Pharmacokinetics and safety of niraparib in patients with moderate hepatic impairment

Re-discover the value of protein binding assessments in hepatic and renal impairment studies and its contributions in drug labels and dose decisions

One of the key pharmacokinetic properties of most small molecule drugs is their ability to bind to serum proteins. Unbound or free drug is responsible for pharmacological activity while the balance between free and bound drug can impact drug distribution, elimination, and other safety parameters. In the hepatic impairment (HI) and renal impairment (RI) clinical studies, unbound drug concentration is often assessed; however, the relevance and impact of the protein binding (PB) results is largely limited. We analyzed published clinical safety and pharmacokinetic studies in subjects with HI or RI with PB assessment up to October 2022 and summarized the contribution of PB results on their label dose recommendations. Among drugs with HI publication, 32% (17/53) associated product labels include PB results in HI section. Of these, the majority (9/17, 53%) recommend dose adjustments consistent with observed PB change. Among drugs with RI publication, 27% (12/44) of associated product labels include PB results in RI section with the majority (7/12, 58%) recommending no dose adjustment, consistent with the reported absence of PB change. PB results were found to be consistent with a tailored dose recommendation in 53% and 58% of the approved labels for HI and RI section, respectively. We further discussed the interpretation challenges of PB results, explored treatment decision factors including total drug concentration, exposure-response relationships, and safety considerations in these case examples. Collectively, comprehending the alterations in free drug levels in HI and RI informs treatment decision through a risk-based approach.

PARP inhibitors: A review of the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacogenetics

PARP inhibitors have emerged as a promising class of anticancer agents approved for the treatment of ovarian, breast, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. These inhibitors target PARP enzymes involved in DNA repair pathways and exhibit remarkable efficacy in cancers with genetic deficiencies in the homologous recombination pathway responsible for mending DNA double-strand breaks. While all PARP inhibitors demonstrate potent and selective inhibition of PARP1 and PARP2, the key enzymes involved in DNA repair, each agent within the class possesses unique pharmacological profiles distinguishing them from one another. This review aims to comprehensively examine the properties of the entire PARP inhibitor class while emphasizing individual pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic distinctions that inform clinical recommendations. Currently, four agents, namely olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, and talazoparib, have obtained approval in the United States and Europe. Olaparib, the first approved PARP inhibitor, has been extensively studied and is indicated for a wider range of cancer types. Niraparib and talazoparib, the more recent additions to the PARP inhibitor class, possess the longest half-lives and are formulated for convenient once-daily dosing, alleviating the pill burden for patients when compared to older agents. Moreover, talazoparib undergoes minimal hepatic metabolism, reducing the potential for drug-drug interactions. Notably, niraparib is the sole PARP inhibitor recommended for dose reduction in hepatically impaired populations, whereas talazoparib and olaparib should be dose reduced in renally impaired populations. The mechanisms underlying these dose adjustment recommendations are further explored in this review. Additionally, this review briefly covers veliparib, a PARP inhibitor under development, and two recently approved PARP inhibitors in China, fuzuloparib and pamiparib. Although significant progress has been made in understanding PARP inhibitors, there are several unanswered questions that remain, necessitating further research across a broader spectrum of cancer types within this evolving class of anticancer agents.

Niraparib and Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Beacon in the Non-BRCA Mutated Setting

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the eighth most common cancer among the female population and the most lethal of all the female reproductive system malignancies. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) have reshaped the treatment scenario of metastatic OC in the maintenance setting post platinum-based chemotherapy. Niraparib is the first Food and Drug Administration (FDA)- and European Medical Agency (EMA)-approved PARPi as maintenance therapy for platinum-sensitive OC, regardless of BReast CAncer gene (BRCA) status, in first-line patients, with a recent restriction to germline BRCA mutations in second-line patients. In this review, we comprehensively summarized the pharmacological properties of niraparib, alongside the efficacy and safety data of the main trials leading to the current approvals, and discussed the future development of this agent.

Bioanalytical Methods for Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor Quantification: A Review for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) is an exploratory practice aimed at improving the quality of treatment through personalized therapy. Currently, there are 4 European Medicines Agency-approved and US Food and Drug Administration-approved PARPis available clinically whose quantification requires validated analytical methods: olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib. The purpose of this literature review was to highlight the pharmacological features of PARPis that could support their TDM practice and provide a detailed discussion of the available liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry methods for their quantification.

METHODS

Using several Medical Subject Heading terms, the literature was searched using several research engines, including SciFinder, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed, to find articles published before August 2022.

RESULTS

Exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety profiles, drug-drug interactions, and hepatic/renal impairment of PARPis provide the potential rationale to monitor their concentrations through TDM. Several bioanalytical methods for their quantification have been reported and compared, and a great deal of heterogeneity has been found among methods, regarding both their analytical and regulatory aspects.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to reducing toxicity and increasing the efficacy of PARPis therapy, TDM could be beneficial to thoroughly investigate the exposure-response relationships of PARPis and to establish pharmacokinetic thresholds for clinical decisions. Based on the comparison of published bioanalytical methods, their transferability and validation both play a key role in method selection. For future use in clinical TDM, we anticipate that bioanalytical methods should address every analytical need more thoroughly and should be validated with standardized guidelines.

DNA Damage Response Alterations in Ovarian Cancer: From Molecular Mechanisms to Therapeutic Opportunities

The DNA damage response (DDR), a set of signaling pathways for DNA damage detection and repair, maintains genomic stability when cells are exposed to endogenous or exogenous DNA-damaging agents. Alterations in these pathways are strongly associated with cancer development, including ovarian cancer (OC), the most lethal gynecologic malignancy. In OC, failures in the DDR have been related not only to the onset but also to progression and chemoresistance. It is known that approximately half of the most frequent subtype, high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), exhibit defects in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair by homologous recombination (HR), and current evidence indicates that probably all HGSCs harbor a defect in at least one DDR pathway. These defects are not restricted to HGSCs; mutations in ARID1A, which are present in 30% of endometrioid OCs and 50% of clear cell (CC) carcinomas, have also been found to confer deficiencies in DNA repair. Moreover, DDR alterations have been described in a variable percentage of the different OC subtypes. Here, we overview the main DNA repair pathways involved in the maintenance of genome stability and their deregulation in OC. We also recapitulate the preclinical and clinical data supporting the potential of targeting the DDR to fight the disease.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of PARP Inhibitors in Oncology

Olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib are poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors approved for the treatment of ovarian, breast, pancreatic, and/or prostate cancer. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are potent inhibitors of the PARP enzymes with comparable half-maximal inhibitory concentrations in the nanomolar range. Olaparib and rucaparib are orally dosed twice a day, extensively metabolized by cytochrome P450 enzymes, and inhibitors of several enzymes and drug transporters with a high risk for drug-drug interactions. Niraparib and talazoparib are orally dosed once a day with a lower risk for niraparib and a minimal risk for talazoparib to cause drug-drug interactions. All four PARP inhibitors show moderate-to-high interindividual variability in plasma exposure. Higher exposure is associated with an increase in toxicity, mostly hematological toxicity. For talazoparib, exposure-efficacy relationships have been described, but for olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib this relationship remains inconclusive. Further studies are required to investigate exposure-response relationships to improve dosing of PARP inhibitors, in which therapeutic drug monitoring could play an important role. In this review, we give an overview of the pharmacokinetic properties of the four PARP inhibitors, including considerations for patients with renal dysfunction or hepatic impairment, the effect of food, and drug-drug interactions. Furthermore, we focus on the pharmacodynamics and summarize the available exposure-efficacy and exposure-toxicity relationships.

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

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

Design and conduct considerations for studies in patients with hepatic impairment

Despite the liver being the primary site for clearance of xenobiotics utilizing a myriad of mechanisms ranging from cytochrome P450 enzyme pathways, glucuronidation, and biliary excretion, there is a dearth of information available as to how the severity of hepatic impairment (HI) can alter drug absorption and disposition (i.e., pharmacokinetics [PK]) as well as their efficacy and safety or pharmacodynamics (PD). In general, regulatory agencies recommend conducting PK studies in subjects with HI when hepatic metabolism/excretion accounts for more than 20% of drug elimination or if the drug has a narrow therapeutic range. In this tutorial, we provide an overview of the global regulatory landscape, clinical measures for hepatic function assessment, methods to stage HI severity, and consequently the impact on labeling. In addition, we provide an in-depth practical guidance for designing and conducting clinical trials for patients with HI and on the application of modeling and simulation strategies in lieu of dedicated trials for dosing recommendations in patients with HI.

Multi-Disciplinary Care Planning of Ovarian Cancer in Older Patients: General Statement-A Position Paper from SOFOG-GINECO-FRANCOGYN-SFPO

Simple Summary

This position paper aims to provide practitioners a proposal for multidisciplinary care planning for older patients with ovarian cancer from the time of suspected diagnosis. The first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer involves several interdependent sequences: cytoreductive surgery, (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and maintenance targeted treatments. In older patients, care planning must be adapted to their geriatric parameters and consider the geriatric impact of each treatment sequence to allow treatment completion. Care planning should be centered on patient motivation and imply multidisciplinarity. Each step of treatment plan should be reconsidered in light of a geriatric assessment and follow-up. Studies are needed to prospectively evaluate the impact of geriatric vulnerability parameters at each step of the treatment agenda and the impact of geriatric interventions on patient outcomes.

Abstract

In this position paper the Société Francophone d’OncoGériatrie (SOFOG; French-speaking oncogeriatric society), the Société Française de Pharmacie Oncologique (SFPO, French society for oncology pharmacy), the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux pour l’Étude des Cancers de l’Ovaire et du sein (GINECO, National Investigators’ Group for Studies in Ovarian and Breast Cancer) and the Groupe Français de chirurgie Oncologique et Gynécologique (FRANCOGYN) propose a multi-disciplinary care planning of ovarian cancer in older patients. The treatment pathway is based on four successive decisional nodes (diagnosis, resectability assessment, operability assessment, adjuvant, and maintenance treatment decision) implying multidisciplinarity and adaptation of the treatment plan according to the patient’s geriatric covariates and her motivation towards treatment. Specific attention must be paid to geriatric intervention, supportive care and pharmaceutical conciliation. Studies are needed to prospectively evaluate the impact of geriatric vulnerability parameters at each step of the treatment agenda and the impact of geriatric interventions on patient outcomes.