A randomized Phase II study of veliparib with temozolomide or carboplatin/paclitaxel versus placebo with carboplatin/paclitaxel in BRCA1/2 metastatic breast cancer: design and rationale

Spatiotemporal Concurrent PARP Inhibitor Sensitization Based on Radiation-Responsive Nanovesicles for Lung Cancer Chemoradiotherapy

The implementation of chemoradiation combinations has gained great momentum in clinical practices. However, the full utility of this paradigm is often restricted by the discordant tempos of action of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Here, a gold nanoparticle-based radiation-responsive nanovesicle system loaded with cisplatin and veliparib, denoted as CV-Au NVs, is developed to augment the concurrent chemoradiation effect in a spatiotemporally controllable manner of drug release. Upon irradiation, the in situ generation of •OH induces the oxidation of polyphenylene sulfide from being hydrophobic to hydrophilic, resulting in the disintegration of the nanovesicles and the rapid release of the entrapped cisplatin and veliparib (the poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor). Cisplatin-induced DNA damage and the impairment of the DNA repair mechanism mediated by veliparib synergistically elicit potent pro-apoptotic effects. In vivo studies suggest that one-dose injection of the CV-Au NVs and one-time X-ray irradiation paradigm effectively inhibit tumor growth in the A549 lung cancer model. This study provides new insight into designing nanomedicine platforms in chemoradiation therapy from a vantage point of synergizing both chemotherapy and radiation therapy in a spatiotemporally concurrent manner.

The Mutational Spectrum of Pre- and Post-Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Triple-Negative Breast Cancers

The response of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients to pre-operative (neoadjuvant chemotherapy) is a critical factor of their outcome. To determine the effects of chemotherapy on the tumor genome and to identify mutations associated with chemoresistance and sensitivity, we performed whole exome sequencing on pre/post-chemotherapy tumors and matched lymphocytes from 26 patients. We observed great inter-tumoral heterogeneity with no gene mutated recurrently in more than four tumors besides TP53. Although the degree of response to chemotherapy in residual tumors was associated with more subclonal changes during chemotherapy, there was minimal evolution between pre/post-tumors. Indeed, gene sets enriched for mutations in pre- and post-chemotherapy tumors were very similar and reflected genes involved in the biological process of neurogenesis. Somatically mutated genes present in chemosensitive tumors included COL1A2, PRMD15, APOBEC3B, PALB2 and histone protein encoding genes, while BRCA1, ATR, ARID1A, XRCC3 and genes encoding for tubulin-associated proteins were present in the chemoresistant tumors. We also found that the mutational spectrum of post-chemotherapy tumors was more reflective of matching metastatic tumor biopsies than pre-chemotherapy samples. These findings support a portrait of modest ongoing genomic instability with respect to single-nucleotide variants induced by or selected for by chemotherapy in TNBCs.

TRPML1 as a potential therapeutic target for triple-negative breast cancer: a review

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most refractory subtype of breast cancer, and effective treatments are urgently needed owing to its poor prognosis. Surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, alone or in combination, are the leading choices for TNBC therapy. Although promising approaches and procedures have emerged, several challenges, such as off-target effects, drug resistance, and severe side effects, remain to be addressed. Recently, transient receptor potential channel mucolipin 1 (TRPML1) has attracted the attention of researchers because its expression has been implicated in numerous diseases, including cancer. TRPML1 regulates biological events and signaling pathways, including autophagic flux, exocytosis, ionic homeostasis, and lysosomal biogenesis, all contributing to tumorigenesis and cancer progression. TRPML1 also functions as a building block for cancer cell growth, mitogenic signaling, priming tissues for metastasis, and activation of transcriptional programs, processes involved in several malignant tumors. This review provides an overview of breast cancer epidemiology and diagnostic techniques and then discusses the existing therapeutics. Additionally, we elaborate on the development of, and associated challenges to, TNBC diagnostics and treatment and the feasibility of TRPML1 as a therapeutic target for TNBC.

Molecular Biology Mechanisms and Emerging Therapeutics of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer that is conventionally characterized by the absence of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2), accounting for approximately 15-20% of all breast cancers. Compared to other molecular phenotypes, TNBC is typically associated with high malignancy and poor prognosis. Cytotoxic agents have been the mainstay of treatment for the past few decades due to the lack of definitive targets and limited therapeutic interventions. However, recent developments have demonstrated that TNBC has peculiar molecular classifications and biomarkers, which provide the possibility of evolving treatment from basic cytotoxic chemotherapy to an expanding domain of targeted therapies. This review presents a framework for understanding the current clinical experience surrounding molecular biology mechanisms in TNBC (Figure 1). Including immunotherapy, polymerase (PARP) and PI3K/AKT pathway inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and androgen receptor (AR) blockade. Additionally, the role of miRNA therapeutics targeting TNBC and potential strategies targeting cancer stem cells (CSCs) are discussed and highlighted. As more and more treatments arise on the horizon, we believe that patients with TNBC will have a new sense of hope.

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

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

A phase 1 study of veliparib (ABT-888) plus weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced solid malignancies, with an expansion cohort in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) (ETCTN 8620)

BACKGROUND

Veliparib is a poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, and it has clinical activity with every 3 weeks carboplatin and paclitaxel. In breast cancer, weekly paclitaxel is associated with improved overall survival. We aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of veliparib with weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel as well as safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary clinical activity in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC).

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced/metastatic solid tumors and adequate organ function were eligible. A standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was followed by a TNBC expansion cohort. Veliparib doses ranging from 50 to 200 mg orally bid were tested with carboplatin (AUC 2) and paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) given weekly in a 21-day cycle. Adverse events (AE) were evaluated by CTCAE v4.0, and objective response rate (ORR) was determined by RECIST 1.1.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled, of whom 22 had TNBC. Two dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The RP2D was determined to be 150 mg PO bid veliparib with weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel 2 weeks on, 1 week off, based on hematologic toxicity requiring dose reduction in the first 5 cycles of treatment. The most common grade 3/4 AEs included neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. PK parameters of veliparib were comparable to single-agent veliparib. In 23 patients with evaluable disease, the ORR was 65%. In 19 patients with TNBC with evaluable disease, the ORR was 63%.

CONCLUSION

Veliparib can be safely combined with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin, and this triplet combination has promising clinical activity.

DNA Damage Response in Cancer Therapy and Resistance: Challenges and Opportunities

Resistance to chemo- and radiotherapy is a common event among cancer patients and a reason why new cancer therapies and therapeutic strategies need to be in continuous investigation and development. DNA damage response (DDR) comprises several pathways that eliminate DNA damage to maintain genomic stability and integrity, but different types of cancers are associated with DDR machinery defects. Many improvements have been made in recent years, providing several drugs and therapeutic strategies for cancer patients, including those targeting the DDR pathways. Currently, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARP inhibitors) are the DDR inhibitors (DDRi) approved for several cancers, including breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. However, PARPi resistance is a growing issue in clinical settings that increases disease relapse and aggravate patients' prognosis. Additionally, resistance to other DDRi is also being found and investigated. The resistance mechanisms to DDRi include reversion mutations, epigenetic modification, stabilization of the replication fork, and increased drug efflux. This review highlights the DDR pathways in cancer therapy, its role in the resistance to conventional treatments, and its exploitation for anticancer treatment. Biomarkers of treatment response, combination strategies with other anticancer agents, resistance mechanisms, and liabilities of treatment with DDR inhibitors are also discussed.

Comparative Analyses of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are approved as monotherapies in BRCA1/2-mutated (m BRCA1/2) metastatic breast and ovarian cancers, and in advanced pancreatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers. Differential safety profiles across PARPi necessitate improved mechanistic understanding of inhibitor differences, especially with expansion of PARPi indications and drug combinations. Here, we report in vitro evaluations of PARPi (–/+ PARP trapper temozolomide, TMZ) with reference to total clinical mean concentration average or maximum (tCavg, tCmax), to elucidate contributions of primary pharmacology and structural differences to clinical efficacy and safety. In biochemical assays, rucaparib and niraparib demonstrated off-target secondary pharmacology activities, and in selectivity assays, talazoparib, olaparib, and rucaparib inhibited a broader panel of PARP enzymes. In donor-derived human bone marrow mononuclear cells, only olaparib both increased early apoptosis and decreased the cell viability half inhibitory concentration (IC50) at ≤ tCavg, whereas other PARPi only did so in the presence of TMZ. In cancer cell lines with DNA damage repair mutations, all PARPi decreased cell viability in H1048 but not TK6 cells, and only talazoparib decreased cell growth in DU145 cells at ≤ tCavg concentrations. When combined with low dose TMZ, only talazoparib left-shifted the functional consequences of PARP trapping (S-phase arrest, apoptosis, S-phase double-stranded breaks) and reduced cell viability/growth in TK6 and DU145 cell lines at ≤ tCavg, whereas the other inhibitors required high-dose TMZ. Our study suggests structural differences across PARPi may contribute to differences in PARP selectivity and off-target activities, which along with distinct pharmacokinetic properties, may influence inhibitor-specific toxicities in patients.

Recently approved treatment options for patients with metastatic triple-negative and HER2-neu-positive breast cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer affecting women worldwide. In 2021, the estimated number of new breast cancer cases was 281 550 and about 43 500 women died from metastatic breast cancer (mBC). For women aged 20-59 years, mBC remains the leading cause of cancer death and is, therefore, an important public health concern. Only 5% of women initially present with metastatic disease. Approximately 20% of patients presenting with local or locoregional disease progress to mBC despite adjuvant therapy. Inspite of all the medicosurgical advancements, the overall prognosis for patients diagnosed with mBC remains poor, with median overall survival of approximately 31 months, although this varies based on tumor biology. In recent years, there has been significant progress in developing immunotargeted therapies such as antihuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (anti-HER2) or check point inhibitors that confirmed to have dramatically improve the prognosis of mBC, a historically unfavorable disease subset. Even with the major progress that has been made in understanding the biology of BC, challenges such as resistance frequency to therapies, unknown efficacy, concerns for safety of drug combination and toxicities still remain high. Therefore, a new targeted and more selective treatment approaches are the need of the hour. In this review, we aim to outline the most recently approved medications in treatment of Her2-positive and triple-negative breast cancers.

3,4‑Dihydroxyacetophenone attenuates oxidative stress‑induced damage to HUVECs via regulation of the Nrf2/HO‑1 pathway

It has been reported that oxidative stress plays a prominent role in diabetic macrovascular diseases. 3,4-Dihydroxyacetophenone (3,4-DHAP) has been found to have a variety of biological activities. However, few studies have assessed the antioxidant capacity of 3,4-DHAP and the underlying mechanisms. Thus, the aim of the present study was to explore the effects of 3,4-DHAP on oxidative stress in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). HUVECs were pre-treated with 3,4-DHAP and then exposed to high glucose conditions. Cell viability and cytotoxicity were measured using an MTT assay. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels were measured using an inverted fluorescence microscope and a fluorescent enzyme labeling instrument. Protein expression levels of nuclear factor E2-related factor 2 (Nrf2), heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1), microtubule-associated protein 1A/1B-light chain 3 (LC3) and poly ADP-ribose polymerase-1 (PARP-1) were measured using western blotting, and mRNA expression of Nrf2 and HO-1 were measured through reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). Nrf2 nuclear translocation was evaluated using immunofluorescence analysis and autophagosomes were observed using transmission electron microscope (TEM). The results of the present study demonstrated that compared with the control group, cell viability of the high glucose group was reduced and cell cytotoxicity of the high glucose group was increased. ROS production in the high glucose group was clearly enhanced. In addition, high glucose upregulated Nrf2 and HO-1 protein and mRNA expression levels. Nuclear translocation of Nrf2 in the high glucose group was also increased. The formation of autophagosomes in the high glucose group was also higher than that in the control group. Furthermore, LC3-II/LC3-I and PARP-1 protein expression levels were increased after treatment with high glucose. However, compared to the high glucose group, 3,4-DHAP (10 µmol/l) significantly enhanced cell viability. 3,4-DHAP markedly decreased the production of ROS, increased Nrf2 and HO-1 protein and mRNA expression levels, and promoted nuclear translocation of Nrf2 in HUVECs. In addition, 3,4-DHAP promoted the formation of autophagosomes, and notably increased the protein expression levels of LC3-II/LC3-I and PARP-1. Moreover, it was determined that compared to the 3,4-DHAP group, treatment with 3,4-DHAP and ML385 enhanced cell viability, and decreased ROS production, Nrf2 and HO-1 protein and mRNA expression levels, nuclear translocation of Nrf2, and LC3-II/LC3-I and PARP-1 protein expression levels. Collectively, the results of the present study showed that 3,4-DHAP protected HUVECs against oxidative stress via regulation of the Nrf2/HO-1 pathway, by increasing autophagy and promoting DNA damage repair.

Veliparib monotherapy following carboplatin/paclitaxel plus veliparib combination therapy in patients with germline BRCA-associated advanced breast cancer: results of exploratory analyses from the phase III BROCADE3 trial

BACKGROUND

In the BROCADE3 trial (NCT02163694), addition of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, veliparib, to carboplatin/paclitaxel improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.57-0.88; P=0.002) in patients with advanced HER2-negative, germline BRCA1/2-mutated breast cancer. A subset of patients discontinued both carboplatin and paclitaxel prior to progression and continued on veliparib/placebo maintenance monotherapy until progression. Analyses in this patient subgroup are reported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomized 2:1 to veliparib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel or placebo plus carboplatin/paclitaxel. Veliparib (120 mg twice daily [BID]) or placebo was given on days -2 to 5, carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL) on day 1, and paclitaxel (80 mg/m²) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 21-day cycles. Patients who discontinued both carboplatin and paclitaxel prior to progression received blinded study drug monotherapy at an increased dose of 300-400 mg BID continuously. PFS was the primary endpoint. Exploratory analyses were performed in the subgroup of patients who received blinded study drug as monotherapy. A time-varying Cox model including data from all patients was also used to evaluate treatment effect in the combination and monotherapy phases.

RESULTS

136 of 337 patients randomized to veliparib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel and 58/172 patients randomized to placebo plus carboplatin/paclitaxel discontinued both carboplatin and paclitaxel prior to progression and continued on blinded veliparib or placebo monotherapy. In this blinded monotherapy subgroup, investigator-assessed median PFS from randomization was 25.7 months with veliparib versus 14.6 months with placebo. HRs from a time-varying Cox model favored veliparib during both combination therapy and monotherapy. Any-grade adverse events (AEs) occurring in the monotherapy phase were primarily gastrointestinal. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia and anemia (4% each with veliparib; 5% and 2%, respectively, with placebo).

CONCLUSIONS

Veliparib maintenance monotherapy had a tolerable safety profile and may extend PFS following combination chemotherapy.

Phase II trial of veliparib and temozolomide in metastatic breast cancer patients with and without BRCA1/2 mutations

PURPOSE

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of poly-(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1 and 2 inhibitor veliparib and temozolomide in metastatic breast cancer patients with and without germline BRCA1/2 mutations.

METHODS

In this single-arm phase II trial, patients with metastatic breast cancer received veliparib 30 to 40 mg twice daily on days 1 to 7 with concurrent temozolomide 150 mg/m² on days 1 to 5 of a 28-day cycle. The primary cohort was unselected for BRCA mutation status, and an expansion cohort enrolled only BRCA1/2 carriers. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) in each cohort. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and evaluation of safety and tolerability.

RESULTS

In the primary cohort of 41 unselected patients, which included 9 BRCA mutation carriers, the ORR was 10% and clinical benefit rate at 4 months (CBR) was 27%. In the expansion cohort of 21 BRCA1/2 carriers, the ORR was 14% and CBR was 43%. Among all 30 BRCA1/2 carriers, the ORR was 23% versus 0% among non-carriers. In the subset of BRCA1/2 carriers, the ORR was 32% among platinum-naïve patients versus 9% among platinum-exposed patients. The median PFS was 3.3 months among BRCA1/2 carriers compared to 1.8 months among non-carriers (HR: 0.48, p = 0.006). A longer median PFS of 6.2 months was observed among BRCA1/2 carriers who had no prior platinum therapy. The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia (32%) and neutropenia (21%) that generally improved with dose modifications.

CONCLUSION

Veliparib and temozolomide demonstrated clinical activity in platinum-naïve BRCA-associated metastatic breast cancer with manageable toxicity at doses of veliparib well below the single-agent active dose. Although the study did not meet its primary endpoint in unselected nor BRCA-associated breast cancer, this regimen was further evaluated in the BROCADE 2 study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01009788 (ClinicalTrials.gov), November 9, 2009.

Harnessing DNA Repair Defects to Augment Immune-Based Therapies in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has poor prognosis with limited treatment options, with little therapeutic progress made during the past several decades. DNA damage response (DDR) associated therapies, including radiation and inhibitors of DDR, demonstrate potential efficacy against TNBC, especially under the guidance of genomic subtype-directed treatment. The tumor immune microenvironment also contributes greatly to TNBC malignancy and response to conventional and targeted therapies. Immunotherapy represents a developing trend in targeted therapies directed against TNBC and strategies combining immunotherapy and modulators of the DDR pathways are being pursued. There is increasing understanding of the potential interplay between DDR pathways and immune-associated signaling. As such, the question of how we treat TNBC regarding novel immuno-molecular strategies is continually evolving. In this review, we explore the current and upcoming treatment options of TNBC in the context of DNA repair mechanisms and immune-based therapies, with a focus on implications of recent genomic analyses and clinical trial findings.

Systematic review of combinations of targeted or immunotherapy in advanced solid tumors

With rapid advances in our understanding of cancer, there is an expanding number of potential novel combination therapies, including novel-novel combinations. Identifying which combinations are appropriate and in which subpopulations are among the most difficult questions in medical research. We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided systematic review of trials of novel-novel combination therapies involving immunotherapies or molecular targeted therapies in advanced solid tumors. A MEDLINE search was conducted using a modified Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy for published clinical trials between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020, in the top-ranked medical and oncology journals. Trials were evaluated according to a criterion adapted from previously published Food and Drug Administration guidance and other key considerations in designing trials of combinations. This included the presence of a strong biological rationale, the use of a new established or emerging predictive biomarker prospectively incorporated into the clinical trial design, appropriate comparator arms of monotherapy or supportive external data sources and a primary endpoint demonstrating a clinically meaningful benefit. Of 32 identified trials, there were 11 (34%) trials of the novel-novel combination of anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) therapy, and 10 (31%) trials of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) combination therapy. 20 (62.5%) trials were phase II trials, while 12 (37.5%) were phase III trials. Most (72%) trials lacked significant preclinical evidence supporting the development of the combination in the given indication. A majority of trials (69%) were conducted in biomarker unselected populations or used pre-existing biomarkers within the given indication for patient selection. Most studies (66%) were considered to have appropriate comparator arms or had supportive external data sources such as prior studies of monotherapy. All studies were evaluated as selecting a clinically meaningful primary endpoint. In conclusion, designing trials to evaluate novel-novel combination therapies presents numerous challenges to demonstrate efficacy in a comprehensive manner. A greater understanding of biological rationale for combinations and incorporating predictive biomarkers may improve effective evaluation of combination therapies. Innovative statistical methods and increasing use of external data to support combination approaches are potential strategies that may improve the efficiency of trial design. Designing trials to evaluate novel-novel combination therapies presents numerous challenges to demonstrate efficacy in a comprehensive manner. A greater understanding of biological rationale for combinations and incorporating predictive biomarkers may improve effective evaluation of combination therapies. Innovative statistical methods and increasing use of external data to support combination approaches are potential strategies that may improve the efficiency of trial design.

Triple-negative breast cancer: A run-through of features, classification and current therapies

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women worldwide. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is characterized by the lack of expression of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. It is the most aggressive subtype of breast cancer and accounts for 12-20% of all breast cancer cases. TNBC is associated with younger age of onset, greater metastatic potential, higher incidence of relapse, and lower overall survival rates. Based on molecular phenotype, TNBC has been classified into six subtypes (BL1, BL2, M, MES, LAR, and IM). TNBC treatment is challenging due to its heterogeneity, highly invasive nature, and relatively poor therapeutics response. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy are conventional strategies for the treatment of TNBC. Recent research in TNBC and mechanistic understanding of disease pathogenesis using cutting-edge technologies has led to the unfolding of new lines of therapies that have been incorporated into clinical practice. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase and immune checkpoint inhibitors have made their way to the current TNBC treatment paradigm. This review focuses on the classification, features, and treatment progress in TNBC. Histological subtypes connected to recurrence, molecular classification of TNBC, targeted therapy for early and advanced TNBC, and advances in non-coding RNA in therapy are the key highlights in this review.

PARP (Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase) inhibitors for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer remains a challenge to treat. With emerging study results, it is important to interpret the available clinical data and apply the evidence offering the most effective treatment to the right patient. Poly(ADP Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are a new class of drug and their role in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer is being established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival; secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

On 8 June 2020, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via OvidSP, Embase via OvidSP, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) search portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences as well as scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors of trials for further information, where needed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials on participants with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer comparing 1) chemotherapy in combination with PARP inhibitors, compared to the same chemotherapy without PARP inhibitors or 2) treatment with PARP inhibitors, compared to treatment with other chemotherapy. We included studies that reported on our primary outcome of overall survival and secondary outcomes including progression-free survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 49 articles for qualitative synthesis, describing five randomised controlled trials that were included in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). A sixth trial was assessed as eligible but had ended prematurely and no data were available for inclusion in our meta-analysis. Risk of bias was predominately low to unclear across all studies except in regards to performance bias (3/5 high risk) and detection bias for the outcomes of quality of life (2/2 high risk) and reporting of adverse events (3/5 high risk). High-certainty evidence shows there may be a small advantage in overall survival (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.00; 4 studies; 1435 patients). High-certainty evidence shows that PARP inhibitors offer an improvement in PFS in locally advanced/metastatic HER2-negative, BRCA germline mutated breast cancer patients (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 5 studies; 1474 patients). There was no statistical heterogeneity for these outcomes. Subgroup analyses for PFS outcomes based on trial level data were performed for triple-negative breast cancer, hormone-positive and/or HER2-positive breast cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations, and patients who had received prior chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer or not. The subgroup analyses showed a persistent PFS benefit regardless of the subgroup chosen. Pooled analysis shows PARP inhibitors likely result in a moderate improvement in tumour response rate compared to other treatment arms (66.9% vs 48.9%; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.54; 5 studies; 1185 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The most common adverse events reported across all five studies included neutropenia, anaemia and fatigue. Grade 3 or higher adverse events probably occur no less frequently in patients receiving PARP inhibitors (59.4% for PARP arm versus 64.5% for non-PARP arm, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.04; 5 studies; 1443 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only two studies reported quality of life outcomes so this was not amenable to meta-analysis. However, both studies that did assess quality of life showed PARP inhibitors were superior compared to physician's choice of chemotherapy in terms of participant-reported outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative, BRCA germline mutated breast cancer, PARP inhibitors offer an improvement in progression-free survival, and likely improve overall survival and tumour response rates. This systematic review provides evidence supporting the use of PARP inhibitors as part of the therapeutic strategy for breast cancer patients in this subgroup. The toxicity profile for PARP inhibitors is probably no worse than chemotherapy but more information is required regarding quality of life outcomes, highlighting the importance of collecting such data in future studies. Future studies should also be powered to detect clinically important differences in overall survival and could focus on the role of PARP inhibitors in other relevant breast cancer populations, including HER2-positive, BRCA-negative/homologous recombination repair-deficient and Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PDL1) positive.

DNA damage response inhibitors: An avenue for TNBC treatment

The DNA damage response (DDR) is critical for the maintenance of genomic stability by sensing DNA damage, regulating cell cycle and initiating DNA repair. Drugs targeting DDR pathways have been increasingly exploited in treating various tumors. Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a highly heterogeneous and aggressive tumor with constitutive activation of oncogenes, inducing replication stress and DNA damage, which require the DDR for survival. In addition, emerging studies have demonstrated that TNBC harbors aberrant genetic alterations in DDR pathways, such as a high frequency of p53 dysfunction and BRCA1/2 mutations. DDR alterations force TNBC to rely on the existing DDR pathways for survival, and make TNBC particularly sensitive to specific DDR inhibitors, such as high sensitivity of TNBC with BRCA1/2 mutations to PARP inhibitors. This review first and comprehensively covers the current status of the development of DDR inhibitors and discusses the mechanism of targeting the DDR in TNBC. Preclinical and clinical studies on inhibitors of the ATR-CHK1-WEE1 pathway and PARP inhibitors, the most studied inhibitors, and some other DDR inhibitors as monotherapy or combination therapy in TNBC are summarized. We also highlight the possible predictive biomarkers for these DDR inhibitors and their potential combination strategies with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or other targeted agents to optimize the efficacy of DDR inhibitors in TNBC treatment. In conclusion, this review discussed the recent considerations related to the use of DDR inhibitors for TNBC and provides a perspective to address future directions and potential therapeutic strategies for patients with TNBC.

Design and Synthesis of a Trifunctional Molecular System "Programmed" to Block Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase, Induce High Levels of DNA Damage, and Inhibit the DNA Repair Enzyme (Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase) in Prostate Cancer Cells

Resistance to chemotherapy in advanced cancers can be mediated by different factors such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) overexpression and DNA repair enzymes. Therefore, current standards of care usually involve combinations of multiple treatments. Here, to reduce the adverse effects of multiple drug combinations and improve outcome, we proposed a single drug approach to block multiple overlapping effects that characterize chemoresistance. Thus, we designed a new linker that allows assembly of multiple functions (e.g., inhibition of EGFR phosphorylation, induction of DNA lesions, and blockade of their repair) into a single molecule. This led to the successful synthesis of a novel and potent combi-molecule JS230. Here, we demonstrated that in resistant prostate cancer cells overexpressing EGFR, it was capable of (a) inhibiting EGFR in a dose-dependent manner, (b) damaging DNA, and (c) sustaining the damage by inhibiting the DNA repair protein poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP). The triple mechanism of action of JS230 cumulated into growth inhibitory potency superior to that of classical two- or three-drug combinations.

The Landscape of Targeted Therapies in TNBC

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) constitutes the most aggressive molecular subtype among breast tumors. Despite progress on the underlying tumor biology, clinical outcomes for TNBC unfortunately remain poor. The median overall survival for patients with metastatic TNBC is approximately eighteen months. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment while there is a growing body of evidence that targeted therapies may be on the horizon with poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) and immune check-point inhibitors already established in the treatment paradigm of TNBC. A large number of novel therapeutic agents are being evaluated for their efficacy in TNBC. As novel therapeutics are now incorporated into clinical practice, it is clear that tumor heterogeneity and clonal evolution can result to de novo or acquired treatment resistance. As precision medicine and next generation sequencing is part of cancer diagnostics, tailored treatment approaches based on the expression of molecular markers are currently being implemented in clinical practice and clinical trial design. The scope of this review is to highlight the most relevant current knowledge regarding underlying molecular profile of TNBC and its potential application in clinical practice.

Current Understanding of RAD52 Functions: Fundamental and Therapeutic Insights

In this Special Issue, we would like to focus on the various functions of the RAD52 helicase-like protein and the current implications of such findings for cancer treatment. Over the last few years, various laboratories have discovered particular activities of mammalian RAD52—both in S and M phase—that are distinct from the auxiliary role of yeast RAD52 in homologous recombination. At DNA double-strand breaks, RAD52 was demonstrated to spur alternative pathways to compensate for the loss of homologous recombination functions. At collapsed replication forks, RAD52 activates break-induced replication. In the M phase, RAD52 promotes the finalization of DNA replication. Its compensatory role in the resolution of DNA double-strand breaks has put RAD52 in the focus of synthetic lethal strategies, which is particularly relevant for cancer treatment.

PARP Inhibitors as Therapeutics: Beyond Modulation of PARylation

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1 is an essential molecule in DNA damage response by sensing DNA damage and docking DNA repair proteins on the damaged DNA site through a type of posttranslational modification, poly (ADP-Ribosyl)ation (PARylation). PARP inhibitors, which inhibit PARylation through competitively binding to NAD+ binding site of PARP1 and PARP2, have improved clinical benefits for BRCA mutated tumors, leading to their accelerated clinical application. However, the antitumor activities of PARP inhibitors in clinical development are different, due to PARP trapping activity beyond blocking PARylation reactions. In this review, we comprehensively address the current state of knowledge regarding the mechanisms of action of PARP inhibitors. We will also discuss the different effects of PARP inhibitors in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents regarding the mechanism of regulating PARylation.

Prospective Evaluation of Universal BRCA Testing for Women With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Background

Limited published literature exists on women with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) diagnosed over the age of 60 years with breast cancer gene (BRCA) pathogenic variants. Our study determined whether the rate of BRCA pathogenic variants in a prospective cohort of TNBC patients outside the definition of current clinical genetic testing (GT) guidelines warrants a change in recommendations.

Methods

A prospective study of 395 women with TNBC underwent genetic counseling and 380 (96.2%) underwent clinical BRCA GT regardless of age of diagnosis beginning January 2014 to October 2015 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. TNBC patients older than 60 years who did not meet clinical GT guidelines had comprehensive sequencing and large rearrangement GT as part of the research protocol.

Results

Fifty-one of 380 (13.4%) women with TNBC who underwent clinical BRCA GT were BRCA positive. Of the 86 patients diagnosed at age over 60 years and underwent GT, only two (2.3%) were positive for BRCA. These two patients would have met clinical testing criteria due to family or ancestral history.

Conclusions

Our study does not support universal BRCA testing for TNBC patients diagnosed older than 60 years as their only risk factor for a BRCA pathogenic variant. Both of the positive BRCA patients older than 60 years identified would have met current National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria for testing. Therefore, our study demonstrates that the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines provide sufficient criteria for identifying BRCA pathogenic variants in women with TNBC at 60 years or younger.

DNA damage repair functions and targeted treatment in breast cancer

Cell DNA is continuously attacked by endogenous and exogenous agents, which causes DNA damage. During long-term evolution, complex defense systems for DNA damage repair are formed by cells to maintain genome stability. Defects in the DNA damage repair process may lead to various diseases, including tumors. Therefore, DNA damage repair systems have become a new anti-tumor drug target. To date, a number of inhibitors related to DNA damage repair systems have been developed, particularly for tumors with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors developed by synthetic lethality are widely used in individualized tumor therapy. In this review, we briefly introduce the mechanisms underlying DNA damage repair, particularly in breast cancer, and mainly focus on new treatments targeting the DNA damage repair pathway in breast cancer.

Treatment of Advanced Merkel Cell Carcinoma: Current Therapeutic Options and Novel Immunotherapy Approaches

Advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a very aggressive, rare neuroendocrine tumor of the skin with a high frequency of locoregional recurrence and metastasis, and a high mortality rate. Surgical resection, sentinel lymph node biopsy, and radiotherapy represent the gold standard of treatment in patients with localized disease, while chemotherapy has a significant role in the treatment of advanced disease. However, no definitive evidence on the survival impact of radiotherapy in the advanced stages has been provided to date, and response to chemotherapy remains brief in the majority of cases, indicating an urgent need for alternative approaches. Biological and genome sequencing studies have implicated multiple molecular pathways in MCC, thus leading to the development of new agents that target angiogenic factors, anti-apoptosis molecules, poly-ADP ribose polymerase, intracellular signal proteins such as the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, and peptide receptors such as somatostatin receptors. More recently, immunotherapy agents such as avelumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab, which act by blocking the programmed cell-death (PD)-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint, have shown promising results, especially in the advanced setting, and should now be considered standard of care for metastatic MCC. Current research is focusing on developing new immunotherapeutic strategies, identifying predictive biomarker to aid in the selection of patients responsive to immunotherapy, and defining combination approaches to increase efficacy in refractory patients.

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

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

Prospect for Application of PARP Inhibitor in Patients with HER2 Negative Breast Cancer

Human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) negative metastatic breast cancer (BC) accounts for 73% of BC. The molecular analysis of this disease is essential for potential options for targeted therapy. Several promising clinical strategies are being evaluated which includes endocrine therapy, modified chemotherapy, angiogenesis inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and anti-androgens. New therapeutic approaches are being developed that target BC patients with germline mutations in either BRCA1, BRCA2 as well as BRCAness, a condition in which tumors have molecular similarity to BRCA-mutated tumors. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) which are effective therapy in germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, are also observed to be effective in somatic mutations. Germline mutations in the homologous recombination pathway genes could also contribute to PARPi sensitivity. PARPi act as chemo- and radio-sensitizers by limiting the DNA-damage response and potentiating the activity of chemo- and radio-therapy when used alone or in combination with chemotherapy. Apart from PARPi as monotherapy, additional researches are ongoing in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapeutics and targeted agents in HER2 negative BC. This review aims at the most recent developments in the targeted therapy, summarizes the recent clinical trials outcomes, along with the overview of ongoing clinical trials in HER2 negative patients with BRCA1/2 mutations and sporadic tumors with BRCAness.

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

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

How shall we treat early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): from the current standard to upcoming immuno-molecular strategies

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a long-lasting orphan disease in terms of little therapeutic progress during the past several decades and still the standard of care remains chemotherapy. Experimental discovery of molecular signatures including the ‘BRCAness’ highlighted the innate heterogeneity of TNBC, generating the diversity of TNBC phenotypes. As it contributes to enhancing genomic instability, it has widened the therapeutic spectrum of TNBC. In particular, unusual sensitivity to DNA damaging agents was denoted in patients with BRCA deficiency, suggesting therapeutic benefit from platinum and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. However, regardless of enriched chemosensitivity and immunogenicity, majority of patients with TNBC still suffer from dismal clinical outcomes including early relapse and metastatic spread. Therefore, efforts into more precise and personalised treatment are critical at this point. Accordingly, the advance of multiomics has revealed novel actionable targets including PI3K-Akt-mTOR and epidermal growth factor receptor signalling pathways, which might actively participate in modulating the chemosensitivity and immune system. Also, TNBC has long been considered a potential protagonist of immunotherapy in breast cancer, supported by abundant tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and heterogeneous tumour microenvironment. Despite that, earlier studies showed somewhat unsatisfactory results of monotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors, consistently durable responses in responders were noteworthy. Based on these results, further combinatorial trials either with other chemotherapy or targeted agents are underway. Incorporating immune-molecular targets into combination as well as refining the standard chemotherapy might be the key to unlock the future of TNBC. In this review, we share the current and upcoming treatment options of TNBC in the framework of scientific and clinical data, especially focusing on early stage of TNBC.

Chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: An update

Breast cancer is the second greatest cause of death among women worldwide; it comprises a group of heterogeneous diseases that evolves due to uncontrolled cellular growth and differentiation and the loss of normal programmed cell death. There are different molecular sub-types of breast cancer; therefore, various options are selected for treatment of different forms of metastatic breast cancer. However, the use of chemotherapeutic drugs is usually accompanied by deleterious side effects and the development of drug resistance when applied for a longer period. This review offers a classification of these chemotherapeutic agents according to their modes of action and therefore improves the understanding of molecular targets that are affected during treatment. Overall, it will allow the clinician to identify more specific targets to increase the effectiveness of a drug and to reduce general toxicity, resistance and other side effects.

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of veliparib with bimonthly FOLFIRI in patients with advanced solid tumours

Background

Veliparib is a potent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. This phase 1 study aimed to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of veliparib combined with various FOLFIRI regimens in patients with solid tumours.

Methods

Patients received veliparib (10–270 mg BID, days 1–5, 15–19) and FOLFIRI (days 1–3, 15–17) in three regimens containing 5-fluorouracil 2,400 mg/m²: irinotecan 150 mg/m² and folinic acid 400 mg/m² (part 1); irinotecan 180 mg/m², folinic acid 400 mg/m², and 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m² bolus (part 2), or irinotecan 180 mg/m² (part 3). The RP2D was further evaluated in safety expansion cohorts. Preliminary antitumour activity was also assessed.

Results

Ninety-two patients received ≥1 veliparib dose. MTD was not reached; RP2D was set at 200 mg BID veliparib plus FOLFIRI (without 5-fluorouracil bolus). Most common treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (66.3%), diarrhoea, and nausea (60.9% each). Dose-limiting toxicities (n = 4) were grade 3 gastritis and grade 4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. Veliparib exposure was dose-proportional, with no effects on the pharmacokinetics of FOLFIRI components. Fifteen patients had a partial response (objective response rate, 17.6%).

Conclusions

The acceptable safety profile and preliminary antitumour activity of veliparib plus FOLFIRI support further evaluation of this combination.

Adjuvant versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer patients with BRCA mutations

PURPOSE

As triple-negative breast cancers are associated with earlier recurrences and poorer survival, optimal treatment of early-stage breast cancer is essential. Several retrospective studies in triple-negative breast cancer have reported conflicting results in overall survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy. This study aims to analyze outcomes of adjuvant versus neoadjuvant in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer with and without BRCA germline mutations.

METHODS

Patients with stage I or II triple-negative breast cancer who had BRCA testing were identified from a prospective cohort study of 4027 patients. Clinical, demographic, genetic test results, chemotherapy, recurrence, and survival data were analyzed. Overall survival and disease-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

319 patients with stage I and II triple-negative breast cancer who met eligibility criteria were included in the analysis. 187 received adjuvant chemotherapy (58.6%) and 132 received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (41.4%). 135 were BRCA positive (42.3%) and 184 were BRCA negative (57.7%). There was no significant association between overall survival or disease-free survival and treatment with neoadjuvant versus adjuvant in the overall cohort. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between patient subgroups (neoadjuvant BRCA positive, neoadjuvant BRCA negative, adjuvant BRCA positive, and adjuvant BRCA negative) with respect to either overall survival or disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant with standard anthracycline- and taxane-containing regimens results in similar disease-free survival and overall survival among patients with stage I and II triple-negative breast cancer regardless of BRCA status. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether similar results are observed with newer agents.

Bridging the divide: preclinical research discrepancies between triple-negative breast cancer cell lines and patient tumors

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most refractory subtype of breast cancer and disproportionately accounts for the majority of breast cancer related deaths. Effective treatment of this disease remains an unmet medical need. Over the past several decades, TNBC cell lines have been used as the foundation for drug development and disease modeling. However, ever-mounting research demonstrates striking differences between cell lines and clinical TNBC tumors, disconnecting bench research and actual clinical responses. In this review, we discuss the limitations of cell lines and the importance of using patients' tumors for translational research, and highlight the usage of patient-derived xenograft (PDXs) models that have emerged as a clinically relevant platform for preclinical studies. PDX tumors possess tumor heterogeneity with similar cellular, molecular, genetic and epigenetic properties akin to those found within patients' tumors. Moreover, PDX and clinical tumors possess abnormal vasculature with higher blood vessel permeability, a feature that is not always demonstrated in in vivo cell line xenografts. Development of clinically relevant, novel drug-nanoparticles capable of accumulating in PDX tumors through the enhanced permeability and retention effect in tumor vasculature may lead to new and effective TNBC treatments.

Emerging Therapeutic Strategies in Breast Cancer

The field of medical oncology is experiencing a period of rapid evolution owing to advances in the fields of genomics, tumor biology, and immunology. These disciplines have provided valuable insights into the heterogeneity between breast tumors, key oncogenic drivers, and the role of the immune system in the natural history of breast cancer. This knowledge is translating into many novel therapeutic strategies using personalized medicines, targeted drug delivery systems, and immunomodulatory agents in the treatment of both the early and metastatic stages of the disease. This review article attempts to cover the major developments in experimental therapeutics and how they relate to our understanding of breast cancer and its various biologic subtypes.

PARP inhibitors: Synthetic lethality in the clinic

PARP inhibitors (PARPi), a cancer therapy targeting poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase, are the first clinically approved drugs designed to exploit synthetic lethality, a genetic concept proposed nearly a century ago. Tumors arising in patients who carry germline mutations in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 are sensitive to PARPi because they have a specific type of DNA repair defect. PARPi also show promising activity in more common cancers that share this repair defect. However, as with other targeted therapies, resistance to PARPi arises in advanced disease. In addition, determining the optimal use of PARPi within drug combination approaches has been challenging. Nevertheless, the preclinical discovery of PARPi synthetic lethality and the route to clinical approval provide interesting lessons for the development of other therapies. Here, we discuss current knowledge of PARP inhibitors and potential ways to maximize their clinical effectiveness.