-
Clinical Cancer Research : An Official... Aug 2016BRCA1/2-mutated and some sporadic triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) have DNA repair defects and are sensitive to DNA-damaging therapeutics. Recently, three...
PURPOSE
BRCA1/2-mutated and some sporadic triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) have DNA repair defects and are sensitive to DNA-damaging therapeutics. Recently, three independent DNA-based measures of genomic instability were developed on the basis of loss of heterozygosity (LOH), telomeric allelic imbalance (TAI), and large-scale state transitions (LST).
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
We assessed a combined homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score, an unweighted sum of LOH, TAI, and LST scores, in three neoadjuvant TNBC trials of platinum-containing therapy. We then tested the association of HR deficiency, defined as HRD score ≥42 or BRCA1/2 mutation, with response to platinum-based therapy.
RESULTS
In a trial of neoadjuvant platinum, gemcitabine, and iniparib, HR deficiency predicted residual cancer burden score of 0 or I (RCB 0/I) and pathologic complete response (pCR; OR = 4.96, P = 0.0036; OR = 6.52, P = 0.0058). HR deficiency remained a significant predictor of RCB 0/I when adjusted for clinical variables (OR = 5.86, P = 0.012). In two other trials of neoadjuvant cisplatin therapy, HR deficiency predicted RCB 0/I and pCR (OR = 10.18, P = 0.0011; OR = 17.00, P = 0.0066). In a multivariable model of RCB 0/I, HR deficiency retained significance when clinical variables were included (OR = 12.08, P = 0.0017). When restricted to BRCA1/2 nonmutated tumors, response was higher in patients with high HRD scores: RCB 0/I P = 0.062, pCR P = 0.063 in the neoadjuvant platinum, gemcitabine, and iniparib trial; RCB 0/I P = 0.0039, pCR P = 0.018 in the neoadjuvant cisplatin trials.
CONCLUSIONS
HR deficiency identifies TNBC tumors, including BRCA1/2 nonmutated tumors more likely to respond to platinum-containing therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 22(15); 3764-73. ©2016 AACR.
Topics: Allelic Imbalance; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Biomarkers, Tumor; Female; Genes, BRCA1; Genes, BRCA2; Homologous Recombination; Humans; Loss of Heterozygosity; Mutation; Neoplasm Staging; Odds Ratio; Platinum; Prognosis; Telomere; Treatment Outcome; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 26957554
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2477 -
Pharmacological Research Jun 2018In women, breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis and second most common cause of cancer death. More than half of breast cancer patients will develop... (Review)
Review
In women, breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis and second most common cause of cancer death. More than half of breast cancer patients will develop metastases to the bone, liver, lung, or brain. Breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM) confers a poor prognosis, as current therapeutic options of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy rarely significantly extend life and are considered palliative. Within the realm of chemotherapy, the last decade has seen an explosion of novel chemotherapeutics involving targeting agents and unique dosage forms. We provide a historical overview of BCBM chemotherapy, review the mechanisms of new agents such as poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors, cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors, phosphatidyl inositol 3-kinaseinhibitors, estrogen pathway antagonists for hormone-receptor positive BCBM; tyrosine kinase inhibitors, antibodies, and conjugates for HER2 BCBM; repurposed cytotoxic chemotherapy for triple negative BCBM; and the utilization of these new agents and formulations in ongoing clinical trials. The mechanisms of novel dosage formulations such as nanoparticles, liposomes, pegylation, the concepts of enhanced permeation and retention, and drugs utilizing these concepts involved in clinical trials are also discussed. These new treatments provide a promising outlook in the treatment of BCBM.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Blood-Brain Barrier; Brain Neoplasms; Breast Neoplasms; Drug Delivery Systems; Humans
PubMed: 29604436
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2018.03.021 -
The Oncologist Mar 2023Iniparib (BSI-201), a novel anticancer agent thought to have poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitory activity and synergy with both gemcitabine and carboplatin...
BACKGROUND
Iniparib (BSI-201), a novel anticancer agent thought to have poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitory activity and synergy with both gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) was evaluated in 2 cohorts with GC.
METHODS
Parallel multicenter, single-arm, phase II studies using a Simon two-stage design. Eligible patients had a histological diagnosis of epithelial ovarian carcinoma, fallopian tube cancer, or primary peritoneal carcinoma and demonstration of platinum-sensitive (≥6 months [mo]) or -resistant disease (relapse 2-6 mo post-platinum). Carboplatin (AUC 4 IV day 1), gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 8), and iniparib (5.6 mg/kg IV days 1, 4, 8, and 11) were given on a 21-day cycle.
RESULTS
The overall response rate (ORR RECIST 1.0) in platinum sensitive disease was 66% (95% CI, 49-80) with a higher response rate in the 15 pts with germline BRCA mutations (gBRCAmut) (73%). Median PFS was 9.9 (95% CI, 8.2-11.3) months. In the platinum resistant population the ORR was 26% (95% CI, 14-42), however in the 11 pts for whom BRCA mutation was present, the best overall response was PR in 5 (46%). Median PFS was 6.8 months (range, 5.7-7.7 months). Notably, among the 17 CA-125-response-evaluable patients who did not achieve tumor response, 7 (41.2%) patients had a CA125 response, and 93% has clinical benefit (CR + PR + SD). The GCI combination was generally well tolerated despite a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia, with no new toxicities.
CONCLUSIONS
Given the subsequent lack of efficacy demonstrated for iniparib in breast cancer, these are studies of GC and demonstrate a higher than traditionally appreciated activity in patients with platinum-sensitive and -resistant recurrent ovarian cancer, especially in patients that harbor a BRCA mutation, resetting the benchmark for efficacy in phase II trials. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01033292 & NCT01033123).
Topics: Humans; Female; Gemcitabine; Carboplatin; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Ovarian Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Disease-Free Survival; Neutropenia; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Recurrence; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
PubMed: 36718018
DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac275 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Jun 2015This study was designed to assess efficacy, safety, and predictors of response to iniparib in combination with gemcitabine and carboplatin in early-stage triple-negative...
Phase II Study of Gemcitabine, Carboplatin, and Iniparib As Neoadjuvant Therapy for Triple-Negative and BRCA1/2 Mutation-Associated Breast Cancer With Assessment of a Tumor-Based Measure of Genomic Instability: PrECOG 0105.
PURPOSE
This study was designed to assess efficacy, safety, and predictors of response to iniparib in combination with gemcitabine and carboplatin in early-stage triple-negative and BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancer.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
This single-arm phase II study enrolled patients with stage I to IIIA (T ≥ 1 cm) estrogen receptor-negative (≤ 5%), progesterone receptor-negative (≤ 5%), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative or BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancer. Neoadjuvant gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously [IV] on days 1 and 8), carboplatin (area under curve of 2 IV on days 1 and 8), and iniparib (5.6 mg/kg IV on days 1, 4, 8, and 11) were administered every 21 days for four cycles, until the protocol was amended to six cycles. The primary end point was pathologic complete response (no invasive carcinoma in breast or axilla). All patients underwent comprehensive BRCA1/2 genotyping, and homologous recombination deficiency was assessed by loss of heterozygosity (HRD-LOH) in pretreatment core breast biopsies.
RESULTS
Among 80 patients, median age was 48 years; 19 patients (24%) had germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations; clinical stage was I (13%), IIA (36%), IIB (36%), and IIIA (15%). Overall pathologic complete response rate in the intent-to-treat population (n = 80) was 36% (90% CI, 27 to 46). Mean HRD-LOH scores were higher in responders compared with nonresponders (P = .02) and remained significant when BRCA1/2 germline mutations carriers were excluded (P = .021).
CONCLUSION
Preoperative combination of gemcitabine, carboplatin, and iniparib is active in the treatment of early-stage triple-negative and BRCA1/2 mutation-associated breast cancer. The HRD-LOH assay was able to identify patients with sporadic triple-negative breast cancer lacking a BRCA1/2 mutation, but with an elevated HRD-LOH score, who achieved a favorable pathologic response. Confirmatory controlled trials are warranted.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; BRCA1 Protein; BRCA2 Protein; Benzamides; Carboplatin; Deoxycytidine; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Gene Expression Profiling; Genomic Instability; Humans; Mastectomy, Segmental; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Treatment Outcome; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 25847929
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.57.0085 -
PloS One 2016Development of iniparib as an anti-cancer agent was hindered in part by lingering questions regarding its mechanism of action, the activity of its metabolites, and their... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial Comparative Study
Development of iniparib as an anti-cancer agent was hindered in part by lingering questions regarding its mechanism of action, the activity of its metabolites, and their potential accumulation in tumors. Due to strong similarities in metabolism of iniparib between humans and dogs, a veterinary clinical trial in pet dogs with spontaneous cancers was designed to answer specific questions pertaining to pharmacokinetic exposures and tolerability of iniparib. Dogs were treated with iniparib alone and in combination with carboplatin chemotherapy. Iniparib doses ranged between 10-70 mg/kg intravenously (IV). Plasma, tumor and normal tissue samples were collected before and at various time points scheduled after exposure for pharmacokinetic and biologic analysis. The primary endpoints included characterization of dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and determination of the drug exposures that could be achieved in both normal and tumor tissues. Nineteen dogs were treated. DLT included fever, anorexia, diarrhea, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia; most effects were attributable to carboplatin based on the timing of adverse event onset. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of iniparib was not identified. Moderate to high variability in plasma exposure was noted for iniparib and all metabolites between animals. When quantifiable, iniparib and metabolite plasma:tumor ratios were < 0.088 and <1.7, respectively. In this study, iniparib was well tolerated as a single agent and in combination with carboplatin over a range of doses. However, clinically relevant concentrations of the parent drug and selected metabolites were not detectable in canine tumor tissues at any studied dose, thus eliminating expectations for clinical responses in dogs or humans. Negative clinical trials in humans, and the uncertainties of its mechanism of action, ultimately led to the decision to stop clinical development of the drug. Nevertheless, the questions that can be asked and answered within the comparative oncology approach are evident from this successfully executed comparative clinical trial and exemplify the value of such studies in drug development.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Benzamides; Breast Neoplasms; Dogs; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Male; Maximum Tolerated Dose; Neoplasms; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 26866698
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149194 -
The New England Journal of Medicine Jan 2011Triple-negative breast cancers have inherent defects in DNA repair, making this cancer a rational target for therapy based on poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose)... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Triple-negative breast cancers have inherent defects in DNA repair, making this cancer a rational target for therapy based on poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition.
METHODS
We conducted an open-label, phase 2 study to compare the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and carboplatin with or without iniparib, a small molecule with PARP-inhibitory activity, in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. A total of 123 patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and carboplatin (at a dose equivalent to an area under the concentration-time curve of 2) on days 1 and 8--with or without iniparib (at a dose of 5.6 mg per kilogram of body weight) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11--every 21 days. Primary end points were the rate of clinical benefit (i.e., the rate of objective response [complete or partial response] plus the rate of stable disease for ≥6 months) and safety. Additional end points included the rate of objective response, progression-free survival, and overall survival.
RESULTS
The addition of iniparib to gemcitabine and carboplatin improved the rate of clinical benefit from 34% to 56% (P=0.01) and the rate of overall response from 32% to 52% (P=0.02). The addition of iniparib also prolonged the median progression-free survival from 3.6 months to 5.9 months (hazard ratio for progression, 0.59; P=0.01) and the median overall survival from 7.7 months to 12.3 months (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; P=0.01). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events in either treatment group included neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, fatigue or asthenia, leukopenia, and increased alanine aminotransferase level. No significant difference was seen between the two groups in the rate of adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
The addition of iniparib to chemotherapy improved the clinical benefit and survival of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer without significantly increased toxic effects. On the basis of these results, a phase 3 trial adequately powered to evaluate overall survival and progression-free survival is being conducted. (Funded by BiPar Sciences [now owned by Sanofi-Aventis]; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00540358.).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Benzamides; Breast Neoplasms; Carboplatin; Cross-Over Studies; Deoxycytidine; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Neoplasm Metastasis; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Survival Analysis; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 21208101
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1011418 -
Clinical Cancer Research : An Official... Jan 2019Iniparib is a purported prodrug causing cell death through intracellular conversion to nitro radical ions. We assessed the efficacy and safety of iniparib with standard...
PURPOSE
Iniparib is a purported prodrug causing cell death through intracellular conversion to nitro radical ions. We assessed the efficacy and safety of iniparib with standard radiotherapy and temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Adults meeting eligibility criteria were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm, open-label multi- institution phase II trial with median overall survival (mOS) compared with a historical control as the primary objective. A safety run-in component of radiotherapy + temozolomide + iniparib ( = 5) was followed by an efficacy study ( = 76) with the recommended phase II doses of iniparib (8.0 mg/kg i.v. twice/week with radiotherapy + daily temozolomide followed by 8.6 mg/kg i.v. twice/week with 5/28-day temozolomide).
RESULTS
The median age of the 81 evaluable participants was 58 years (63% male). Baseline KPS was ≥ 80% in 87% of participants. The mOS was 22 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 17-24] and the HR was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.35-0.55) per-person-year of follow-up. The 2- and 3-year survival rates were 38% and 25%, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 27% of patients; 9 patients had AEs requiring drug discontinuation including infusion-related reaction, rash, gastritis, increased liver enzymes, and thrombocytopenia.
CONCLUSIONS
Iniparib is well tolerated with radiotherapy and temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed GBM at up to 17.2 mg/kg weekly. The primary objective of improved mOS compared with a historical control was met, indicating potential antitumor activity of iniparib in this setting. Dosing optimization (frequency and sequence) is needed prior to additional efficacy studies.
Topics: Benzamides; Brain Neoplasms; Chemoradiotherapy; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Glioblastoma; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Temozolomide; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30131387
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0110 -
Cancer Biology & Therapy Jun 2013PARP inhibitors, both as monotherapy and in combination with cytotoxic drugs, are currently undergoing clinical trials in several different cancer types. In this... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
PARP inhibitors, both as monotherapy and in combination with cytotoxic drugs, are currently undergoing clinical trials in several different cancer types. In this investigation, we compared the antiproliferative activity of two PARP/putative PARP inhibitors, i.e., olaparib and iniparib, in a panel of 14 breast cancer cell lines (seven tripe-negative and seven non-triple-negative). In almost all cell lines investigated, olaparib was a more potent inhibitor of cell growth than iniparib. Inhibition by both drugs was cell line-dependent and independent of the molecular subtype status of the cells, i.e., whether cells were triple-negative or non-triple negative. Although the primary target of PARP inhibitors is PARP1, no significant association was found between baseline levels of PARP1 activity and inhibition with either agent. Similarly, no significant correlation was evident between sensitivity and levels of CDK1, BRCA1 or miR-182. Combined addition of olaparib and either the CDK1 inhibitor, RO-3306 or a pan HER inhibitor (neratinib, afatinib) resulted in superior growth inhibition to that obtained with olaparib alone. We conclude that olaparib, in contrast to iniparib, is a strong inhibitor of breast cancer cell growth and may have efficacy in breast cancer irrespective of its molecular subtype, i.e., whether HER2-positive, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive or triple-negative. Olaparib, in combination with a selective CDK1 inhibitor or a pan HER inhibitor, is a potential new approach for treating breast cancer.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; BRCA1 Protein; Benzamides; Biomarkers, Tumor; CDC2 Protein Kinase; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Proliferation; Cell Survival; Drug Synergism; Female; Humans; Inhibitory Concentration 50; MicroRNAs; Phthalazines; Piperazines; Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase-1; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 23760496
DOI: 10.4161/cbt.24349 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... Aug 2012Neoadjuvant chemotherapy provides a means both of improving subsequent surgical intervention and of testing novel therapies or combinations. Historically,... (Review)
Review
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy provides a means both of improving subsequent surgical intervention and of testing novel therapies or combinations. Historically, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has responded well in the neoadjuvant setting, with rates of pathological complete response (pCR) commonly higher than for other breast tumour types. However, more than half of TNBC patients do not achieve a pCR and have a very poor prognosis. The lack of drug-targetable receptors on TNBC tumours has made improving the available interventions in TNBC an area of important medical need. The routine use of neoadjuvant anthracycline/taxane combinations in TNBC is currently being supplemented by ongoing investigations of their use with other types of agent. In particular, the substantial proportion of TNBC tumours associated with BRCA1 mutations is driving clinical research into the use of DNA-damaging agents such as platinums, as well as of potentiators of DNA damage such as the investigational agent iniparib and inhibitors of poly-ADP ribose polymerase such as olaparib. Tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitors and microtubule-targeting inhibitors of cell cycling are also under active investigation. The use of neoadjuvant treatment with pCR as a surrogate of overall survival will allow the rapid evaluation and comparison of these and other much-needed new treatments for TNBC.
Topics: Anthracyclines; Antineoplastic Agents; Benzamides; Breast Neoplasms; Bridged-Ring Compounds; Cell Cycle; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Female; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Phthalazines; Piperazines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Receptor Protein-Tyrosine Kinases; Receptor, ErbB-2; Receptors, Estrogen; Receptors, Progesterone; Taxoids; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23012300
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds193 -
Clinical Cancer Research : An Official... Mar 2012Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are undergoing extensive clinical testing for their single-agent activity in homologous recombination (HR)-deficient tumors... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
PURPOSE
Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are undergoing extensive clinical testing for their single-agent activity in homologous recombination (HR)-deficient tumors and ability to enhance the action of certain DNA-damaging agents. Compared with other PARP inhibitors in development, iniparib (4-iodo-3-nitrobenzamide) is notable for its simple structure and the reported ability of its intracellular metabolite 4-iodo-3-nitrosobenzamide to covalently inhibit PARP1 under cell-free conditions. The present preclinical studies were conducted to compare the actions iniparib with the more extensively characterized PARP inhibitors olaparib and veliparib.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
The abilities of iniparib, olaparib, and veliparib to (i) selectively induce apoptosis or inhibit colony formation in HR-deficient cell lines, (ii) selectively sensitize HR-proficient cells to topoisomerase I poisons, and (iii) inhibit formation of poly(ADP-ribose) polymer (pADPr) in intact cells were compared.
RESULTS
Consistent with earlier reports, olaparib and veliparib selectively induced apoptosis and inhibited colony formation in cells lacking BRCA2 or ATM. Moreover, like earlier generation PARP inhibitors, olaparib and veliparib sensitized cells to the topoisomerase I poisons camptothecin and topotecan. Finally, olaparib and veliparib inhibited formation of pADPr in intact cells. In contrast, iniparib exhibited little or no ability to selectively kill HR-deficient cells, sensitize cells to topoisomerase I poisons, or inhibit pADPr formation in situ. In further experiments, iniparib also failed to sensitize cells to cisplatin, gemcitabine, or paclitaxel.
CONCLUSIONS
While iniparib kills normal and neoplastic cells at high (>40 μmol/L) concentrations, its effects are unlikely to reflect PARP inhibition and should not be used to guide decisions about other PARP inhibitors.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Apoptosis; Benzamides; Benzimidazoles; Cell Line; Cell Line, Tumor; Drug Evaluation, Preclinical; Homologous Recombination; Humans; Mice; Phthalazines; Piperazines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Topoisomerase I Inhibitors
PubMed: 22291137
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2890