Talazoparib in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer and a Germline BRCA Mutation

BACKGROUND The poly(adenosine diphosphate‐ribose) inhibitor talazoparib has shown antitumor activity in patients with advanced breast cancer and germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2). METHODS We conducted a randomized, open‐label, phase 3 trial in which patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation were assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive talazoparib (1 mg once daily) or standard single‐agent therapy of the physician's choice (capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine in continuous 21‐day cycles). The primary end point was progression‐free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS Of the 431 patients who underwent randomization, 287 were assigned to receive talazoparib and 144 were assigned to receive standard therapy. Median progressionfree survival was significantly longer in the talazoparib group than in the standardtherapy group (8.6 months vs. 5.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.71; P<0.001). The interim median hazard ratio for death was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.55 to 1.06; P = 0.11 [57% of projected events]). The objective response rate was higher in the talazoparib group than in the standard‐therapy group (62.6% vs. 27.2%; odds ratio, 5.0; 95% CI, 2.9 to 8.8; P<0.001). Hematologic grade 3‐4 adverse events (primarily anemia) occurred in 55% of the patients who received talazoparib and in 38% of the patients who received standard therapy; nonhematologic grade 3 adverse events occurred in 32% and 38% of the patients, respectively. Patient‐reported outcomes favored talazoparib; significant overall improvements and significant delays in the time to clinically meaningful deterioration according to both the global health status‐quality‐of‐life and breast symptoms scales were observed. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation, single‐agent talazoparib provided a significant benefit over standard chemotherapy with respect to progression‐free survival. Patient‐reported outcomes were superior with talazoparib. (Funded by Medivation [Pfizer]; EMBRACA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01945775.)

[1]  Paul Ellis,et al.  Carboplatin in BRCA1/2-mutated and triple-negative breast cancer BRCAness subgroups: the TNT Trial , 2018, Nature Medicine.

[2]  S. Loi,et al.  Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Patients with a Germline BRCA Mutation. , 2017, New England Journal of Medicine.

[3]  David C. Smith,et al.  Phase I, Dose-Escalation, Two-Part Trial of the PARP Inhibitor Talazoparib in Patients with Advanced Germline BRCA1/2 Mutations and Selected Sporadic Cancers. , 2017, Cancer discovery.

[4]  P. Fasching,et al.  Final results of a phase 2 study of talazoparib (TALA) following platinum or multiple cytotoxic regimens in advanced breast cancer patients (pts) with germline BRCA1/2 mutations (ABRAZO). , 2017 .

[5]  Alan Ashworth,et al.  PARP inhibitors: Synthetic lethality in the clinic , 2017, Science.

[6]  Y. Pommier,et al.  Stereospecific PARP Trapping by BMN 673 and Comparison with Olaparib and Rucaparib , 2013, Molecular Cancer Therapeutics.

[7]  A. Ashworth,et al.  BMN 673, a Novel and Highly Potent PARP1/2 Inhibitor for the Treatment of Human Cancers with DNA Repair Deficiency , 2013, Clinical Cancer Research.

[8]  Y. Pommier,et al.  Trapping of PARP1 and PARP2 by Clinical PARP Inhibitors. , 2012, Cancer research.

[9]  J. Lubiński,et al.  Results of a phase II open-label, non-randomized trial of cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with BRCA1-positive metastatic breast cancer , 2012, Breast Cancer Research.

[10]  N. Curtin,et al.  The potential for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in cancer therapy , 2011, Therapeutic advances in medical oncology.

[11]  Thomas Helleday,et al.  The underlying mechanism for the PARP and BRCA synthetic lethality: Clearing up the misunderstandings , 2011, Molecular oncology.

[12]  S. Kaufmann,et al.  PARP inhibition: PARP1 and beyond , 2010, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[13]  D. Osoba,et al.  Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  M. Pike,et al.  Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. analysis and examples. , 1977, British Journal of Cancer.

[15]  P. Armitage,et al.  Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. I. Introduction and design. , 1976, British Journal of Cancer.

[16]  J. Haybittle,et al.  Repeated assessment of results in clinical trials of cancer treatment. , 1971, The British journal of radiology.