1
|
Joris S, Denys H, Collignon J, Rasschaert M, T'Kint de Roodenbeke D, Duhoux FP, Canon JL, Tejpar S, Mebis J, Decoster L, Aftimos P, De Grève J. Efficacy of olaparib in advanced cancers with germline or somatic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 and ATM, a Belgian Precision tumor-agnostic phase II study. ESMO Open 2023; 8:102041. [PMID: 37852034 PMCID: PMC10774963 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.102041] [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: 06/29/2023] [Revised: 09/20/2023] [Accepted: 09/21/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Belgian Precision initiative aims to maximize the implementation of tumor-agnostic next-generation sequencing in patients with advanced cancer and enhance access to molecularly guided treatment options. Academic tumor-agnostic basket phase II studies are part of this initiative. The current investigator-driven trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of olaparib in advanced cancers with a (likely) pathogenic mutation (germline or somatic) in a gene that plays a role in homologous recombination (HR). PATIENTS AND METHODS This open-label, multi-cohort, phase II study examines the efficacy of olaparib in patients with an HR gene mutation in their tumor and disease progression on standard of care. Patients with a somatic or germline mutation in the same gene define a cohort. For each cohort, a Simon minimax two-stage design was used. If a response was observed in the first 13 patients, 14 additional patients were included. Here, we report the results on four completed cohorts: patients with a BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 or ATM mutation. RESULTS The overall objective response rate across different tumor types was 11% in the BRCA1-mutated (n = 27) and 21% in the BRCA2-mutated (n = 27) cohorts. Partial responses were seen in pancreatic cancer, gallbladder cancer, endocrine carcinoma of the pancreas and parathyroid cancer. One patient with a BRCA2 germline-mutated colon cancer has an ongoing complete response with 19+ months on treatment. Median progression-free survival in responding patients was 14+ months (5-34+ months). The clinical benefit rate was 63% in the BRCA1-mutated and 46% in the BRCA2-mutated cohorts. No clinical activity was observed in the ATM (n = 13) and CHEK2 (n = 14) cohorts. CONCLUSION Olaparib showed efficacy in different cancer types harboring somatic or germline mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes but not in ATM and CHEK2. Patients with any cancer type harboring BRCA1/2 mutations should have access to olaparib.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Joris
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Brussels.
| | - H Denys
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent
| | | | | | | | - F P Duhoux
- Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels
| | | | | | | | - L Decoster
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Brussels
| | - P Aftimos
- Institut Jules Bordet-Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels
| | - J De Grève
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Brussels; Department of Medical Genetics, UZ Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Aoun R, El Hadi C, Tahtouh R, El Habre R, Hilal G. Microarray analysis of breast cancer gene expression profiling in response to 2-deoxyglucose, metformin, and glucose starvation. Cancer Cell Int 2022; 22:123. [PMID: 35305635 PMCID: PMC8933915 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-022-02542-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2021] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women. Altering glucose metabolism and its effects on cancer progression and treatment resistance is an emerging interest in BC research. For instance, combining chemotherapy with glucose-lowering drugs (2-deoxyglucose (2-DG), metformin (MET)) or glucose starvation (GS) has shown better outcomes than with chemotherapy alone. However, the genes and molecular mechanisms that govern the action of these glucose deprivation conditions have not been fully elucidated. Here, we investigated the differentially expressed genes in MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 BC cell lines upon treatment with glucose-lowering drugs (2-DG, MET) and GS using microarray analysis to study the difference in biological functions between the glucose challenges and their effect on the vulnerability of BC cells. Methods MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells were treated with 20 mM MET or 4 mM 2-DG for 48 h. GS was performed by gradually decreasing the glucose concentration in the culture medium to 0 g/L, in which the cells remained with fetal bovine serum for one week. Expression profiling was carried out using Affymetrix Human Clariom S microarrays. Differentially expressed genes were obtained from the Transcriptome Analysis Console and enriched using DAVID and R packages. Results Our results showed that MDA-MB-231 cells were more responsive to glucose deprivation than MCF-7 cells. Endoplasmic reticulum stress response and cell cycle inhibition were detected after all three glucose deprivations in MDA-MB-231 cells and only under the metformin and GS conditions in MCF-7 cells. Induction of apoptosis and inhibition of DNA replication were observed with all three treatments in MDA-MB-231 cells and metformin-treated MCF-7 cells. Upregulation of cellular response to reactive oxygen species and inhibition of DNA repair mechanisms resulted after metformin and GS administration in MDA-MB-231 cell lines and metformin-treated MCF-7 cells. Autophagy was induced after 2-DG treatment in MDA-MB-231 cells and after metformin in MCF-7 cells. Finally, inhibition of DNA methylation were observed only with GS in MDA-MB-231 cells. Conclusion The procedure used to process cancer cells and analyze their expression data distinguishes our study from others. GS had the greatest effect on breast cancer cells compared to 2-DG and MET. Combining MET and GS could restrain both cell lines, making them more vulnerable to conventional chemotherapy. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12935-022-02542-w.
Collapse
|
3
|
Kim TW, Taieb J, Gurary EB, Lerman N, Cui K, Yoshino T. Olaparib with or without bevacizumab or bevacizumab and 5-fluorouracil in advanced colorectal cancer: Phase III LYNK-003. Future Oncol 2021; 17:5013-5022. [PMID: 34779646 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2021-0899] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy with a regimen such as FOLFOX with or without targeted therapy is a standard of care option for advanced colorectal cancer; however, long-term exposure to oxaliplatin is associated with cumulative toxicity. Growing evidence suggests maintenance therapy with a less intensive regimen after platinum-based induction therapy can provide continuing benefit with reduced toxicity. We describe the rationale and design of the Phase III LYNK-003 trial, which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of olaparib with or without bevacizumab compared with 5-fluoruracil plus bevacizumab in patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer that has not progressed on an induction course of FOLFOX plus bevacizumab. The primary end point is progression-free survival by independent central review; secondary end points include overall survival, objective response, duration of response and safety. Clinical trial registration: NCT04456699.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tae Won Kim
- Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan, Seoul 05505, South Korea
| | - Julien Taieb
- Georges Pompidou European Hospital, SIRIC-CARPEM, Université de Paris, Paris 75015, France
| | - Ellen B Gurary
- Oncology Late Stage Development, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 07033, USA
| | - Nati Lerman
- Oncology Late Stage Development, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 07033, USA
| | - Karen Cui
- Late Development Oncology, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD 20878, USA
| | - Takayuki Yoshino
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medicine, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Orsi G, Di Marco M, Cavaliere A, Niger M, Bozzarelli S, Giordano G, Noventa S, Rapposelli IG, Garajova I, Tortora G, Rodriquenz MG, Bittoni A, Penzo E, De Lorenzo S, Peretti U, Paratore C, Bernardini I, Mosconi S, Spallanzani A, Macchini M, Tamburini E, Bencardino K, Giommoni E, Scartozzi M, Forti L, Valente MM, Militello AM, Cascinu S, Milella M, Reni M. Chemotherapy toxicity and activity in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and germline BRCA1-2 pathogenic variants (gBRCA1-2pv): a multicenter survey. ESMO Open 2021; 6:100238. [PMID: 34392104 PMCID: PMC8371213 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Revised: 07/15/2021] [Accepted: 07/20/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Germline BRCA1-2 pathogenic variants (gBRCA1-2pv)-related pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) showed increased sensitivity to DNA cross-linking agents. This study aimed at exploring safety profile, dose intensity, and activity of different chemotherapy regimens in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS gBRCA1-2pv PDAC patients of any age and clinical tumor stage who completed a first course of chemotherapy were eligible. A descriptive analysis of chemotherapy toxicity, dose intensity, response, and survival outcomes was performed. RESULTS A total of 85 gBRCA1-2pv PDAC patients treated in 21 Italian centers between December 2008 and March 2021were enrolled. Seventy-four patients were assessable for toxicity and dose intensity, 83 for outcome. Dose intensity was as follows: nab-paclitaxel 72%, gemcitabine 76% (AG); cisplatin 75%, nab-paclitaxel 73%, capecitabine 73%, and gemcitabine 65% (PAXG); fluorouracil 35%, irinotecan 58%, and oxaliplatin 64% (FOLFIRINOX). When compared with the literature, grade 3-4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and diarrhea were increased with PAXG, and unmodified with AG and FOLFIRINOX. RECIST responses were numerically higher with the three- (81%) or four-drug (73%) platinum-containing regimens that outperformed AG (41%) and oxaliplatin-based doublets (56%). Carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) reduction >89% at nadir was reported in two-third of metastatic patients treated with triplets and quadruplets, as opposed to 33% and 45% of patients receiving oxaliplatin-based doublets or AG, respectively. All patients receiving AG experienced disease progression, with a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 6.4 months, while patients treated with platinum-containing triplets or quadruplets had an mPFS >10.8 months. Albeit still immature, data on overall survival seemed to parallel those on PFS. CONCLUSIONS Our data, as opposed to figures expected from the literature, highlighted that platinum-based regimens provoked an increased toxicity on proliferating cells, when dose intensity was maintained, or an as-expected toxicity, when dose intensity was reduced, while no change in toxicity and dose intensity was evident with AG. Furthermore, an apparently improved outcome of platinum-based triplets or quadruplets over other regimens was observed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Orsi
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - M Di Marco
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, S. Orsola - Malpighi University Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - A Cavaliere
- Section of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona School of Medicine and Verona University Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - M Niger
- Medical Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - S Bozzarelli
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Humanitas Cancer Center, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Rozzano (Milan), Italy
| | - G Giordano
- Unit of Medical Oncology and Biomolecular Therapy, Policlinico Riuniti, Foggia, Italy; Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - S Noventa
- Department of Medical Oncology, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - I G Rapposelli
- Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori "Dino Amadori" - IRST, Meldola, Italy
| | - I Garajova
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - G Tortora
- Unit of Medical Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario, Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - M G Rodriquenz
- Oncology Unit, Ospedale IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo (FG), Italy
| | - A Bittoni
- Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti Umberto I, GM Lancisi, G Salesi di Ancona, Ancona, Italy
| | - E Penzo
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - S De Lorenzo
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - U Peretti
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - C Paratore
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, Ordine Mauriziano Hospital, Turin, Italy
| | - I Bernardini
- Medical Oncology Unit, Ospedale Ramazzini, Carpi (MO), Italy
| | - S Mosconi
- Oncology Unit, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy
| | - A Spallanzani
- Department of Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - M Macchini
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - E Tamburini
- Medical Oncology and Palliative Care Department, Azienda Ospedaliera Cardinale G. Panico, Tricase-Lecce, Italy
| | - K Bencardino
- Niguarda Cancer Center, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - E Giommoni
- Medical Oncology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Firenze, Italy
| | - M Scartozzi
- Medical Oncology, University and University Hospital, Cagliari, Italy
| | - L Forti
- Medical Oncology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy
| | - M M Valente
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - A M Militello
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - S Cascinu
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - M Milella
- Section of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona School of Medicine and Verona University Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - M Reni
- Medical Oncology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Miglietta F, Dieci MV, Griguolo G, Guarneri V. Neoadjuvant approach as a platform for treatment personalization: focus on HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 2021; 98:102222. [PMID: 34023642 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102222] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2021] [Revised: 05/06/2021] [Accepted: 05/09/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
The neoadjuvant setting provides unquestionable clinical benefits for high-risk breast cancer (BC) patients, mainly in terms of expansion of locoregional treatment options and prognostic stratification. Additionally, it is also emerging as a strategical tool in the research field. In the present review, by focusing on HER2-positive and triple-negative subtypes, we examined the role of the neoadjuvant setting as a research platform to facilitate and rationalize the placement of escalation strategies, promote the adoption of biomarker-driven approaches for the investigation of de-escalated treatments, and foster the conduction of comprehensive translational analyses, thus ultimately aiming at pursuing treatment personalization. The solid prognostic role of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy, and its use as a surrogate endpoint to accelerate the drug approval process were discussed. In this context, available data on escalated treatment strategies capable of enhancing pathologic complete response (pCR) rate or improving prognosis of patients with residual disease (RD) after neoadjuvant treatment, were comprehensively reviewed. We also summarized evidence regarding the possibility of obtaining pCR with de-escalated strategies, with particular emphasis on the role of biomarker-driven approaches for patient selection. Pitfalls of the dichotomy of pCR/RD were also deepened, and data on alternative/complementary biomarkers with a possible clinical relevance in this regard were reviewed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Miglietta
- Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy; Medical Oncology 2, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV-IRCCS, Padova, Italy
| | - Maria Vittoria Dieci
- Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy; Medical Oncology 2, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV-IRCCS, Padova, Italy.
| | - Gaia Griguolo
- Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy; Medical Oncology 2, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV-IRCCS, Padova, Italy
| | - Valentina Guarneri
- Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy; Medical Oncology 2, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV-IRCCS, Padova, Italy
| |
Collapse
|