Englander Institute for Precision Medicine

Rucaparib in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Harboring a or Gene Alteration.

TitleRucaparib in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Harboring a or Gene Alteration.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2020
AuthorsAbida W, Patnaik A, Campbell D, Shapiro J, Bryce AH, McDermott R, Sautois B, Vogelzang NJ, Bambury RM, Voog E, Zhang J, Piulats JM, Ryan CJ, Merseburger AS, Daugaard G, Heidenreich A, Fizazi K, Higano CS, Krieger LE, Sternberg CN, Watkins SP, Despain D, Simmons AD, Loehr A, Dowson M, Golsorkhi T, Chowdhury S
Corporate AuthorsTRITON2 investigators
JournalJ Clin Oncol
Volume38
Issue32
Pagination3763-3772
Date Published2020 Nov 10
ISSN1527-7755
KeywordsAged, Aged, 80 and over, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic, Germ-Line Mutation, Humans, Indoles, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Metastasis, Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors, Progression-Free Survival, Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant
Abstract

PURPOSE: or () alterations are common in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and may confer sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. We present results from patients with mCRPC associated with a alteration treated with rucaparib 600 mg twice daily in the phase II TRITON2 study.

METHODS: We enrolled patients who progressed after one to two lines of next-generation androgen receptor-directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Efficacy and safety populations included patients with a deleterious alteration who received ≥ 1 dose of rucaparib. Key efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 in patients with measurable disease as assessed by blinded, independent radiology review and by investigators) and locally assessed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline) rate.

RESULTS: Efficacy and safety populations included 115 patients with a alteration with or without measurable disease. Confirmed ORRs per independent radiology review and investigator assessment were 43.5% (95% CI, 31.0% to 56.7%; 27 of 62 patients) and 50.8% (95% CI, 38.1% to 63.4%; 33 of 65 patients), respectively. The confirmed PSA response rate was 54.8% (95% CI, 45.2% to 64.1%; 63 of 115 patients). ORRs were similar for patients with a germline or somatic alteration and for patients with a or alteration, while a higher PSA response rate was observed in patients with a alteration. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (25.2%; 29 of 115 patients).

CONCLUSION: Rucaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC and a deleterious alteration, but with a manageable safety profile consistent with that reported in other solid tumor types.

DOI10.1200/JCO.20.01035
Alternate JournalJ Clin Oncol
PubMed ID32795228
PubMed Central IDPMC7655021
Grant ListP30 CA008748 / CA / NCI NIH HHS / United States
P50 CA092629 / CA / NCI NIH HHS / United States
P50 CA180995 / CA / NCI NIH HHS / United States

Weill Cornell Medicine Englander Institute for Precision Medicine 413 E 69th Street
Belfer Research Building
New York, NY 10021