity of cfDNA for detecting somatic mutations in tissues was 71.8%, but important somatic/germline mutations in HRR genes were found to have a higher concordance (100%). Liquid biopsies can be a reasonable substitute for tissue biopsies in CRPC patients when evaluating genomic alterations.

Ampulla of Vater carcinoma: advancement in the relationships between histological subtypes, molecular features, and clinical outcomes

The incidence of ampulla of Vater carcinoma, a type of periampullary cancer, has been increasing at an annual percentage rate of 0.9%. However, patients with ampulla of Vater carcinoma have quite different prognoses due to the heterogeneities of the tissue origin of this carcinoma. In addition to TNM staging, histological subtypes and molecular features of ampulla of Vater carcinoma are the key factors for predicting the clinical outcomes of patients. Fortunately, with the development of testing technology, information on the histological subtypes and molecular features of ampulla of Vater carcinoma is increasingly being analyzed in-depth. Patients with the pancreaticobiliary subtype have shorter survival times. In immunohistochemical examination, high cutoff values of positive MUC1 staining can be used to accurately predict the outcome of patients. Mutant KRAS, TP53, negative SMAD4 expression, and microsatellite stability are related to poor prognosis, while the clinical value of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations is limited for prognosis. Testing the histological subtypes and molecular characteristics of ampulla of Vater carcinoma not only is the key to prognosis analysis but also provides extra information for targeted treatment to improve the clinical outcomes of patients.

Multi-Gene Next-Generation Sequencing Panel for Analysis of BRCA1/BRCA2 and Homologous Recombination Repair Genes Alterations Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Despite significant therapeutic advances, metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease. Mutations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes are frequent in mCRPC, and tumors harboring these mutations are known to be sensitive to PARP inhibitors. The aim of this study was to verify the technical effectiveness of this panel in the analysis of mCRPC, the frequency and type of mutations in the BRCA1/BRCA2 genes, as well as in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. A total of 50 mCRPC cases were analyzed using a multi-gene next-generation sequencing panel evaluating a total of 1360 amplicons in 24 HRR genes. Of the 50 cases, 23 specimens (46.0%) had an mCRPC harboring a pathogenic variant or a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), whereas in 27 mCRPCs (54.0%), no mutations were detected (wild-type tumors). BRCA2 was the most commonly mutated gene (14.0% of samples), followed by ATM (12.0%), and BRCA1 (6.0%). In conclusion, we have set up an NGS multi-gene panel that is capable of analyzing BRCA1/BRCA2 and HRR alterations in mCRPC. Moreover, our clinical algorithm is currently being used in clinical practice for the management of patients with mCRPC.

Recent Research Advances in Double-Strand Break and Mismatch Repair Defects in Prostate Cancer and Potential Clinical Applications

Prostate cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related death in men worldwide. Recent research advances have emphasized the critical roles of mismatch repair (MMR) and double-strand break (DSB) in prostate cancer development and progression. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the molecular mechanisms underlying DSB and MMR defects in prostate cancer, as well as their clinical implications. Furthermore, we discuss the promising therapeutic potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors and PARP inhibitors in targeting these defects, particularly in the context of personalized medicine and further perspectives. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of these novel treatments, including Food and Drugs Association (FDA) drug approvals, offering hope for improved patient outcomes. Overall, this review emphasizes the importance of understanding the interplay between MMR and DSB defects in prostate cancer to develop innovative and effective therapeutic strategies for patients.

Cysteine depletion sensitizes prostate cancer cells to agents that enhance DNA damage and to immune checkpoint inhibition

BACKGROUND

Prostate Cancer (PCa) represents one of the most commonly diagnosed neoplasms in men and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Therapy resistance and significant side effects of current treatment strategies indicate the need for more effective agents to treat both androgen-dependent and androgen-independent PCa. In earlier studies, we demonstrated that depletion of L-cysteine/cystine with an engineered human enzyme, Cyst(e)inase, increased intracellular ROS levels and inhibited PCa growth in vitro and in vivo. The current study was conducted to further explore the mechanisms and potential combinatorial approaches with Cyst(e)inase for treatment of PCa.

METHODS

DNA single strand breaks and clustered oxidative DNA damage were evaluated by alkaline comet assay and pulsed field gel electrophoresis, respectively. Neutral comet assay and immunofluorescence staining was used to measure DNA double strand breaks. Cell survival and reactive oxygen species level were measured by crystal violet assay and DCFDA staining, respectively. Western blot was used to determine protein expression. FACS analyses were preformed for immune cell phenotyping. Allograft and xenograft tumor models were used for assessing effects on tumor growth.

RESULTS

PCa cells treated with Cyst(e)inase lead to DNA single and double strand breaks resulted from clustered oxidative DNA damage (SSBs and DSBs). Cyst(e)inase in combination with Auranofin, a thioredoxin reductase inhibitor, further increased intracellular ROS and DNA DSBs and synergistically inhibited PCa cell growth in vitro and in vivo. A combination of Cyst(e)inase with a PARP inhibitor (Olaparib) also increased DNA DSBs and synergistically inhibited PCa cell growth in vitro and in vivo without additional ROS induction. Knockdown of BRCA2 in PCa cells increased DSBs and enhanced sensitivity to Cyst(e)inase. Finally, Cyst(e)inase treatment altered tumor immune infiltrates and PD-L1 expression and sensitized PCa cells to anti-PD-L1 treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results demonstrate the importance of oxidative DNA damage either alone or in combination for Cyst(e)inase-induced anticancer activity. Furthermore, cysteine/cystine depletion alters the tumor immune landscape favoring enhanced immune checkpoint inhibition targeting PD-L1. Thus, combinatorial approaches with Cyst(e)inase could lead to novel therapeutic strategies for PCa.

Genetic and Genomic Testing for Prostate Cancer: Beyond DNA Repair

Significant progress has been made in genetic and genomic testing for prostate cancer across the disease spectrum. Molecular profiling is increasingly relevant for routine clinical management, fueled in part by advancements in testing technology and integration of biomarkers into clinical trials. In metastatic prostate cancer, defects in DNA damage response genes are now established predictors of benefit to US Food and Drug Administration-approved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, and trials are actively investigating these and other targeted treatment strategies in earlier disease states. Excitingly, opportunities for molecularly informed management beyond DNA damage response genes are also maturing. Germline genetic variants (eg, BRCA2 or MSH2/6) and polygenic germline risk scores are being investigated to inform cancer screening and active surveillance in at-risk carriers. RNA expression tests have recently gained traction in localized prostate cancer, enabling patient risk stratification and tailored treatment intensification via radiotherapy and/or androgen deprivation therapy for localized or salvage treatment. Finally, emerging minimally invasive circulating tumor DNA technology promises to enhance biomarker testing in advanced disease pending additional methodological and clinical validation. Collectively, genetic and genomic tests are rapidly becoming indispensable tools for informing the optimal clinical management of prostate cancer.

Management of Prostate Cancer in Older Adults

The majority of men with prostate cancer are diagnosed when they are older than 65 years; however, clinical trial participants are disproportionately younger and more fit than the real-world population treated in typical clinical practices. It is, therefore, unknown whether the optimal approach to prostate cancer treatment is the same for older men as it is for younger and/or more fit men. Short screening tools can be used to efficiently assess frailty, functional status, life expectancy, and treatment toxicity risk. These risk assessment tools allow for targeted interventions to increase a patient's reserve and improve treatment tolerance, potentially allowing more men to experience the benefit of the significant recent treatment advances in prostate cancer. Treatment plans should also take into consideration each patient's individual goals and values considered within their overall health and social context to reduce barriers to care. In this review, we will discuss evidence-based risk assessment and decision tools for older men with prostate cancer, highlight intervention strategies to improve treatment tolerance, and contextualize these tools within the current treatment landscape for prostate cancer.

Treatments and challenges in advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is designed to highlight recent research examining treatment progress in advanced prostate cancer while identifying ongoing challenges to clinical outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent randomized trials suggest an overall survival advantage to treating some men with newly identified metastatic prostate cancer with a "triplet" of androgen deprivation therapy, docetaxel, and an androgen receptor axis-targeted agent. Questions remain about which men are best served by these combinations. Additional treatment success is being identified with prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA)-radiopharmaceuticals, combinations involving targeted therapies, and novel manipulations of the androgen receptor axis. Challenges remain in selecting between available therapies, harnessing immune therapies, and treating tumors with emergent neuroendocrine differentiation.

SUMMARY

An expanding number of therapeutics are becoming available for men with advanced prostate cancer improving outcomes but at the same time making treatment selection more demanding. Ongoing research will be required to continue to hone treatment paradigms.

Clinical Impact of a Rapid Genetic Testing Model for Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

Genetic testing may alter clinical management for individuals with metastatic prostate cancer by identifying additional therapies. Traditional counseling models are unlikely to enable time-sensitive therapeutic decision-making. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and clinical impact of an alternative hereditary genetic testing model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

As part of a multicenter, single-arm prospective trial, individuals with advanced prostate cancer were referred by their oncologist for testing of 14 genes associated with hereditary prostate cancer. Pretest education (brochure and video) was provided in the oncology clinic. Questionnaires assessing participant satisfaction with both pretest education and decision to undergo genetic testing were collected. A genetic counselor contacted participants by phone to obtain family history and discuss results. Medical records were queried to determine whether a change in clinical management was discussed.

RESULTS

Of 501 participants consented to germline analysis, 51 (10.2%) had at least 1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant. Change in treatment was discussed with 22/48 (45.8%) of eligible participants who tested positive. Feasibility of this model was assessed by participant satisfaction and turnaround time. Average±SD satisfaction with the pretest education (15.5±2.2, 4-20 scale) and with the decision to undergo genetic testing (17.1±2.9, 4-20 scale) were both high. Results were returned 20 days (median) after sample collection.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologist-initiated germline genetic testing in collaboration with a genetic counselor is a feasible approach to testing advanced prostate cancer patients with impactful clinical actionability. The testing model and educational material serve as resources to clinicians treating prostate cancer patients.

Detection of Biallelic Loss of DNA Repair Genes in Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tumor Samples Using a Novel Tumor-Only Sequencing Panel

Patient selection for synthetic lethal-based cancer therapy may be improved by assessment of gene-specific loss of heterozygosity (LOH) and biallelic loss of function (LOF). This report describes SyNthetic lethal Interactions for Precision Diagnostics (SNiPDx), a targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel for detection of LOH and biallelic LOF alterations in 26 target genes focused on DNA damage response pathways, in tumor-only formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. NGS was performed across all exons of these 26 genes and encompassed a total of 7632 genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphisms on genomic DNA from 80 FFPE solid tumor samples. The Fraction and Allele-Specific Copy Number Estimates from Tumor Sequencing algorithm was optimized to assess tumor purity and copy number based on heterozygous single-nucleotide polymorphisms. SNiPDx demonstrated high sensitivity (95%) and specificity (91%) for LOH detection compared with whole genome sequencing. Positive agreement with local NGS-based testing in the detection of genetic alterations was 95%. SNiPDx detected 93% of biallelic ATM LOF mutations, 100% of ATM single-nucleotide variants and small insertions/deletions, and 100% of all ATM LOH status events identified by orthogonal NGS-based testing. SNiPDx is a novel, clinically feasible test for analysis of allelic status in FFPE tumor samples, which demonstrated high accuracy when compared with other NGS-based approaches in clinical use.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022

BACKGROUND

Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The experts voted on controversial questions where high-level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

TWITTER SUMMARY

Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer.

TAKE-HOME MESSAGE

At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer is summarised here.

Management of Advanced Prostate Cancer in the Precision Oncology Era

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second leading cause of cancer death in men in the United States. While diversified and improved treatment options for aggressive PC have improved patient outcomes, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains incurable and an area of investigative therapeutic interest. This review will cover the seminal clinical data supporting the indication of new precision oncology-based therapeutics and explore their limitations, present utility, and potential in the treatment of PC. Systemic therapies for high-risk and advanced PC have experienced significant development over the past ten years. Biomarker-driven therapies have brought the field closer to the goal of being able to implement precision oncology therapy for every patient. The tumor agnostic approval of pembrolizumab (a PD-1 inhibitor) marked an important advancement in this direction. There are also several PARP inhibitors indicated for patients with DNA damage repair deficiencies. Additionally, theranostic agents for both imaging and treatment have further revolutionized the treatment landscape for PC and represent another advancement in precision medicine. Radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT is rapidly becoming a standard of care for diagnosis, and PSMA-targeted radioligand therapies have gained recent FDA approval for metastatic prostate cancer. These advances in precision-based oncology are detailed in this review.

Frequency of Germline and Somatic BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations in Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In prostate cancer (PC), the presence of BRCA somatic and/or germline mutation provides prognostic and predictive information. Meta-analysis aims to estimate the frequency of BRCA mutations in patients with PC (PCp). In November 2022, we reviewed literature searching for all articles testing the proportion of BRCA mutations in PCp, without explicit enrichment for familiar risk. The frequency of germline and somatic BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations was described in three stage disease populations (any/metastatic/metastatic castration-resistant PC, mCRPC). Out of 2253 identified articles, 40 were eligible. Here, 0.73% and 1.20% of any stage PCp, 0.94% and 1.10% of metastatic PCp, and 1.21% and 1.10% of mCRPC patients carried germline and somatic BRCA1 mutation, respectively; 3.25% and 6.29% of any stage PCp, 4.51% and 10.26% of metastatic PCp, and 3.90% and 10.52% of mCRPC patients carried germline and somatic BRCA2 mutation, respectively; and 4.47% and 7.18% of any stage PCp, 5.84% and 10.94% of metastatic PCp, and 5.26% and 11.26% of mCRPC patients carried germline and somatic BRCA1/2 mutation, respectively. Somatic mutations are more common than germline and BRCA2 are more common than BRCA1 mutations; the frequency of mutations is higher in the metastatic setting. Despite that BRCA testing in PC is now standard in clinical practice, several open questions remain.

PARP inhibitors in metastatic prostate cancer

Poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are an emerging therapeutic option for the treatment of prostate cancer. Their primary mechanism of action is via induction of synthetic lethality in cells with underlying deficiencies in homologous recombination repair (HRR). In men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and select HRR pathway alterations, PARPi treatment has been shown to induce objective tumor responses as well as improve progression free and overall survival. Presently, there are two PARPi, olaparib and rucaparib, that are FDA approved in the treatment of mCRPC. Ongoing research is focused on identifying which HRR alterations are best suited to predict response to PARPi so that these therapies can be most effectively utilized in the clinic. While resistance to PARPi remains a concern, combination therapies may represent a mechanism to overcome or delay resistance.

Current therapy and drug resistance in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), especially metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies and main cause of cancer-related death among men in the world. In addition, it is very difficult for clinical treatment because of the natural or acquired drug resistance of CRPC. Mechanisms of drug resistance are extremely complicated and how to overcome it remains an urgent clinical problem to be solved. Thus, a comprehensive and thorough understanding for mechanisms of drug resistance in mCRPC is indispensable to develop novel and better therapeutic strategies. In this review, we aim to review new insight of the treatment of mCRPC and elucidate mechanisms governing resistance to new drugs: taxanes, androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi). Most importantly, in order to improve efficacy of these drugs, strategies of overcoming drug resistance are also discussed based on their mechanisms respectively.

Epigenetic mechanism of therapeutic resistance and potential of epigenetic therapeutics in chemorefractory prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among men in the United States. Depending upon the histopathological subtypes of prostate cancers, various therapeutic options, such as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI), immunotherapy, and chemotherapy, are available to treat prostate cancer. While these therapeutics are effective in the initial stages during treatments, the tumors subsequently develop resistance to these therapies. Despite all the progress made so far, therapeutic resistance remains a major challenge in the treatment of prostate cancer. Although various mechanisms have been reported for the resistance development in prostate cancer, altered expression of genes either directly or indirectly involved in drug response pathways is a common event. In addition to the genetic basis of gene regulation such as mutations and gene amplifications, epigenetic alterations involved in the aberrant expression of genes have frequently been shown to be associated not only with cancer initiation and progression but also with therapeutic resistance development. There are several review articles compiling reports on genetic mechanisms involved in therapeutic resistance in prostate cancer. However, epigenetic mechanisms for the therapeutic resistance development in prostate cancer have not yet been summarized in a review article. Therefore, the objective of this article is to compile various reports and provide a comprehensive review of the epigenetic aberrations, and aberrant expression of genes by epigenetic mechanisms involved in CRPCs and therapeutic resistance development in prostate cancer. Additionally, the potential of epigenetic-based therapeutics in the treatment of chemorefractory prostate cancer as evidenced by clinical trials has also been discussed.

Analysis of evolutionary dynamics and clonal architecture in prostate cancer

The extent to which clinical and genomic characteristics associate with prostate cancer clonal architecture, tumor evolution, and therapeutic response remains unclear. Here, we reconstructed the clonal architecture and evolutionary trajectories of 845 prostate cancer tumors with harmonized clinical and molecular data. We observed that tumors from patients who self-reported as Black had more linear and monoclonal architectures, despite these men having higher rates of biochemical recurrence. This finding contrasts with prior observations relating polyclonal architecture to adverse clinical outcomes. Additionally, we utilized a novel approach to mutational signature analysis that leverages clonal architecture to uncover additional cases of homologous recombination and mismatch repair deficiency in primary and metastatic tumors and link the origin of mutational signatures to specific subclones. Broadly, prostate cancer clonal architecture analysis reveals novel biological insights that may be immediately clinically actionable and provide multiple opportunities for subsequent investigation.

Statement of significance

Tumors from patients who self-reported as Black demonstrate linear and monoclonal evolutionary trajectories yet experience higher rates of biochemical recurrence. In addition, analysis of clonal and subclonal mutational signatures identifies additional tumors with potentially actionable alterations such as deficiencies in mismatch repair and homologous recombination.

Prostate Cancer: Advances in Genetic Testing and Clinical Implications

The demand for genetic testing (GT) for prostate cancer (PCa) is expanding, but there is limited knowledge about the genetic counseling (GC) needs of men. A strong-to-moderate inherited genetic predisposition causes approximately 5–20% of prostate cancer (PCa). In men with prostate cancer, germline testing may benefit the patient by informing treatment options, and if a mutation is noticed, it may also guide screening for other cancers and have family implications for cascade genetic testing (testing of close relatives for the same germline mutation). Relatives with the same germline mutations may be eligible for early cancer detection strategies and preventive measures. Cascade family testing can be favorable for family members, but it is currently unutilized, and strategies to overcome obstacles like knowledge deficiency, family communication, lack of access to genetic services, and testing expenses are needed. In this review, we will look at the genetic factors that have been linked to prostate cancer, as well as the role of genetic counseling and testing in the early detection of advanced prostate cancer.

Advances in PARP Inhibitors for Prostate Cancer

Poly-adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase plays an essential role in cell function by regulating apoptosis, genomic stability and DNA repair. PARPi is a promising drug class that has gained significant traction in the last decade with good outcomes in different cancers. Several trials have sought to test its effectiveness in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We conducted a comprehensive literature review to evaluate the current role of PARPi in this setting. To this effect, we conducted queries in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases. We reviewed and compared all major contemporary publications on the topic. In particular, recent phase II and III studies have also demonstrated the benefits of olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, talazoparib in CRPC. Drug effectiveness has been assessed through radiological progression or overall response. Given the notion of synthetic lethality and potential synergy with other oncological therapies, several trials are looking to integrate PARPi in combined therapies. There remains ongoing controversy on the need for genetic screening prior to treatment initiation as well as the optimal patient population, which would benefit most from PARPi. PARPi is an important asset in the oncological arsenal for mCRPC. New combinations with PARPi may improve outcomes in earlier phases of prostate cancer.

A review of treatments targeting DNA-repair gene defects in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. About 6% of those diagnosed will develop metastatic disease. Unfortunately, metastatic prostate cancer is fatal. Prostate cancer can be castration sensitive or castration resistant. Many treatments have been shown to improve progression free survival and overall survival in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In recent years, studies have been exploring targeting mutations in the DNA Damage Repair (DDR) response that may amplify oncogenes. In this paper, we aim to discuss DDR, new approved targeted therapies, and the most recent clinical trials in the setting of metastatic CRPC.

Matching BRCA and prostate cancer in a public health system: Report of the Italian Society for Uro-Oncology (SIUrO) consensus project

The recent approval of PARP inhibitors for the treatment of metastatic -castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with BRCA mutations firstly introduced the possibility of proposing a targeted treatment in this disease. However, the availability of this therapeutic option raises a number of questions concerning the management of prostate cancer in everyday clinical practice: the timing and method of detecting BRCA mutations, the therapeutic implications of the detection, and the screening of the members of the family of a prostate cancer patient with a BRCA alteration. These challenging issues led the Italian Society for Uro-Oncology (SIUrO) to organise a Consensus Conference aimed to develop suggestions capable of supporting clinicians managing prostate cancer patients. The present paper described the development of the statements discussed during the consensus, which involved all of the most important Italian scientific societies engaged in the multi-disciplinary and multi-professional management of the disease.

A generalizable machine learning framework for classifying DNA repair defects using ctDNA exomes

Specific classes of DNA damage repair (DDR) defect can drive sensitivity to emerging therapies for metastatic prostate cancer. However, biomarker approaches based on DDR gene sequencing do not accurately predict DDR deficiency or treatment benefit. Somatic alteration signatures may identify DDR deficiency but historically require whole-genome sequencing of tumour tissue. We assembled whole-exome sequencing data for 155 high ctDNA fraction plasma cell-free DNA and matched leukocyte DNA samples from patients with metastatic prostate or bladder cancer. Labels for DDR gene alterations were established using deep targeted sequencing. Per sample mutation and copy number features were used to train XGBoost ensemble models. Naive somatic features and trinucleotide signatures were associated with specific DDR gene alterations but insufficient to resolve each class. Conversely, XGBoost-derived models showed strong performance including an area under the curve of 0.99, 0.99 and 1.00 for identifying BRCA2, CDK12, and mismatch repair deficiency in metastatic prostate cancer. Our machine learning approach re-classified several samples exhibiting genomic features inconsistent with original labels, identified a metastatic bladder cancer sample with a homozygous BRCA2 copy loss, and outperformed an existing exome-based classifier for BRCA2 deficiency. We present DARC Sign (DnA Repair Classification SIGNatures); a public machine learning tool leveraging clinically-practical liquid biopsy specimens for simultaneously identifying multiple types of metastatic prostate cancer DDR deficiencies. We posit that it will be useful for understanding differential responses to DDR-directed therapies in ongoing clinical trials and may ultimately enable prospective identification of prostate cancers with phenotypic evidence of DDR deficiency.

Personalized Systemic Therapies in Hereditary Cancer Syndromes

Hereditary cancer syndromes are inherited disorders caused by germline pathogenic variants (PVs) that lead to an increased risk of developing certain types of cancer, frequently at an earlier age than in the rest of the population. The germline PVs promote cancer development, growth and survival, and may represent an ideal target for the personalized treatment of hereditary tumors. PARP inhibitors for the treatment of BRCA and PALB2-associated tumors, immune checkpoint inhibitors for tumors associated with the Lynch Syndrome, HIF-2α inhibitor in the VHL-related cancers and, finally, selective RET inhibitors for the treatment of MEN2-associated medullary thyroid cancer are the most successful examples of how a germline PVs can be exploited to develop effective personalized therapies and improve the outcome of these patients. The present review aims to describe and discuss the personalized systemic therapies for inherited cancer syndromes that have been developed and investigated in clinical trials in recent decades.

Combining targeted DNA repair inhibition and immune-oncology approaches for enhanced tumor control

Targeted therapy and immunotherapy have revolutionized cancer treatment. However, the ability of cancer to evade the immune system remains a major barrier for effective treatment. Related to this, several targeted DNA-damage response inhibitors (DDRis) are being tested in the clinic and have been shown to potentiate anti-tumor immune responses. Seminal studies have shown that these agents are highly effective in a pan-cancer class of tumors with genetic defects in key DNA repair genes such as BRCA1/2, BRCA-related genes, ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), and others. Here, we review the molecular consequences of targeted DDR inhibition, from tumor cell death to increased engagement of the anti-tumor immune response. Additionally, we discuss mechanistic and clinical rationale for pairing targeted DDRis with immunotherapy for enhanced tumor control. We also review biomarkers for patient selection and promising new immunotherapy approaches poised to form the foundation of next-generation DDRi and immunotherapy combinations.

Impact of concurrent tumor events on the prostate cancer outcomes of germline BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND

Several studies have reported the association of germline BRCA2 (gBRCA2) mutations with poor clinical outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa), but the impact of concurrent somatic events on gBRCA2 carriers survival and disease progression is unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To ascertain the role of frequent somatic genomic alterations and histology subtypes in the outcomes of gBRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers, we correlated the tumour characteristics and clinical outcomes of 73 gBRCA2 and 127 non-carriers. Fluorescent in-situ hybridisation and next-generation sequencing were used to detect copy number variations in BRCA2, RB1, MYC and PTEN. Presence of intraductal and cribriform subtypes was also assessed. The independent impact of these events on cause-specific survival (CSS), metastasis-free survival and time to castration-resistant disease was assessed using cox-regression models.

RESULTS

Somatic BRCA2-RB1 co-deletion (41% versus 12%, p < 0.001) and MYC amplification (53.4% versus 18.8%, p < 0.001) were enriched in gBRCA2 compared to sporadic tumours. Median CSS from diagnosis of PCa was 9.1 versus 17.6 years in gBRCA2 carriers and non-carriers, respectively (HR 2.12; p = 0.002), Median CSS in gBRCA2 carriers increased to 11.3 and 13.4 years in the absence of BRCA2-RB1 deletion or MYC amplification, respectively. Median CSS of non-carriers decreased to 8 and 2.6 years if BRCA2-RB1 deletion or MYC amplification were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

gBRCA2-related prostate tumours are enriched for aggressive genomic features, such as BRCA2-RB1 co-deletion and MYC amplification. The presence or absence of these events modify the outcomes of gBRCA2 carriers.

Prostate cancer and novel pharmacological treatment options-what's new for 2022?

INTRODUCTION

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus Androgen Receptor Target Agents (ARTAs) or docetaxel are the actual standard of care in prostate cancer (PC). Several therapeutic options are available for pretreated patients: cabazitaxel, olaparib, and rucaparib for BRCA mutations, Radium-223 for selected patients with symptomatic bone metastasis, sipuleucel T, and 177 LuPSMA-617.

AREAS COVERED

This review the new potential therapeutic approaches and the most impacting recent published trials to provide an overview on the future management of PC.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, there is a growing interest in the potential role of triplet therapies encompassing ADT, chemotherapy, and ARTAs. These strategies, explored in different settings, appeared to be particularly promising in metastatic hormone-sensitive PC. Recent trials investigating ARTAs plus poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARPi) inhibitor provided helpful insights for patients with metastatic castration resistant disease, regardless of homologous recombination genes status. Otherwise, the publication of the complete data is awaited, and more evidence is required. In advanced settings, several combination approaches are under investigation, to date with contradictory results, such as immunotherapy plus PARPi or chemotherapy. The radionuclide ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA-617 proved successful outcomes in pretreated mCRPC patients. Additional studies will better clarify the appropriate candidates to each strategy and the correct treatments' sequence.

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

BACKGROUND

Poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are approved in the USA for the treatment of patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutated (BRCA+) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). BRCA reversion mutations are a known mechanism of acquired resistance to PARP inhibitors in multiple cancer types, although their impact and prevalence in mCRPC remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of BRCA reversion mutations in the plasma of patients with BRCA+ mCRPC after progression on rucaparib.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Men with BRCA+ mCRPC enrolled in Trial of Rucaparib in Prostate Indications 2 (TRITON2) were treated with rucaparib after progressing on one to two lines of androgen receptor-directed and one taxane-based therapy. Cell-free DNA from the plasma of 100 patients, collected at the end of treatment after confirmed progression before May 5, 2020, was queried for BRCA reversion mutations using next-generation sequencing (NGS).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The association of clinical efficacy and postprogression genomics was measured in 100 patients with BRCA+ mCRPC treated with rucaparib.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

No baseline BRCA reversion mutations were observed in 100 BRCA+ patients. NGS identified somatic BRCA reversion mutations in 39% (39/100) of patients after progression. Reversion rates were similar for BRCA2 and BRCA1, irrespective of germline or somatic status, but higher in samples with a high tumor DNA fraction. Most patients with reversions (74%, 29/39) had two or more reversion mutations occurring subclonally at lower allele frequencies than the original BRCA mutations. The incidence of BRCA reversion mutations increased with the duration of rucaparib treatment. The frequency of reversion mutations was higher in patients with an objective (58%) or a prostate-specific antigen (69%) response compared with those without either (39% and 29%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that BRCA reversion mutations are a significant mechanism of acquired resistance to rucaparib in patients with BRCA+ mCRPC, with evidence of subclonal convergence promoting systemic resistance.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Men with BRCA mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer enrolled in TRITON2 were treated with rucaparib after progressing on one to two lines of androgen receptor-directed and one taxane-based therapy. Cell-free DNA from the plasma of 100 patients, collected after radiographic or prostate-specific antigen progression before May 5, 2020, was analyzed by next-generation sequencing and queried for BRCA reversion mutations.

Rucaparib or Physician's Choice in Metastatic Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

In a phase 2 study, rucaparib, an inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), showed a high level of activity in patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA alteration. Data are needed to confirm and expand on the findings of the phase 2 study.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration and who had disease progression after treatment with a second-generation androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI). We randomly assigned the patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or a physician's choice control (docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI [abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide]). The primary outcome was the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival according to independent review.

RESULTS

Of the 4855 patients who had undergone prescreening or screening, 270 were assigned to receive rucaparib and 135 to receive a control medication (intention-to-treat population); in the two groups, 201 patients and 101 patients, respectively, had a BRCA alteration. At 62 months, the duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer in the rucaparib group than in the control group, both in the BRCA subgroup (median, 11.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.69) and in the intention-to-treat group (median, 10.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001 for both comparisons). In an exploratory analysis in the ATM subgroup, the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was 8.1 months in the rucaparib group and 6.8 months in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.52). The most frequent adverse events with rucaparib were fatigue and nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

The duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer with rucaparib than with a control medication among patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA alteration. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; TRITON3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02975934.).

Preclinical Efficacy of a PARP-1 Targeted Auger-Emitting Radionuclide in Prostate Cancer

There is an unmet need for better therapeutic strategies for advanced prostate cancer. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP-1) is a chromatin-binding DNA repair enzyme overexpressed in prostate cancer. This study evaluates whether PARP-1, on account of its proximity to the cell's DNA, would be a good target for delivering high-linear energy transfer Auger radiation to induce lethal DNA damage in prostate cancer cells. We analyzed the correlation between PARP-1 expression and Gleason score in a prostate cancer tissue microarray. A radio-brominated Auger emitting inhibitor ([77Br]Br-WC-DZ) targeting PARP-1 was synthesized. The ability of [77Br]Br-WC-DZ to induce cytotoxicity and DNA damage was assessed in vitro. The antitumor efficacy of [77Br]Br-WC-DZ was investigated in prostate cancer xenograft models. PARP-1 expression was found to be positively correlated with the Gleason score, thus making it an attractive target for Auger therapy in advanced diseases. The Auger emitter, [77Br]Br-WC-DZ, induced DNA damage, G2-M cell cycle phase arrest, and cytotoxicity in PC-3 and IGR-CaP1 prostate cancer cells. A single dose of [77Br]Br-WC-DZ inhibited the growth of prostate cancer xenografts and improved the survival of tumor-bearing mice. Our studies establish the fact that PARP-1 targeting Auger emitters could have therapeutic implications in advanced prostate cancer and provides a strong rationale for future clinical investigation.

Olaparib in Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer With BRCA1/2 Mutation: Results From the TAPUR Study

PURPOSE

The TAPUR Study is a phase II basket trial that aims to evaluate activity of approved targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers with potentially actionable genomic variants. Data from a cohort of patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and BRCA1/2 mutations treated with olaparib are reported.

METHODS

Eligible patients with measurable mCRPC were matched to treatment according to protocol-specified genomic matching rules. Patients had no remaining standard treatment options, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and adequate organ function. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control, defined as objective response or stable disease of at least 16-week duration. Secondary end points include radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety.

RESULTS

Thirty patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 mutations were treated with olaparib. The disease control rate was 69% (95% CI, 51 to 81), and the objective response rate was 58% (95% CI, 37 to 77). The median radiographic progression-free survival and the median overall survival were 38.4 (95% CI, 16.3 to 52.1) weeks and 76.4 (95% CI, 49.3 to 106.0) weeks, respectively. Six of 30 (20%) patients experienced grade 3-4 adverse or serious adverse events including anemia, aspiration, decreased WBC count, and fatigue.

CONCLUSION

Olaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 mutations and warrants further study to determine how to best integrate it into the standard treatment of patients with BRCA1/2-mutated prostate cancer.