Olaparib combined with abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial

Background Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations have a better response to treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib than patients without HRR mutations. Preclinical data suggest synergy between olaparib and androgen pathway inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy of olaparib plus the androgen pathway inhibitor abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer regardless of HRR mutation status. Methods We carried out this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at 41 urological oncology sites in 11 countries across Europe and North America. Eligible male patients were aged 18 years or older with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had previously received docetaxel and were candidates for abiraterone treatment. Patients were excluded if they had received more than two previous lines of chemotherapy, or had previous exposure to second-generation antihormonal drugs. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice or web response system, without stratification, to receive oral olaparib 300 mg twice daily or placebo. All patients received oral abiraterone 1000 mg once daily and prednisone or prednisolone 5 mg twice daily. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS; based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 criteria). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly assigned patients, and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of olaparib or placebo. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01972217, and is no longer recruiting patients. Findings Between Nov 25, 2014, and July 14, 2015, 171 patients were assessed for eligibility. Of those, 142 patients were randomly assigned to receive olaparib and abiraterone (n=71) or placebo and abiraterone (n=71). The clinical cutoff date for the final analysis was Sept 22, 2017. Median rPFS was 13·8 months (95% CI 10·8–20·4) with olaparib and abiraterone and 8·2 months (5·5–9·7) with placebo and abiraterone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·65, 95% CI 0·44–0·97, p=0·034). The most common grade 1–2 adverse events were nausea (26 [37%] patients in the olaparib group vs 13 [18%] patients in the placebo group), constipation (18 [25%] vs eight [11%]), and back pain (17 [24%] vs 13 [18%]). 38 (54%) of 71 patients in the olaparib and abiraterone group and 20 (28%) of 71 patients in the placebo and abiraterone group had grade 3 or worse adverse events, including anaemia (in 15 [21%] of 71 patients vs none of 71), pneumonia (four [6%] vs three [4%]), and myocardial infarction (four [6%] vs none). Serious adverse events were reported by 24 (34%) of 71 patients receiving olaparib and abiraterone (seven of which were related to treatment) and 13 (18%) of 71 patients receiving placebo and abiraterone (one of which was related to treatment). One treatment-related death (pneumonitis) occurred in the olaparib and abiraterone group. Interpretation Olaparib in combination with abiraterone provided clinical efficacy benefit for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer compared with abiraterone alone. More serious adverse events were observed in patients who received olaparib and abiraterone than abiraterone alone. Our data suggest that the combination of olaparib and abiraterone might provide an additional clinical benefit to a broad population of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Targeted Inhibition of CYP11A1 in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Targeted Inhibition of CYP11A1 in Prostate CancerIn this single-arm, multicenter, combined phase 1 and phase 2 study, patients with metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma with progression on prior androgen receptor pathway inhibitors and taxane-based chemotherapy were treated with ODM-208. A decrease in prostate-specific antigen levels of 50% or more occurred in 16/42 (38.1%) and 24/45 (53.3%) in phase 1 and 2 respectively. Responses mainly occurred in patients with androgen receptor mutations. Adrenal insufficiency was the dose-limiting toxicity.</p

Phase II Study of Biweekly Plitidepsin as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Urothelium

The objective of this exploratory, open-label, single-arm, phase II clinical trial was to evaluate plitidepsin (5 mg/m2) administered as a 3-hour continuous intravenous infusion every two weeks to patients with locally advanced/metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium who relapsed/progressed after first-line chemotherapy. Treatment cycles were repeated for up to 12 cycles or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient refusal or treatment delay for >2 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate according to RECIST. Secondary endpoints were the rate of SD lasting ≥ 6 months and time-to-event variables. Toxicity was assessed using NCI-CTC v. 3.0. Twenty-one patients received 57 treatment cycles. No objective tumor responses occurred. SD lasting <6 months was observed in two of 18 evaluable patients. With a median follow-up of 4.6 months, the median PFR and the median OS were 1.4 months and 2.3 months, respectively. The most common AEs were mild to moderate nausea, fatigue, myalgia and anorexia. Anemia, lymphopenia, and increases in transaminases, alkaline phosphatase and creatinine were the most frequent laboratory abnormalities. No severe neutropenia occurred. Treatment was feasible and generally well tolerated in this patient population; however the lack of antitumor activity precludes further studies of plitidepsin in this setting

Niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DNA repair gene defects (GALAHAD): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

Background Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers are enriched for DNA repair gene defects (DRDs) that can be susceptible to synthetic lethality through inhibition of PARP proteins. We evaluated the anti-tumour activity and safety of the PARP inhibitor niraparib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers and DRDs who progressed on previous treatment with an androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mixed histology accepted, with the exception of the small cell pure phenotype) and DRDs (assessed in blood, tumour tissue, or saliva), with progression on a previous next-generation androgen signalling inhibitor and a taxane per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 or Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, were eligible. Enrolled patients received niraparib 300 mg orally once daily until treatment discontinuation, death, or study termination. For the final study analysis, all patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis population; patients with germline pathogenic or somatic biallelic pathogenic alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA cohort) or biallelic alterations in other prespecified DRDs (non-BRCA cohort) were included in the efficacy analysis population. The primary endpoint was objective response rate in patients with BRCA alterations and measurable disease (measurable BRCA cohort). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02854436. Findings Between Sept 28, 2016, and June 26, 2020, 289 patients were enrolled, of whom 182 (63%) had received three or more systemic therapies for prostate cancer. 223 (77%) of 289 patients were included in the overall efficacy analysis population, which included BRCA (n=142) and non-BRCA (n=81) cohorts. At final analysis, with a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 6·6–13·3), the objective response rate in the measurable BRCA cohort (n=76) was 34·2% (95% CI 23·7–46·0). In the safety analysis population, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade were nausea (169 [58%] of 289), anaemia (156 [54%]), and vomiting (111 [38%]); the most common grade 3 or worse events were haematological (anaemia in 95 [33%] of 289; thrombocytopenia in 47 [16%]; and neutropenia in 28 [10%]). Of 134 (46%) of 289 patients with at least one serious treatment-emergent adverse event, the most common were also haematological (thrombocytopenia in 17 [6%] and anaemia in 13 [4%]). Two adverse events with fatal outcome (one patient with urosepsis in the BRCA cohort and one patient with sepsis in the non-BRCA cohort) were deemed possibly related to niraparib treatment. Interpretation Niraparib is tolerable and shows anti-tumour activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and DRDs, particularly in those with BRCA alterations

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum-based therapy (RANGE): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

Few treatments with a distinct mechanism of action are available for patients with platinum-refractory advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of treatment with docetaxel plus either ramucirumab-a human IgG1 VEGFR-2 antagonist-or placebo in this patient population

Report of a young man with three successive curable cancers.

International audienc

Real World Data of Diagnosis, Survival, and Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Non Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

Introduction: Metastatic non clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is an heterogenous group, usually excluded from phase 3 trials. We report real life data of prognosis and systemic management of those patients.Methods: We retrospectively included 102 metastatic nccRCC patients (unspecified papillary, n=10; type 1 and 2 papillary n=10 and n=32; translocation RCC, n=9; chromophobe, n=14; collecting duct, n=14) treated between 2006 and 2020.Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: Among patients who underwent pathological review, 40.8% presented a complete histological discordance. First line treatments were mainly tyrosine kinase inhibitor (60.8%), combination including immunotherapy (7.8%) or combination of chemotherapy (13.7%). Median ORR ranged from 0% in unspecified papillary RCC to 42.9% in type 1 papillary RCC. Median PFS ranged from 2.9 months in collecting duct carcinoma to 10.9 months in type 1 papillary RCC. Median OS ranged from 6.8 months in collecting duct carcinoma to 29.1 months in MiT family translocation RCC. Thirty (29.4%) patients were included in a treatment trial during their treatment course.Conclusion: Metastatic nccRCC patients have variable prognosis due to heterogeneity of histological subtypes. Their diagnosis and access to therapeutic innovation remain suboptimal. Dedicated prospective trials are needed

Phase II study of biweekly plitidepsin as second-line therapy for advanced or metastatic ttransitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium

Abstract: The objective of this exploratory, open-label, single-arm, phase II clinical trial was to evaluate plitidepsin (5 mg/m 2) administered as a 3-hour continuous intravenous infusion every two weeks to patients with locally advanced/metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium who relapsed/progressed after first-line chemotherapy. Treatment cycles were repeated for up to 12 cycles or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient refusal or treatment delay for&gt;2 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate according to RECIST. Secondary endpoints were the rate of SD lasting ≥6 months and time-to-event variables. Toxicity was assessed using NCI-CTC v. 3.0. Twenty-one patients received 57 treatment cycles. No objective tumor responses occurred. SD lasting &lt;6 months was observed in two of 18 evaluableMar. Drugs 2009, 7 452 patients. With a median follow-up of 4.6 months, the median PFR and the median OS wer

Intermediate analysis of a phase II trial assessing gemcitabine and cisplatin in locoregional or metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma

International audienceOBJECTIVE:To perform a phase II study evaluating a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin in a population of patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the penis and unresected locoregional lymph nodes and/or distant metastases, who had a poor prognosis with no standard of chemotherapy.PATIENTS AND METHODS:Eligible patients had histologically confirmed SCC of the penis with unresected locoregional lymph nodes and/or distant metastases, at initial diagnosis or at relapse, and measurable disease as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Patients were treated with a combination of gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on day 1 over 30 min and cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1 over 1 h, every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate; secondary endpoints were time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS).RESULTS:In all, 25 patients were included in the first phase of the study between February 2004 and January 2010 and received a median of five cycles. For the intent-to-treat population, two patients (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-26.0) presented an objective response and 13 patients (52%) had stable disease (95% CI 35.5-76.8). The median TTP was at 5.48 months (95% CI 2.40-11.73). After a median follow-up of 26.97 months (95% CI 17.77, not reached), nine patients were still alive. The median OS and 2-year OS rate were respectively estimated at 14.98 months (95% CI 9.76-32.9) and 39.32% (95% CI 19.15-59.03). Eleven patients had a serious adverse event (44%), 24% being relied to chemotherapy.CONCLUSION:Every 2 weeks' administration of the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin showed non-significant responses in patients with unresected locoregional or metastatic penile SCC. Despite manageable side-effects, this combination cannot be recommended as a standard of care, due to disappointing response rates seen in this negative study. Further regimens should be explored to improve the OS of these patients with poor prognosis