Prediction of clinical drug-drug interactions of veliparib (ABT-888) with human renal transporters (OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, MATE1, and MATE2K)

Increase in creatinine levels associated with niraparib maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer

AIM

In Japan, Niraparib maintenance therapy for primary and recurrent ovarian cancer was approved in September 2020 and is expected to improve the prognosis of ovarian cancer. However, the safety of niraparib maintenance therapy in Japanese patients has not been fully evaluated.

METHODS

Patients with ovarian cancer (including fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer) treated with niraparib at Jichi Medical University Hospital from September 2020 to August 2022 were enrolled in this study. Patient background, starting dose, rates of interruption, reduction, or discontinuation, adverse events (AEs) during treatment, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) trends were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients received niraparib maintenance therapy during the study period, including 21 with primary cancer and 8 patients with recurrent cancer. Seventeen patients (58.6%) required dose interruptions and 16 patients (55.2%) required dose reductions. Only two patients (6.9%) discontinued treatment due to fatigue and nausea. The most frequent AE was creatinine increases in 18 patients (62.1%, all grades). Although eGFR levels decreased significantly after niraparib therapy compared to before niraparib therapy (59.3 vs. 50.3 mL/min/1.73 m2 , p < 0.001), the levels returned to pre-niraparib initiation levels after discontinuation of niraparib (64.6 vs. 64.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 , p = 0.96). Multivariate regression analysis showed that diabetes was independently associated with decreased eGFR (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Niraparib maintenance therapy frequently increased serum creatinine, but the change was reversible. Further studies are needed to determine the effects of niraparib on renal function in Japanese patients.

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

BACKGROUND

Initial TRITON2 (NCT02952534) results demonstrated the efficacy of rucaparib 600 mg BID in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) associated with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) or other DNA damage repair (DDR) gene alteration.

OBJECTIVE

To present the final data from TRITON2.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

TRITON2 enrolled patients with mCRPC who had progressed on one or two lines of next-generation androgen receptor-directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; as per the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor Version 1.1/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria in patients with measurable disease by independent radiology review [IRR]); prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline [PSA50]) was a key secondary endpoint.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

As of July 27, 2021 (study closure), TRITON2 had enrolled 277 patients, grouped by mutated gene: BRCA (n = 172), ATM (n = 59), CDK12 (n = 15), CHEK2 (n = 7), PALB2 (n = 11), or other DDR gene (Other; n = 13). ORR by IRR was 46% (37/81) in the BRCA subgroup (95% confidence interval [CI], 35-57%), 100% (4/4) in the PALB2 subgroup (95% CI, 40-100%), and 25% (3/12) in the Other subgroup (95% CI, 5.5-57%). No patients within the ATM, CDK12, or CHEK2 subgroups had an objective response by IRR. PSA50 response rates (95% CI) in the BRCA, PALB2, ATM, CDK12, CHEK2, and Other subgroups were 53% (46-61%), 55% (23-83%), 3.4% (0.4-12), 6.7% (0.2-32%), 14% (0.4-58%), and 23% (5.0-54%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The final TRITON2 results confirm the clinical benefit and manageable safety profile of rucaparib in patients with mCRPC, including those with an alteration in BRCA or select non-BRCA DDR gene.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Almost half of TRITON2 patients with BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer had a complete or partial tumor size reduction with rucaparib; clinical benefits were also observed with other DNA damage repair gene alterations.

A real-world disproportionality analysis of Rucaparib: Post-marketing Pharmacovigilance Data

BACKGROUND

Rucaparib has been approved for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. However, the long-term safety of rucaparib in large sample population was unknown. The presented study aimed to evaluate rucaparib-associated adverse events (AEs) according to the real-world pharmacovigilance database.

METHODS

Disproportionality analysis was conducted to assess the association between rucaparib and its AEs. Data were collected from the international pharmacovigilance database of US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between January 2017 and June 2022. The characteristics of rucaparib-related AEs, and the onset time were further analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9,296,694 AE reports were recorded in the FAERS during the study period, among which 7,087 reports were associated with rucaparib. About 135 rucaparib-related AE signals in 15 system organ class (SOCs) were identified. The most common AEs included anaemia, thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, blood creatinine increase, alanine aminotransferase increase, and aspartate aminotransferase increase, which were listed in the label for rucaparib. Of note, 21 new and unexpected significant AEs that off-label were also found in our study, such as preferred term (PTs) of intestinal obstruction, gastrooesophageal reflux disease, blood iron decreased, dehydration, and hypersomnia. The median onset time of rucaparib-related AEs was 12 days (interquartile range [IQR] 1-62 days), and had early failure types.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated potential new AEs of rucaparib, and further studies were expected to confirm the results.

Research Methods and New Advances in Drug-Drug Interactions Mediated by Renal Transporters

The kidney is critical in the human body's excretion of drugs and their metabolites. Renal transporters participate in actively secreting substances from the proximal tubular cells and reabsorbing them in the distal renal tubules. They can affect the clearance rates (CLr) of drugs and their metabolites, eventually influence the clinical efficiency and side effects of drugs, and may produce drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of clinical significance. Renal transporters and renal transporter-mediated DDIs have also been studied by many researchers. In this article, the main types of in vitro research models used for the study of renal transporter-mediated DDIs are membrane-based assays, cell-based assays, and the renal slice uptake model. In vivo research models include animal experiments, gene knockout animal models, positron emission tomography (PET) technology, and studies on human beings. In addition, in vitro-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE), ex vivo kidney perfusion (EVKP) models, and, more recently, biomarker methods and in silico models are included. This article reviews the traditional research methods of renal transporter-mediated DDIs, updates the recent progress in the development of the methods, and then classifies and summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Through the sorting work conducted in this paper, it will be convenient for researchers at different learning stages to choose the best method for their own research based on their own subject's situation when they are going to study DDIs mediated by renal transporters.

Preclinical evaluation of a brain penetrant PARP PET imaging probe in rat glioblastoma and nonhuman primates

PURPOSE

Currently, there are multiple active clinical trials involving poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the treatment of glioblastoma. The noninvasive quantification of baseline PARP expression using positron emission tomography (PET) may provide prognostic information and lead to more precise treatment. Due to the lack of brain-penetrant PARP imaging agents, the reliable and accurate in vivo quantification of PARP in the brain remains elusive. Herein, we report the synthesis of a brain-penetrant PARP PET tracer, (R)-2-(2-methyl-1-(methyl-11C)pyrrolidin-2-yl)-1H-benzo[d]imidazole-4-carboxamide ([11C]PyBic), and its preclinical evaluations in a syngeneic RG2 rat glioblastoma model and healthy nonhuman primates.

METHODS

We synthesized [11C]PyBic using veliparib as the labeling precursor, performed dynamic PET scans on RG2 tumor-bearing rats and calculated the distribution volume ratio (DVR) using simplified reference region method 2 (SRTM2) with the contralateral nontumor brain region as the reference region. We performed biodistribution studies, western blot, and immunostaining studies to validate the in vivo PET quantification results. We characterized the brain kinetics and binding specificity of [11C]PyBic in nonhuman primates on FOCUS220 scanner and calculated the volume of distribution (VT), nondisplaceable volume of distribution (VND), and nondisplaceable binding potential (BPND) in selected brain regions.

RESULTS

[11C]PyBic was synthesized efficiently in one step, with greater than 97% radiochemical and chemical purity and molar activity of 148 ± 85 MBq/nmol (n = 6). [11C]PyBic demonstrated PARP-specific binding in RG2 tumors, with 74% of tracer binding in tumors blocked by preinjected veliparib (i.v., 5 mg/kg). The in vivo PET imaging results were corroborated by ex vivo biodistribution, PARP1 immunohistochemistry and immunoblotting data. Furthermore, brain penetration of [11C]PyBic was confirmed by quantitative monkey brain PET, which showed high specific uptake (BPND > 3) and low nonspecific uptake (VND < 3 mL/cm3) in the monkey brain.

CONCLUSION

[11C]PyBic is the first brain-penetrant PARP PET tracer validated in a rat glioblastoma model and healthy nonhuman primates. The brain kinetics of [11C]PyBic are suitable for noninvasive quantification of available PARP binding in the brain, which posits [11C]PyBic to have broad applications in oncology and neuroimaging.

Efficacy and safety of rucaparib treatment in patients with BRCA-mutated, relapsed ovarian cancer: final results from Study 10

BACKGROUND

Study 10, a four-part Phase 1/2 study, evaluated oral rucaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours. Here we report the final efficacy and safety results in heavily pretreated patients with ovarian cancer who received rucaparib in Study 10 Parts 2A and 2B.

METHODS

Parts 2A and 2B (Phase 2 portions) enrolled patients with relapsed, high-grade, platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant, BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer who had received 2-4 (Part 2A) or 3-4 (Part 2B) prior chemotherapies. Patients received oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily (starting dose). The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were enrolled: 42 in Part 2A (all had platinum-sensitive disease) and 12 in Part 2B (4 with platinum-sensitive disease; 8 with platinum-resistant disease). ORR was 59.3% (95% CI 45.0-72.4%). The median time to onset of the most common nonhaematological treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was typically early (<56 days) and was later for haematological TEAEs (53-84 days). The median duration of grade ≥3 TEAEs was ≤13 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with relapsed, platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant germline BRCA-mutant high-grade ovarian cancer who had received ≥2 prior chemotherapies, rucaparib had robust antitumour activity with a safety profile consistent with prior reports.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01482715.

Novel method for kinetic analysis applied to transport by the uniporter OCT2

The kinetics of solute transport shed light on the roles these processes play in cellular physiology, and the absolute values of the kinetic parameters that quantitatively describe transport are increasingly used to model its impact on drug clearance. However, accurate assessment of transport kinetics is challenging. Although most carrier-mediated transport is adequately described by the Michaelis-Menten equation, its use presupposes that the rates of uptake used in the analysis of maximal rates of transport (Jmax) and half-saturation constants (Kt) reflect true unidirectional rates of influx from known concentrations of substrate. Most experimental protocols estimate the initial rate of transport from net substrate accumulation determined at a single time point (typically between 0.5 and 5 min) and assume it reflects unidirectional influx. However, this approach generally results in systematic underestimates of Jmax and overestimates of Kt; the former primarily due to the unaccounted impact of efflux of accumulated substrate, and the latter due to the influence of unstirred water layers. Here, we describe the bases of these time-dependent effects and introduce a computational model that analyzes the time course of net substrate uptake at several concentrations to calculate Jmax and Kt for unidirectional influx, taking into account the influence of unstirred water layers and mediated efflux. This method was then applied to calculate the kinetics of transport of 1-methyl-4-phenylpryridinium and metformin by renal organic cation transporter 2 as expressed in cultured Chinese hamster ovary cells.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Here, we describe a mathematical model that uses the time course of net substrate uptake into cells from several increasing concentrations to calculate unique kinetic parameters [maximal rates of transport (Jmax) and half-saturation constants (Kt)] of the process. The method is the first to take into consideration the common complicating factors of unstirred layers and carrier-mediated efflux in the experimental determination of transport kinetics.

Guidelines for Management of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events During Rucaparib Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Purpose

The US Food and Drug Administration has recently granted accelerated approval of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib as treatment for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) associated with a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alteration. As the safety profile of this new addition to the mCRPC treatment landscape may be unfamiliar to clinicians and patients, we summarize the data from the literature and provide practical guidelines for the management of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) that may occur during rucaparib treatment.

Materials and Methods

Safety data were identified from PubMed and congress publications of trials involving men with mCRPC treated with oral rucaparib monotherapy (600 mg twice daily). Management guidelines for TEAEs were developed based on trial protocols, prescribing information, oncology association guidance, and the authors’ clinical experience.

Results

In clinical trials of men with mCRPC who received rucaparib (n = 193), TEAEs observed were consistent with that of other PARP inhibitors. The most frequent any-grade TEAEs included gastrointestinal events, asthenia/fatigue, anemia, increased alanine/aspartate aminotransferase, rash, and thrombocytopenia; the most frequent grade ≥3 TEAE was anemia. The majority of TEAEs were self-limiting and did not require treatment modification or interruption. Here, we provide recommendations on management of the most common TEAEs reported with rucaparib as well as other TEAEs of interest.

Conclusion

Rucaparib’s recent approval for treatment of BRCA-mutant mCRPC is practice changing. Proper management of TEAEs will allow maximum treatment benefit for patients receiving rucaparib.

BRCA Mutations in Prostate Cancer: Assessment, Implications and Treatment Considerations

Prostate cancer ranks fifth in cancer-related mortality in men worldwide. DNA damage is implicated in cancer and DNA damage response (DDR) pathways are in place against this to maintain genomic stability. Impaired DDR pathways play a role in prostate carcinogenesis and germline or somatic mutations in DDR genes have been found in both primary and metastatic prostate cancer. Among these, BRCA mutations have been found to be especially clinically relevant with a role for germline or somatic testing. Prostate cancer with DDR defects may be sensitive to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors which target proteins in a process called PARylation. Initially they were used to target BRCA-mutated tumor cells in a process of synthetic lethality. However, recent studies have found potential for PARP inhibitors in a variety of other genetic settings. In this review, we explore the mechanisms of DNA repair, potential for genomic analysis of prostate cancer and therapeutics of PARP inhibitors along with their safety profile.

Veliparib and nivolumab in combination with platinum doublet chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A phase 1 dose escalation study

OBJECTIVES

Both combinations of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus platinum doublet chemotherapy (CT), and the programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitor nivolumab plus CT have demonstrated encouraging efficacy for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase 1 dose-escalation study (NCT02944396) evaluated the quadruple combination of veliparib with nivolumab and doublet CT in patients with unresectable advanced/metastatic NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were enrolled into five dosing cohorts: patients received veliparib 120 mg twice daily (BID) combined with nivolumab 360 mg, carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL∙min, and paclitaxel 200 mg/m² (C/PAC) or veliparib 80/120/200/240 mg BID in combination with nivolumab 360 mg, carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL∙min, and pemetrexed 500 mg/m² (C/PEM). Primary objective was to identify the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of veliparib + nivolumab + CT. Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of this combination were also assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled: 6 patients received veliparib 120 mg BID + nivolumab + C/PAC and 19 received veliparib (80-240 mg BID) + nivolumab + C/PEM. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported, and the RP2Ds were veliparib 120 mg BID + nivolumab + C/PAC, and veliparib 240 mg BID + nivolumab + C/PEM. The most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (56%), nausea (52%), and anemia (48%). Grade 3/4 AEs included anemia (32%) and neutropenia (24%), and the most frequent serious AE was malignant neoplasm progression (12%). Veliparib exhibited approximately dose proportional kinetics in the dose range 80-240 mg BID combined with nivolumab and C/PEM, with no effects on pemetrexed pharmacokinetics. Overall, the confirmed objective response rate was 40%, and best overall response was 64%.

CONCLUSION

Veliparib combined with nivolumab and platinum doublet CT was tolerated in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, and no evidence of drug-drug interaction was observed. Although preliminary, this quadruple therapy may have promising antitumor activity.

Veliparib in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel-based chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Veliparib is a potent poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase (PARP) 1 and 2 inhibitor that impedes repair of DNA damage induced by cytotoxic and radiation therapies. This phase 1 study evaluated veliparib in combination with chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients received veliparib orally twice daily (BID) in escalating doses (60-240 mg, Day -3 to 1 day after last dose of radiation) combined with weekly carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 2 mg/mL/min), paclitaxel (45 mg/m²), and daily radiation therapy (60 Gy in 30 fractions), followed by two cycles of veliparib (120-240 mg BID, Days -2 through 5 of each 21-day cycle), carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL/min, Day 1 of each cycle), and paclitaxel (200 mg/m², Day 1 of each cycle) consolidation. Endpoints included veliparib maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were enrolled. The MTD/RP2D of veliparib was 240 mg BID with chemoradiotherapy followed by 120 mg BID with consolidation. The most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) in this cohort for the whole treatment period were nausea (83%), esophagitis (75%), neutropenia (75%), and thrombocytopenia (75%). Dose-proportional pharmacokinetics of veliparib were observed. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 19.6 months (95% CI: 9.7-32.6). Median overall survival was estimated to be 32.6 months (95% CI: 15.0-not reached). In patients treated with the RP2D, mPFS was 19.6 months (95% CI: 3.0-not reached).

CONCLUSIONS

When combined with standard concurrent chemoradiotherapy and consolidation chemotherapy in patients with stage III NSCLC, veliparib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and antitumor activity with an mPFS of 19.6 months.

A Population Pharmacokinetic Meta-Analysis of Veliparib, a PARP Inhibitor, Across Phase 1/2/3 Trials in Cancer Patients

Veliparib (ABT-888) is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in development for the treatment of high-grade ovarian cancer or BRCA-mutated breast cancer in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel. The population pharmacokinetics of veliparib were characterized using combined data from 1470 adult subjects with ovarian cancer, breast cancer, or other solid tumors enrolled in 6 phase 1 studies, 1 phase 2 study, and 2 phase 3 studies of veliparib oral doses of 10 to 400 mg twice daily as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy. A 1-compartment model with linear clearance and first-order absorption best characterized veliparib pharmacokinetics. The predicted apparent oral clearance (CL/F) and volume of distribution (V_c /F) were 479 L/day and 152 L, respectively. The significant covariates in the final model included albumin, creatinine clearance, strong inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6, and sex on CL/F and albumin, body weight, and sex on V_c /F. Mild and moderate renal impairment increased veliparib median (95%CI) steady-state AUC (AUC_ss ) by 27.3% (23.7%-30.9%) and 65.4% (56.0%-75.5%), respectively, compared with normal renal function. Male subjects had 16.5% (7.53%-23.9%) lower AUC_ss compared with female subjects and coadministration with strong CYP2D6 inhibitors increased AUCss by 13.0% (6.11%-20.8%). Race, age, region, cancer type, or enzyme (CYP3A4, CYP2C19) or transporter (P-glycoprotein, multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1/2, organic cation transporter 2) inhibiting/inducing comedications were not found to significantly impact veliparib pharmacokinetics. Other than baseline creatinine clearance and hence renal impairment effect on veliparib clearance, no other covariates had a clinically meaningful effect on veliparib exposure warranting dose adjustment.

An open-label, pilot study of veliparib and lapatinib in patients with metastatic, triple-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Poly (ADP-ribose)-polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have been approved for cancer patients with germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) mutations, and efforts to expand the utility of PARPi beyond BRCA1/2 are ongoing. In preclinical models of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with intact DNA repair, we have previously shown an induced synthetic lethality with combined EGFR inhibition and PARPi. Here, we report the safety and clinical activity of lapatinib and veliparib in patients with metastatic TNBC.

METHODS

A first-in-human, pilot study of lapatinib and veliparib was conducted in metastatic TNBC (NCT02158507). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints were objective response rates and pharmacokinetic evaluation. Gene expression analysis of pre-treatment tumor biopsies was performed. Key eligibility included TNBC patients with measurable disease and prior anthracycline-based and taxane chemotherapy. Patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations were excluded.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled, of which 17 were evaluable for response. The median number of prior therapies in the metastatic setting was 1 (range 0-2). Fifty percent of patients were Caucasian, 45% African-American, and 5% Hispanic. Of evaluable patients, 4 demonstrated a partial response and 2 had stable disease. There were no dose-limiting toxicities. Most AEs were limited to grade 1 or 2 and no drug-drug interactions noted. Exploratory gene expression analysis suggested baseline DNA repair pathway score was lower and baseline immunogenicity was higher in the responders compared to non-responders.

CONCLUSIONS

Lapatinib plus veliparib therapy has a manageable safety profile and promising antitumor activity in advanced TNBC. Further investigation of dual therapy with EGFR inhibition and PARP inhibition is needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02158507 . Registered on 12 September 2014.

Updates and New Options in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Treatment

The medical and surgical treatment strategies for women with epithelial ovarian cancer continue to evolve. In the past several years, there has been significant progress backed by landmark clinical trials. Although primary epithelial ovarian cancer is still treated with a combination of surgery and systemic therapy, more complex surgical procedures and novel therapeutics have emerged as standard of care. Cytotoxic chemotherapy and maximal surgical effort remain mainstays, but targeted therapies are becoming more widespread and new data have called into question the role of surgery for women with recurrent disease. Poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors have improved progression-free survival outcomes in both the frontline and recurrent settings, and their use has become increasingly widespread. The recent creation of treatment categories based on genetic changes reinforces the recommendation that all women with epithelial ovarian cancer have germline genetic testing, and new biomarker-driven drug approvals indicate that women may benefit from somatic molecular testing as well. To continue to identify novel strategies, however, enrollment on clinical trials remains of the utmost importance. With the evolving data on surgical approaches, targeted therapies such as antiangiogenics and poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors, and the new therapeutic agents and combinations in development, we hope that advanced epithelial ovarian cancer will eventually transition from an almost universally fatal disease to one that can increasingly be cured.

Substrates and Inhibitors of Organic Cation Transporters (OCTs) and Plasma Membrane Monoamine Transporter (PMAT) and Therapeutic Implications

The gene products of the SLC22A gene family (hOCT1, hOCT2, and hOCT3) and of the SLC29A4 gene (hPMAT or hENT4) are all polyspecific organic cation transporters. Human OCTs (including hPMAT) are expressed in peripheral tissues such as small intestine, liver, and kidney involved in the pharmacokinetics of drugs. In the human brain, all four transporters are expressed at the blood-brain barrier (BBB), hOCT2 is additionally expressed in neurons, and hOCT3 and hPMAT in glia. More than 40% of the presently used drugs are organic cations. This chapter lists and discusses all known drugs acting as substrates or inhibitors of these four organic cation transporters, independently of whether the transporter is expressed in the central nervous system (CNS) or in peripheral tissues. Of interest is their involvement in drug absorption, distribution, and excretion as well as potential OCT-associated drug-drug interactions (DDIs), with a focus on drugs that act in the CNS.

PARP inhibition in the ovarian cancer patient: Current approvals and future directions

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have transformed the therapeutic management of solid tumors, particularly ovarian cancer. Initially studied in BRCA deficient tumors, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indications have expanded to include other homologous recombination deficient tumors as well as biomarker-wildtype tumors. They have also gained momentum not only as a treatment strategy, but as a maintenance strategy as well. While PARP inhibitors were initially ev aluated in the recurrent setting, they have now moved to frontline therapy. This review will discuss the current FDA indications of the clinically available PARP inhibitors for treatment and maintenance therapies. We will then review the recently completed and ongoing clinical trials which may inform future clinical approvals.

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

PURPOSE

BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) alterations are common in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and may confer sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. We present results from patients with mCRPC associated with a BRCA alteration treated with rucaparib 600 mg twice daily in the phase II TRITON2 study.

METHODS

We enrolled patients who progressed after one to two lines of next-generation androgen receptor–directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Efficacy and safety populations included patients with a deleterious BRCA alteration who received ≥ 1 dose of rucaparib. Key efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 in patients with measurable disease as assessed by blinded, independent radiology review and by investigators) and locally assessed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline) rate.

RESULTS

Efficacy and safety populations included 115 patients with a BRCA alteration with or without measurable disease. Confirmed ORRs per independent radiology review and investigator assessment were 43.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 56.7%; 27 of 62 patients) and 50.8% (95% CI, 38.1% to 63.4%; 33 of 65 patients), respectively. The confirmed PSA response rate was 54.8% (95% CI, 45.2% to 64.1%; 63 of 115 patients). ORRs were similar for patients with a germline or somatic BRCA alteration and for patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 alteration, while a higher PSA response rate was observed in patients with a BRCA2 alteration. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (25.2%; 29 of 115 patients).

CONCLUSION

Rucaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC and a deleterious BRCA alteration, but with a manageable safety profile consistent with that reported in other solid tumor types.

Practical guidance for the management of side effects during rucaparib therapy in a multidisciplinary UK setting

The use of targeted therapeutics known as poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the management of ovarian cancer is currently transforming clinical practice. The PARP inhibitor rucaparib is indicated in the UK, European Union and the United States for use in the treatment and maintenance settings for patients with relapsed ovarian cancer. Here, we discuss some of the real-world challenges and side effects that we have encountered while prescribing rucaparib, and we provide practical guidance on how the individual members of our multidisciplinary team (MDT), including a clinician, chemotherapy nurse practitioner, and clinical pharmacist, collaborate to manage these side effects. If recognized early, the side effects experienced by patients during rucaparib therapy, which include fatigue, nausea and vomiting, liver enzyme elevations, and anemia, can be easily managed. For example, providing patients with prophylactic antiemetics can help them avoid nausea, and early detection of decreases in hemoglobin levels allows for proactive interventions to alleviate anemia. The MDT should work together with the patient to identify potential side effects early and manage them effectively. The aim of this proactive approach is to maintain patients on rucaparib for optimal clinical benefit, while minimizing the potential negative impact of side effects on patient quality of life.

Management of Adverse Events During Rucaparib Treatment for Relapsed Ovarian Cancer: A Review of Published Studies and Practical Guidance

The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib is approved as monotherapy in the treatment and maintenance settings for women with relapsed ovarian cancer in the European Union and the United States. We review the safety profile of rucaparib in both settings and provide recommendations for the clinical management of the main adverse events (AEs) that may occur during rucaparib treatment. We searched PubMed and congress proceedings for safety data on oral rucaparib monotherapy (600 mg twice daily) from clinical trials involving patients with relapsed ovarian cancer. AE management guidance was developed from clinical trial protocols, rucaparib prescribing information, oncology association guidelines, and author experience. The most frequent any-grade treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) included gastrointestinal symptoms, asthenia/fatigue, dysgeusia, anemia/decreased hemoglobin, and increased alanine/aspartate aminotransferase. Across clinical trials, 61.8% of patients had one or more grade 3 or higher TEAEs. Clinicians should employ close follow-up for TEAEs, particularly early in treatment, and educate patients about expected TEAEs and methods for their monitoring and management (e.g., antiemetics for nausea/vomiting, transfusions for hematologic TEAEs, or dose interruptions/reductions for moderate/severe TEAEs). Overall, 16.2% of patients discontinued rucaparib due to TEAEs. Management of AEs that may occur during rucaparib treatment is crucial for patients to obtain optimal clinical benefit by remaining on therapy and to avoid their detrimental impact on quality of life.

Real-World Delivery of Rucaparib to Patients with Ovarian Cancer: Recommendations Based on an Integrated Safety Analysis of ARIEL2 and Study 10

Treatment options for women with recurrent ovarian cancer who have received two or more prior lines of chemotherapy have recently expanded with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Commission (EC) approvals of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib. As more oncologists begin to use rucaparib and other PARP inhibitors as part of routine clinical practice, awareness of possible side effects and how to adequately manage toxicities is crucial. In this review, we summarize the safety and tolerability of rucaparib reported in an integrated safety analysis that supported the FDA's initial approval of rucaparib in the treatment setting. Additionally, drawing on clinical data and our personal experience with rucaparib, we provide our recommendations on the management of common side effects observed with rucaparib, including anemia, blood creatinine elevations, alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase elevations, thrombocytopenia, gastrointestinal-related events (e.g., nausea, vomiting), and asthenia and fatigue. These side effects, many of which appear to be class effects of PARP inhibitors, are often self-limiting and can be managed with adequate interventions such as treatment interruption and/or dose reduction and the use of supportive therapies. Supportive therapies may include blood transfusions for patients with anemia, prophylactic medications to prevent nausea and vomiting, or behavioral interventions to mitigate fatigue. Understanding and appropriate management of potential side effects associated with rucaparib may allow patients with ovarian cancer to continue to benefit from rucaparib treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Rucaparib was recently approved in the U.S. and European Union for use as treatment or maintenance for recurrent ovarian cancer. This review focuses on the safety and tolerability of rucaparib in the treatment setting. Similar side effects are observed in the maintenance setting. Drawing on the authors' clinical experience with rucaparib, rucaparib prescribing information, and published supportive cancer care guidelines, this review discusses how to optimally manage common rucaparib-associated side effects in patients with advanced ovarian cancer in the real-world oncology setting. Adequate management of such side effects is crucial for allowing patients with ovarian cancer to remain on treatment to receive optimal efficacy benefit.

Discrepancy in calculated and measured glomerular filtration rates in patients treated with PARP inhibitors

OBJECTIVE

To describe discrepancies in calculated and measured glomerular filtration rate in patients using PARP (poly ADP ribose polymerase) inhibitors who had an elevation in serum creatinine levels.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort, single center study. Patients included were those with ovarian or endometrial cancer taking olaparib, rucaparib or niraparib, and in in whom an increased serum creatinine was identified. The study cohort included those who also underwent technetium-99m radioisotope renography (glomerular filtration rate (GFR) scan). The main objective is to describe the discrepancies in calculated glomerular filtration rate using the Cockcroft-Gault method and measured glomerular filtration rate using a GFR scan.

RESULTS

211 patients were included in the study; 64 (30%) had on-treatment elevated serum creatinine, and 23 (36%) underwent a GFR scan. 32 GFR scans were performed (six patients had more than one scan). Using a clinical cut-off ≥50 mL/min as normal renal function, both calculated and estimated glomerular filtration rates were below normal in 6 of 32 GFR scans. In those patients undergoing a GFR scan, serum creatinine had risen a median 49% (IQR 20-66%, range 0-144%) above baseline. Discordance between a calculated low glomerular filtration rate and an estimated normal glomerular filtration rate occurred in 63% (range of glomerular filtration rate discrepancy: -46% to +237%). Despite increases in serum creatinine on therapy and a subsequent significant decline in the per patient calculated creatinine clearance (mean 65.6 mL/min vs 43.4 mL/min; p<0.0001), the estimated glomerular filtration rate from the renal scan was nearly identical to the patient's baseline (65.6 mL/min vs 66.1 mL/min; p=0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Serum creatinine elevation in patients taking PARP inhibitors may not be associated with a true decrease in glomerular filtration rate. A high index of suspicion should be maintained for alternative causes of elevated serum creatinine in patients treated with PARP inhibitors who lack other sources of renal injury.

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.

Veliparib: a new therapeutic option in ovarian cancer?

The role of poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors in ovarian cancer is rapidly evolving. Three different poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (olaparib, niraparib and rucaparib) have been already approved as maintenance after response to platinum-based chemotherapy; two of them (olaparib and rucaparib) also as single agents. Veliparib, a novel PARPI, showed promising results in preclinical and early clinical settings. The aim of this review is to discuss veliparib’s mechanisms of action, to provide a clinical update on its safety and activity in ovarian cancer, and to highlight future perspectives for its optimal use. Veliparib favorable toxicity profile encourages its use either as monotherapy or in combination. Its peculiar neuroprotective and radio-sensitizing effect warrant further investigation.

How safe is rucaparib in ovarian cancer?

Introduction: Rucaparib is increasingly being utilized for women with recurrent ovarian cancer both as treatment and maintenance therapy. Poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors like rucaparib are daily oral medication that exploit the DNA repair pathway. The most significant clinical benefit is in those tumors exhibiting deficiency in their homologous recombination pathway. Areas covered: This review will discuss the mechanism of action, clinical efficacy data, and safety of rucaparib as presented from phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials. Expert opinion: Rucaparib is a promising therapeutic option for women where prolongation of survival with favorable side effects is the goal. The side effect profile of rucaparib is similar or more favorable when evaluating it against other PARP inhibitors. Physicians will likely need to have increasing comfort with unique side effects like transaminitis and serum creatinine increases. Clinicians should be prepared for not only increasing utilization of PARP inhibitors in the recurrent setting but also upfront usage may be on the horizon. As >50% of high grade serous ovarian cancers likely have the predictive biomarker, HRD, for PARP inhibition a substantial group of patients stand to have PARP inhibitors as part of their oncologic care.

Population pharmacokinetics and exposure-response assessment of veliparib co-administered with temozolomide in patients with myeloid leukemias

PURPOSE

Veliparib is an oral inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase enzyme. Combination of veliparib and temozolomide was well-tolerated and demonstrated clinical activity in older patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or AML arising from pre-existing myeloid malignancies. We aimed to perform quantitative assessments of pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of veliparib in this patient population to inform future trial design.

METHODS

Population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using Phoenix^® NLME with pharmacokinetic data obtained from 37 subjects after oral administration of veliparib in a Phase I study with and without temozolomide. Effect of covariates (age, sex, BMI, creatinine clearance (CL_CR), and co-administration of temozolomide) on the pharmacokinetics of veliparib were evaluated, as well as impact of veliparib exposure on mucositis (dose-limiting toxicity), objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival.

RESULTS

A two-compartment model with first-order elimination and a first-order absorption with lag-time adequately described veliparib pharmacokinetics. CL_CR and body weight were clinically significant covariates for veliparib disposition. The proportion of subjects with all grade mucositis increased with veliparib exposure (AUC). However, no trend in ORR and overall survival was observed with increasing exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Veliparib with temozolomide presents a promising combination for older patients with myeloid leukemias. An exposure-safety relationship was established for this combination. Further clinical investigations aimed at elucidating the veliparib exposure-efficacy/safety relationship and optimizing dosing recommendations for maximizing benefit-risk in patients with advanced myeloid malignancies should study veliparib doses ranging up to 120 mg in combination with temozolomide.

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.

Rucaparib in ovarian cancer: extending the use of PARP inhibitors in the recurrent disease

Rucaparib is a potent inhibitor of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) PARP1, PARP2 and PARP3, and to a lesser extent, PARP4, PARP10, PARP12, PARP15 and PARP16. Study 10 and ARIEL2 evaluated the use of rucaparib as treatment in patients with recurrent high-grade ovarian carcinoma and resulting in approval of rucaparib for patients with both germline and somatic BRCA mutation. Data from the Phase III trial ARIEL3 led to approval in platinum-sensitive disease as maintenance. This article reviews the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rucaparib as well as future and ongoing trials.

Rucaparib: An emerging parp inhibitor for treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer

Recently, Poly-ADP-Ribose Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are one of the most intensively studied group of antiblastic agents for the management of recurrent ovarian cancer. Among this family, Olaparib was the first to be approved by European Medicines Agency as maintenance therapy post-response to platinum-based chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer in women with deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation. Following that, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Olaparib monotherapy as fourth or later line of treatment in advanced ovarian cancer with deleterious germ-line BRCA1/2 mutation. On March 2017, Niraparib, was approved as maintenance treatment of patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, who are in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy, independently of BRCA mutation. Rucaparib inhibits PARP-1, 2 and 3, PARP-4, -12, -15 and -16, as well as tankyrase 1 and 2. On December 2016, it was granted accelerated approval by the FDA, based on data from two multicenter, single arm, phase II trials that evaluated the efficacy of Rucaparib in patients with deleterious, germline and/or somatic BRCA mutation-associated, advanced OC, who have been treated with two or more lines of chemotherapy. The maximum tolerated dose reported was 600 mg twice a day administered orally. Phase III studies are currently ongoing to further validate the efficacy of Rucaparib in the treatment setting and explore its usefulness in a maintenance setting as well. The focus of our review is to report the most recent investigations and clinical progress regarding Rucaparib for treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer.

Rucaparib: a novel PARP inhibitor for BRCA advanced ovarian cancer

Rucaparib is a potent small-molecule inhibitor of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) proteins (PARP-1, PARP-2 and PARP-3) that play an important role in repairing DNA damage and maintaining genomic stability. Tumors with mutations in BRCA1/2 or other homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) genes are particularly sensitive to PARP inhibitors because of “synthetic lethality”, whereby a therapeutic agent can take advantage of an intrinsic weakness in DNA repair. Rucaparib has been investigated in several preclinical and clinical studies showing promising activity in BRCA-mutant and BRCA–wild-type epithelial ovarian cancers (EOCs). Dose-escalation Phase I studies have established the recommended Phase II dose to be 600 mg twice a day for oral rucaparib. Phase II and III studies have defined its role as treatment for BRCA-mutant recurrent high-grade EOC and as maintenance treatment for platinum-sensitive relapsed EOC following response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Genomic loss of heterozygosity has also been investigated as a potential signature of HRD and as a potential predictive biomarker of response. Treatment-induced adverse events (AEs) have been observed in almost all patients treated with rucaparib, but mainly lower grade; with the most common being nausea, vomiting, asthenia/fatigue, anemia and transient transaminitis. The majority of AEs occurred early in treatment, were transient and have been easily managed with supportive treatment, dose interruption or discontinuation. This review will analyze the results of clinical trials investigating efficacy and safety of rucaparib in patients with ovarian cancer.

Phase I combination study of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus carboplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced ovarian cancer and other solid malignancies

OBJECTIVE

Determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of veliparib combined with carboplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced ovarian cancer and other nonhematologic malignancies.

METHODS

In this phase I study, patients with metastatic or unresectable solid tumors and ≤2 prior chemotherapy regimens received veliparib combined with carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 4 on day 1 and gemcitabine 800mg/m² on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for maximum 10cycles, followed by optional veliparib maintenance therapy. Veliparib dosing commenced twice-daily (BID) continuously on day 1 of cycle 2; granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was permitted. Dose escalation used a Bayesian continual reassessment method. Safety, tolerability, and efficacy were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were enrolled (ovarian cancer, n=54; breast cancer, n=12). Thirty-six patients with ovarian cancer (67%) had known germline BRCA mutations. Most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; ≥60%) were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, nausea, and anemia. Most common grade 3/4 TRAEs (≥40%) were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Dose-limiting toxicities were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. The MTD/RP2D was established at veliparib 250mg with carboplatin AUC 4 plus gemcitabine 800mg/m². Responses were observed in 69% of patients with BRCA-deficient ovarian cancer (45% partial, 24% complete responses). Five patients remained on veliparib (80-310mg BID) for >34cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

Veliparib plus carboplatin/gemcitabine is tolerated, with a safety profile similar to carboplatin and gemcitabine alone. Combination therapy demonstrated promising preliminary antitumor activity in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients with germline BRCA mutations. Trial registration ID: NCT01063816.

Emerging treatment options for ovarian cancer: focus on rucaparib

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) are an exciting class of anticancer drugs, which have revolutionized the management of BRCA mutant/homologous recombination-deficient recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). With three PARPi now approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, olaparib (Lynparza™), niraparib (Zejula™), and rucaparib (Rubraca™) in 2014 (and 2017 for the tablet formulation), 2016, and 2017, respectively, these drugs have now entered routine clinical practice. The marked single-agent efficacy of PARPi either as maintenance following response to platinum-based chemotherapy or as up-front treatment in these indications is based on the well-known concept of synthetic lethality. PARPi themselves work by blocking the repair of single-strand DNA breaks by the base excision/single-strand break repair pathway and can also be directly cytotoxic by the mechanism of PARP trapping. The greatest benefit in terms of progression-free survival, in all three PARPi maintenance registration studies, was seen in women with platinum-sensitive BRCA mutation-associated HGSOC. However, it is clear that non-BRCA HGSOC can benefit from PARPi and the ongoing challenge of biomarker driven studies is how best to define these patients. PARPi are well tolerated, but more information is needed to assess the longer-term/later onset toxicities as these agents are investigated in the first-line setting. The future direction and challenges for PARPi will be to continue to expand beyond BRCA and ovarian cancer by identifying molecular or functional signatures of response; to see if the durable responses in ovarian cancer can be improved and efficacy can be achieved in other cancer sub-types by combining with novel targeted agents. This review summarizes the development of PARPi as a class in ovarian cancer with particular focus on the PARPi rucaparib.

Antitumor activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor rucaparib in patients with high-grade ovarian carcinoma and a germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation: Integrated analysis of data from Study 10 and ARIEL2

OBJECTIVE

An integrated analysis was undertaken to characterize the antitumor activity and safety profile of the oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib in patients with relapsed high-grade ovarian carcinoma (HGOC).

METHODS

Eligible patients from Study 10 (NCT01482715) and ARIEL2 (NCT01891344) who received a starting dose of oral rucaparib 600mg twice daily (BID) with or without food were included in these analyses. The integrated efficacy population included patients with HGOC and a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation who received at least two prior chemotherapies and were sensitive, resistant, or refractory to platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS). The integrated safety population included patients with HGOC who received at least one dose of rucaparib 600mg BID, irrespective of BRCA1/2 mutation status and prior treatments.

RESULTS

In the efficacy population (n=106), ORR was 53.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.8-63.5); 8.5% and 45.3% of patients achieved complete and partial responses, respectively. Median DOR was 9.2months (95% CI, 6.6-11.6). In the safety population (n=377), the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were nausea, asthenia/fatigue, vomiting, and anemia/hemoglobin decreased. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AE was anemia/hemoglobin decreased. Treatment-emergent AEs led to treatment interruption, dose reduction, and treatment discontinuation in 58.6%, 45.9%, and 9.8% of patients, respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Rucaparib has antitumor activity in advanced BRCA1/2-mutated HGOC and a manageable safety profile.

Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma after response to platinum therapy (ARIEL3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Rucaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, has anticancer activity in recurrent ovarian carcinoma harbouring a BRCA mutation or high percentage of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity. In this trial we assessed rucaparib versus placebo after response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with high-grade, recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian carcinoma.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients from 87 hospitals and cancer centres across 11 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma, had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, had achieved complete or partial response to their last platinum-based regimen, had a cancer antigen 125 concentration of less than the upper limit of normal, had a performance status of 0-1, and had adequate organ function. Patients were ineligible if they had symptomatic or untreated central nervous system metastases, had received anticancer therapy 14 days or fewer before starting the study, or had received previous treatment with a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. We randomly allocated patients 2:1 to receive oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo in 28 day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six, stratified by homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval after the penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to the most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival evaluated with use of an ordered step-down procedure for three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations (carcinoma associated with deleterious germline or somatic BRCA mutations), patients with homologous recombination deficiencies (BRCA mutant or BRCA wild-type and high loss of heterozygosity), and the intention-to-treat population, assessed at screening and every 12 weeks thereafter. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01968213; enrolment is complete.

FINDINGS

Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, we randomly allocated 564 patients: 375 (66%) to rucaparib and 189 (34%) to placebo. Median progression-free survival in patients with a BRCA-mutant carcinoma was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·4-22·9; 130 [35%] patients) in the rucaparib group versus 5·4 months (3·4-6·7; 66 [35%] patients) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·23 [95% CI 0·16-0·34]; p<0·0001). In patients with a homologous recombination deficient carcinoma (236 [63%] vs 118 [62%]), it was 13·6 months (10·9-16·2) versus 5·4 months (5·1-5·6; 0·32 [0·24-0·42]; p<0·0001). In the intention-to-treat population, it was 10·8 months (8·3-11·4) versus 5·4 months (5·3-5·5; 0·36 [0·30-0·45]; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or higher in the safety population (372 [99%] patients in the rucaparib group vs 189 [100%] in the placebo group) were reported in 209 (56%) patients in the rucaparib group versus 28 (15%) in the placebo group, the most common of which were anaemia or decreased haemoglobin concentration (70 [19%] vs one [1%]) and increased alanine or aspartate aminotransferase concentration (39 [10%] vs none).

INTERPRETATION

Across all primary analysis groups, rucaparib significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer who had achieved a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. ARIEL3 provides further evidence that use of a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in the maintenance treatment setting versus placebo could be considered a new standard of care for women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer following a complete or partial response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy.

FUNDING

Clovis Oncology.

Heterogeneous drug penetrance of veliparib and carboplatin measured in triple negative breast tumors

BACKGROUND

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), coupled to a DNA damaging agent is a promising approach to treating triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, not all patients respond; we hypothesize that non-response in some patients may be due to insufficient drug penetration. As a first step to testing this hypothesis, we quantified and visualized veliparib and carboplatin penetration in mouse xenograft TNBCs and patient blood samples.

METHODS

MDA-MB-231, HCC70 or MDA-MB-436 human TNBC cells were implanted in 41 beige SCID mice. Low dose (20 mg/kg) or high dose (60 mg/kg) veliparib was given three times daily for three days, with carboplatin (60 mg/kg) administered twice. In addition, blood samples were analyzed from 19 patients from a phase 1 study of carboplatin + PARPi talazoparib. Veliparib and carboplatin was quantified using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Veliparib tissue penetration was visualized using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometric imaging (MALDI-MSI) and platinum adducts (covalent nuclear DNA-binding) were quantified using inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). Pharmacokinetic modeling and Pearson's correlation were used to explore associations between concentrations in plasma, tumor cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs).

RESULTS

Veliparib penetration in xenograft tumors was highly heterogeneous between and within tumors. Only 35% (CI 95% 26-44%), 74% (40-97%) and 46% (9-37%) of veliparib observed in plasma penetrated into MDA-MB-231, HCC70 and MDA-MB-436 cell-based xenografts, respectively. Within tumors, penetration heterogeneity was larger with the 60 mg/kg compared to the 20 mg/kg dose (RSD 155% versus 255%, P = 0.001). These tumor concentrations were predicted similar to clinical dosing levels, but predicted tumor concentrations were below half maximal concentration values as threshold of response. Xenograft veliparib concentrations correlated positively with platinum adduct formation (R 2 = 0.657), but no PARPi-platinum interaction was observed in patients' PBMCs. Platinum adduct formation was significantly higher in five gBRCA carriers (ratio of platinum in DNA in PBMCs/plasma 0.64% (IQR 0.60-1.16%) compared to nine non-carriers (ratio 0.29% (IQR 0.21-0.66%, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

PARPi/platinum tumor penetration can be measured by MALDI-MSI and ICP-MS in PBMCs and fresh frozen, OCT embedded core needle biopsies. Large variability in platinum adduct formation and spatial heterogeneity in veliparib distribution may lead to insufficient drug exposure in select cell populations.

Renal Drug Transporters and Drug Interactions

Transporters in proximal renal tubules contribute to the disposition of numerous drugs. Furthermore, the molecular mechanisms of tubular secretion have been progressively elucidated during the past decades. Organic anions tend to be secreted by the transport proteins OAT1, OAT3 and OATP4C1 on the basolateral side of tubular cells, and multidrug resistance protein (MRP) 2, MRP4, OATP1A2 and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) on the apical side. Organic cations are secreted by organic cation transporter (OCT) 2 on the basolateral side, and multidrug and toxic compound extrusion (MATE) proteins MATE1, MATE2/2-K, P-glycoprotein, organic cation and carnitine transporter (OCTN) 1 and OCTN2 on the apical side. Significant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may affect any of these transporters, altering the clearance and, consequently, the efficacy and/or toxicity of substrate drugs. Interactions at the level of basolateral transporters typically decrease the clearance of the victim drug, causing higher systemic exposure. Interactions at the apical level can also lower drug clearance, but may be associated with higher renal toxicity, due to intracellular accumulation. Whereas the importance of glomerular filtration in drug disposition is largely appreciated among clinicians, DDIs involving renal transporters are less well recognized. This review summarizes current knowledge on the roles, quantitative importance and clinical relevance of these transporters in drug therapy. It proposes an approach based on substrate-inhibitor associations for predicting potential tubular-based DDIs and preventing their adverse consequences. We provide a comprehensive list of known drug interactions with renally-expressed transporters. While many of these interactions have limited clinical consequences, some involving high-risk drugs (e.g. methotrexate) definitely deserve the attention of prescribers.

Rucaparib: the past, present, and future of a newly approved PARP inhibitor for ovarian cancer

Rucaparib camsylate (CO-338, AG-014699, PF-01367338) is a potent PARP-1, PARP-2, and PARP-3 inhibitor. Phase I and II studies demonstrated clinical efficacy in both BRCA-mutated (inclusive of germline and somatic) ovarian tumors and ovarian tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) loss of heterozygosity (LOH). Rucaparib has received the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for patients with deleterious BRCA mutation (germline and/or somatic)-associated advanced ovarian cancer who have been treated with two or more chemotherapies. There is evidence to suggest that rucaparib has clinical efficacy against ovarian tumors with high HRD-LOH. Rucaparib's companion diagnostic FoundationFocus™ CDx BRCA test is the first FDA-approved next-generation sequencing-based companion diagnostic test designed to identify patients likely to respond to rucaparib. This article reviews the mechanisms of action, safety, approval, and indications for use of the PARP inhibitor rucaparib as well as future trials and use of rucaparib's companion diagnostic test.

Mechanisms and Predictions of Drug-Drug Interactions of the Hepatitis C Virus Three Direct-Acting Antiviral Regimen: Paritaprevir/Ritonavir, Ombitasvir, and Dasabuvir

To assess drug-drug interaction (DDI) potential for the three direct-acting antiviral (3D) regimen of ombitasvir, dasabuvir, and paritaprevir, in vitro studies profiled drug-metabolizing enzyme and transporter interactions. Using mechanistic static and dynamic models, DDI potential was predicted for CYP3A, CYP2C8, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A1, organic anion-transporting polypeptide (OATP) 1B1/1B3, breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), and P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Perpetrator static model DDI predictions for metabolizing enzymes were within 2-fold of the clinical observations, but additional physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling was necessary to achieve the same for drug transporters. When perpetrator interactions were assessed, ritonavir was responsible for the strong increase in exposure of sensitive CYP3A substrates, whereas paritaprevir (an OATP1B1/1B3 inhibitor) greatly increased the exposure of sensitive OATP1B1/1B3 substrates. The 3D regimen drugs are UGT1A1 inhibitors and are predicted to moderately increase plasma exposure of sensitive UGT1A1 substrates. Paritaprevir, ritonavir, and dasabuvir are BCRP inhibitors. Victim DDI predictions were qualitatively in line with the clinical observations. Plasma exposures of the 3D regimen were reduced by strong CYP3A inducers (paritaprevir and ritonavir; major CYP3A substrates) but were not affected by strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, since ritonavir (a CYP3A inhibitor) is already present in the regimen. Strong CYP2C8 inhibitors increased plasma exposure of dasabuvir (a major CYP2C8 substrate), OATP1B1/1B3 inhibitors increased plasma exposure of paritaprevir (an OATP1B1/1B3 substrate), and P-gp or BCRP inhibitors (all compounds are substrates of P-gp and/or BCRP) increased plasma exposure of the 3D regimen. Overall, the comprehensive mechanistic assessment of compound disposition along with mechanistic and PBPK approaches to predict victim and perpetrator DDI liability may enable better clinical management of nonstudied drug combinations with the 3D regimen.

Population pharmacokinetics and site of action exposures of veliparib with topotecan plus carboplatin in patients with haematological malignancies

AIMS

Veliparib is a potent inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) enzyme. The objectives of the analysis were to evaluate the effect of baseline covariates and co-administration of topotecan plus carboplatin (T + C) on pharmacokinetics of veliparib in patients with refractory acute leukaemia, and compare veliparib concentration in various biological matrices.

METHODS

A population pharmacokinetic model was developed and effect of age, body size indices, sex, creatinine clearance (CrCL) and co-administration of T + C on the pharmacokinetics of veliparib were evaluated. The final model was qualified using bootstrap and quantitative predictive check. Linear regression was conducted to correlate concentrations of veliparib in various biological matrices.

RESULTS

A two compartment model with first-order absorption with T_lag described veliparib pharmacokinetics. The apparent clearance (CL/F) and volume (V_c /F) were 16.5 l h^-1 and 122.7 l, respectively. The concomitant administration of T + C was not found to affect veliparib CL/F. CrCL and lean body mass (LBM) were significant covariates on CL/F and Vc/F, respectively. While a strong positive relationship was observed between veliparib concentrations in plasma and bone marrow supernatant, no correlation was observed between plasma and peripheral blood or bone marrow blasts.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with veliparib's physiochemical properties and its elimination mechanism, LBM and CrCL were found to affect pharmacokinetics of veliparib while concomitant administration of T + C did not affect veliparib's CL/F. Plasma concentrations were found to be a reasonable surrogate for veliparib concentrations in peripheral blood and bone marrow supernatant but not blasts. The current model will be utilized to conduct exposure-response analysis to support dosing recommendations.

Rucaparib in relapsed, platinum-sensitive high-grade ovarian carcinoma (ARIEL2 Part 1): an international, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have activity in ovarian carcinomas with homologous recombination deficiency. Along with BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) mutations genomic loss of heterozygosity (LOH) might also represent homologous recombination deficiency. In ARIEL2, we assessed the ability of tumour genomic LOH, quantified with a next-generation sequencing assay, to predict response to rucaparib, an oral PARP inhibitor.

METHODS

ARIEL2 is an international, multicentre, two-part, phase 2, open-label study done at 49 hospitals and cancer centres in Australia, Canada, France, Spain, the UK, and the USA. In ARIEL2 Part 1, patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive, high-grade ovarian carcinoma were classified into one of three predefined homologous recombination deficiency subgroups on the basis of tumour mutational analysis: BRCA mutant (deleterious germline or somatic), BRCA wild-type and LOH high (LOH high group), or BRCA wild-type and LOH low (LOH low group). We prespecified a cutoff of 14% or more genomic LOH for LOH high. Patients began treatment with oral rucaparib at 600 mg twice per day for continuous 28 day cycles until disease progression or any other reason for discontinuation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. All patients treated with at least one dose of rucaparib were included in the safety analyses and all treated patients who were classified were included in the primary endpoint analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01891344. Enrolment into ARIEL2 Part 1 is complete, although an extension (Part 2) is ongoing.

FINDINGS

256 patients were screened and 206 were enrolled between Oct 30, 2013, and Dec 19, 2014. At the data cutoff date (Jan 18, 2016), 204 patients had received rucaparib, with 28 patients remaining in the study. 192 patients could be classified into one of the three predefined homologous recombination deficiency subgroups: BRCA mutant (n=40), LOH high (n=82), or LOH low (n=70). Tumours from 12 patients were established as BRCA wild-type, but could not be classified for LOH, because of insufficient neoplastic nuclei in the sample. The median duration of treatment for the 204 patients was 5·7 months (IQR 2·8-10·1). 24 patients in the BRCA mutant subgroup, 56 patients in the LOH high subgroup, and 59 patients in the LOH low subgroup had disease progression or died. Median progression-free survival after rucaparib treatment was 12·8 months (95% CI 9·0-14·7) in the BRCA mutant subgroup, 5·7 months (5·3-7·6) in the LOH high subgroup, and 5·2 months (3·6-5·5) in the LOH low subgroup. Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the BRCA mutant (hazard ratio 0·27, 95% CI 0·16-0·44, p<0·0001) and LOH high (0·62, 0·42-0·90, p=0·011) subgroups compared with the LOH low subgroup. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia or decreased haemoglobin (45 [22%] patients), and elevations in alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase (25 [12%]). Common serious adverse events included small intestinal obstruction (10 [5%] of 204 patients), malignant neoplasm progression (10 [5%]), and anaemia (nine [4%]). Three patients died during the study (two because of disease progression and one because of sepsis and disease progression). No treatment-related deaths occurred.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with BRCA mutant or BRCA wild-type and LOH high platinum-sensitive ovarian carcinomas treated with rucaparib, progression-free survival was longer than in patients with BRCA wild-type LOH low carcinomas. Our results suggest that assessment of tumour LOH can be used to identify patients with BRCA wild-type platinum-sensitive ovarian cancers who might benefit from rucaparib. These results extend the potential usefulness of PARP inhibitors in the treatment setting beyond BRCA mutant tumours.

FUNDING

Clovis Oncology, US Department of Defense Ovarian Cancer Research Program, Stand Up To Cancer-Ovarian Cancer Research Fund Alliance-National Ovarian Cancer Coalition Dream Team Translational Research Grant, and V Foundation Translational Award.

A phase 1 study evaluating the pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of veliparib (ABT-888) in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel in Japanese subjects with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

INTRODUCTION

Veliparib is a potent, orally bioavailable PARP inhibitor that enhances efficacy of DNA-damaging chemotherapeutic agents. The study objectives were to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RPTD) of veliparib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel, and assess pharmacokinetics (PK), tolerability, and preliminary efficacy in Japanese patients with solid tumors.

METHODS

Carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL min) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) were administered on day 3 of a 21-day cycle. Oral veliparib (40, 80, or 120 mg BID) was administered on days 1-7. Patients received ≤6 cycles. Adverse events (AEs) were reported using NCI-CTCAE version 4.03, PK parameters were analyzed using noncompartmental methods, and responses were measured by RECIST version 1.1.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were treated. Common treatment-emergent AEs, consistent with toxicities associated with carboplatin and paclitaxel, included leukopenia (100 %), neutropenia (100 %), anemia (83 %), thrombocytopenia (75 %), increased alanine aminotransferase (67 %), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (67 %). Grade 3/4 AEs (in ≥2 patients) included neutropenia (100 %), leukopenia (33 %), anemia (25 %), and hyponatremia (17 %). No AEs led to veliparib, carboplatin, or paclitaxel interruption; no DLTs were observed. The RPTD was determined to be 120 mg BID. Veliparib C max and AUC were approximately dose proportional. Six partial responses were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Veliparib PK was not impacted by carboplatin and paclitaxel. The safety profile was manageable. The 120 mg BID RPTD confirmed in Japanese patients is the dose being evaluated in global studies of veliparib. Preliminary efficacy suggests veliparib may enhance carboplatin and paclitaxel activity, providing benefit to patients with NSCLC.

Profile of veliparib and its potential in the treatment of solid tumors

Inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) is an attractive therapeutic strategy because of the importance of this pathway in restoring DNA damage. Small-molecule inhibitors of PARP appear most effective when used to treat tumors with underlying defects in DNA repair, or when combined with DNA-damaging agents. Veliparib is one of several recently developed oral inhibitors of PARP currently in clinical trials. This review summarizes the pharmacology, mechanisms of action, toxicity, and activity of veliparib seen in clinical trials to date. Also discussed are proposed mechanisms of resistance, potential biomarkers of activity, and issues regarding patient selection and combination therapies that may optimize use of this exciting new agent.

Mechanistic Dissection of PARP1 Trapping and the Impact on In Vivo Tolerability and Efficacy of PARP Inhibitors

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP1, -2, and -3) play important roles in DNA damage repair. As such, a number of PARP inhibitors are undergoing clinical development as anticancer therapies, particularly in tumors with DNA repair deficits and in combination with DNA-damaging agents. Preclinical evidence indicates that PARP inhibitors potentiate the cytotoxicity of DNA alkylating agents. It has been proposed that a major mechanism underlying this activity is the allosteric trapping of PARP1 at DNA single-strand breaks during base excision repair; however, direct evidence of allostery has not been reported. Here the data reveal that veliparib, olaparib, niraparib, and talazoparib (BMN-673) potentiate the cytotoxicity of alkylating agents. Consistent with this, all four drugs possess PARP1 trapping activity. Using biochemical and cellular approaches, we directly probe the trapping mechanism for an allosteric component. These studies indicate that trapping is due to catalytic inhibition and not allostery. The potency of PARP inhibitors with respect to trapping and catalytic inhibition is linearly correlated in biochemical systems but is nonlinear in cells. High-content imaging of γH2Ax levels suggests that this is attributable to differential potentiation of DNA damage in cells. Trapping potency is inversely correlated with tolerability when PARP inhibitors are combined with temozolomide in mouse xenograft studies. As a result, PARP inhibitors with dramatically different trapping potencies elicit comparable in vivo efficacy at maximum tolerated doses. Finally, the impact of trapping on tolerability and efficacy is likely to be context specific.

IMPLICATIONS

Understanding the context-specific relationships of trapping and catalytic inhibition with both tolerability and efficacy will aid in determining the suitability of a PARP inhibitor for inclusion in a particular clinical regimen.

Unstirred Water Layers and the Kinetics of Organic Cation Transport

PURPOSE

Unstirred water layers (UWLs) present an unavoidable complication to the measurement of transport kinetics in cultured cells, and the high rates of transport achieved by overexpressing heterologous transporters exacerbate the UWL effect. This study examined the correlation between measured Jmax and Kt values and the effect of manipulating UWL thickness or transport Jmax on the accuracy of experimentally determined kinetics of the multidrug transporters, OCT2 and MATE1.

METHODS

Transport of TEA and MPP was measured in CHO cells that stably expressed human OCT2 or MATE1. UWL thickness was manipulated by vigorous reciprocal shaking. Several methods were used to manipulate maximal transport rates.

RESULTS

Vigorous stirring stimulated uptake of OCT2-mediated transport by decreasing apparent Kt (Ktapp) values. Systematic reduction in transport rates was correlated with reduction in Ktapp values. The slope of these relationships indicated a 1500 μm UWL in multiwell plates. Reducing the influence of UWLs (by decreasing either their thickness or the Jmax of substrate transport) reduced Ktapp by 2-fold to >10-fold.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to take into account the presence of UWLs in experiments using cultured cells to measure transport kinetics can result in significant underestimates of the apparent affinity of multidrug transporters for substrates.