1
|
Bardia A, Sun S, Thimmiah N, Coates JT, Wu B, Abelman RO, Spring L, Moy B, Ryan P, Melkonyan MN, Partridge A, Juric D, Peppercorn J, Parsons H, Wander SA, Attaya V, Lormil B, Shellock M, Nagayama A, Bossuyt V, Isakoff SJ, Tolaney SM, Ellisen LW. Antibody-Drug Conjugate Sacituzumab Govitecan Enables a Sequential TOP1/PARP Inhibitor Therapy Strategy in Patients with Breast Cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2024; 30:2917-2924. [PMID: 38709212 PMCID: PMC11247314 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-24-0428] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2024] [Revised: 04/17/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) sacituzumab govitecan (SG) comprises the topoisomerase 1 (TOP1) inhibitor (TOP1i) SN-38, coupled to a monoclonal antibody targeting trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (TROP-2). Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition may synergize with TOP1i and SG, but previous studies combining systemic PARP and TOP1 inhibitors failed due to dose-limiting myelosuppression. Here, we assess the proof-of-mechanism and clinical feasibility for SG and talazoparib (TZP) employing an innovative sequential dosing schedule. PATIENTS AND METHODS In vitro models tested pharmacodynamic endpoints, and in a phase 1b clinical trial (NCT04039230), 30 patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) received SG and TZP in a concurrent (N = 7) or sequential (N = 23) schedule. Outcome measures included safety, tolerability, preliminary efficacy, and establishment of a recommended phase 2 dose. RESULTS We hypothesized that tumor-selective delivery of TOP1i via SG would reduce nontumor toxicity and create a temporal window, enabling sequential dosing of SG and PARP inhibition. In vitro, sequential SG followed by TZP delayed TOP1 cleavage complex clearance, increased DNA damage, and promoted apoptosis. In the clinical trial, sequential SG/TZP successfully met primary objectives and demonstrated median progression-free survival (PFS) of 7.6 months without dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), while concurrent dosing yielded 2.3 months PFS and multiple DLTs including severe myelosuppression. CONCLUSIONS While SG dosed concurrently with TZP is not tolerated clinically due to an insufficient therapeutic window, sequential dosing of SG followed by TZP proved a viable strategy. These findings support further clinical development of the combination and suggest that ADC-based therapy may facilitate novel, mechanism-based dosing strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aditya Bardia
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sheng Sun
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Nayana Thimmiah
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - James T Coates
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Bogang Wu
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Rachel O Abelman
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Laura Spring
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Beverly Moy
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Phoebe Ryan
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Mark N Melkonyan
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ann Partridge
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Dejan Juric
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jeffrey Peppercorn
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Heather Parsons
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Seth A Wander
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Victoria Attaya
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Brenda Lormil
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Maria Shellock
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Aiko Nagayama
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Veerle Bossuyt
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Steven J Isakoff
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sara M Tolaney
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Leif W Ellisen
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Ludwig Center at Harvard, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Spring LM, Tolaney SM, Fell G, Bossuyt V, Abelman RO, Wu B, Maheswaran S, Trippa L, Comander A, Mulvey T, McLaughlin S, Ryan P, Ryan L, Abraham E, Rosenstock A, Garrido-Castro AC, Lynce F, Moy B, Isakoff SJ, Tung N, Mittendorf EA, Ellisen LW, Bardia A. Response-guided neoadjuvant sacituzumab govitecan for localized triple-negative breast cancer: results from the NeoSTAR trial. Ann Oncol 2024; 35:293-301. [PMID: 38092228 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.11.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2023] [Revised: 11/22/2023] [Accepted: 11/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/13/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sacituzumab govitecan (SG), a novel antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) targeting TROP2, is approved for pre-treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). We conducted an investigator-initiated clinical trial evaluating neoadjuvant (NA) SG (NCT04230109), and report primary results. PATIENTS AND METHODS Participants with early-stage TNBC received NA SG for four cycles. The primary objective was to assess pathological complete response (pCR) rate in breast and lymph nodes (ypT0/isN0) to SG. Secondary objectives included overall response rate (ORR), safety, event-free survival (EFS), and predictive biomarkers. A response-guided approach was utilized, and subsequent systemic therapy decisions were at the discretion of the treating physician. RESULTS From July 2020 to August 2021, 50 participants were enrolled (median age = 48.5 years; 13 clinical stage I disease, 26 stage II, 11 stage III). Forty-nine (98%) completed four cycles of SG. Overall, the pCR rate with SG alone was 30% [n = 15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 18% to 45%]. The ORR per RECIST V1.1 after SG alone was 64% (n = 32/50, 95% CI 77% to 98%). Higher Ki-67 and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were predictive of pCR to SG (P = 0.007 for Ki-67 and 0.002 for TILs), while baseline TROP2 expression was not (P = 0.440). Common adverse events were nausea (82%), fatigue (76%), alopecia (76%), neutropenia (44%), and rash (48%). With a median follow-up time of 18.9 months (95% CI 16.3-21.9 months), the 2-year EFS for all participants was 95%. Among participants with a pCR with SG (n = 15), the 2-year EFS was 100%. CONCLUSIONS In the first NA trial with an ADC in localized TNBC, SG demonstrated single-agent efficacy and feasibility of response-guided escalation/de-escalation. Further research on optimal duration of SG as well as NA combination strategies, including immunotherapy, are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L M Spring
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - S M Tolaney
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - G Fell
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - V Bossuyt
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - R O Abelman
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - B Wu
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - S Maheswaran
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - L Trippa
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - A Comander
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - T Mulvey
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - S McLaughlin
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - P Ryan
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - L Ryan
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - E Abraham
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - A Rosenstock
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | | | - F Lynce
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - B Moy
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - S J Isakoff
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - N Tung
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - E A Mittendorf
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - L W Ellisen
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston; Ludwig Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - A Bardia
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
| |
Collapse
|