Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2023 Sep;84(3):321-330.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.05.021. Epub 2023 Jun 3.

Rucaparib for the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Associated with a DNA Damage Repair Gene Alteration: Final Results from the Phase 2 TRITON2 Study

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Rucaparib for the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Associated with a DNA Damage Repair Gene Alteration: Final Results from the Phase 2 TRITON2 Study

Wassim Abida et al. Eur Urol. 2023 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Initial TRITON2 (NCT02952534) results demonstrated the efficacy of rucaparib 600 mg BID in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) associated with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) or other DNA damage repair (DDR) gene alteration.

Objective: To present the final data from TRITON2.

Design, setting, and participants: TRITON2 enrolled patients with mCRPC who had progressed on one or two lines of next-generation androgen receptor-directed therapy and one taxane-based chemotherapy.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; as per the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor Version 1.1/Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria in patients with measurable disease by independent radiology review [IRR]); prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline [PSA50]) was a key secondary endpoint.

Results and limitations: As of July 27, 2021 (study closure), TRITON2 had enrolled 277 patients, grouped by mutated gene: BRCA (n = 172), ATM (n = 59), CDK12 (n = 15), CHEK2 (n = 7), PALB2 (n = 11), or other DDR gene (Other; n = 13). ORR by IRR was 46% (37/81) in the BRCA subgroup (95% confidence interval [CI], 35-57%), 100% (4/4) in the PALB2 subgroup (95% CI, 40-100%), and 25% (3/12) in the Other subgroup (95% CI, 5.5-57%). No patients within the ATM, CDK12, or CHEK2 subgroups had an objective response by IRR. PSA50 response rates (95% CI) in the BRCA, PALB2, ATM, CDK12, CHEK2, and Other subgroups were 53% (46-61%), 55% (23-83%), 3.4% (0.4-12), 6.7% (0.2-32%), 14% (0.4-58%), and 23% (5.0-54%), respectively.

Conclusions: The final TRITON2 results confirm the clinical benefit and manageable safety profile of rucaparib in patients with mCRPC, including those with an alteration in BRCA or select non-BRCA DDR gene.

Patient summary: Almost half of TRITON2 patients with BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer had a complete or partial tumor size reduction with rucaparib; clinical benefits were also observed with other DNA damage repair gene alterations.

Keywords: DNA damage repair gene alteration; Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Financial disclosures: Wassim Abida certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: Dr. Wassim Abida reports receiving support for the present manuscript from Clovis Oncology and in part by National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Support Grant (P30-CA008748); grants or contracts from AstraZeneca, Epizyme, ORIC, Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Zenith Epigenetics; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen Pharma UK, and ORIC Pharmaceuticals; speaking honoraria from Aptitude Health, Medscape, OncLive/MJH Health, Roche, and TouchIME; and publication royalties. Dr. David Campbell has nothing to disclose. Dr. Akash Patnaik has served in a consulting or advisory role for Exelixis, Janssen, and Jounce Therapeutics; has received honoraria from Clovis Oncology, Merck, Prime Inc., and Roche; has received research funding from Clovis Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and Progenics; and has received clinical trial support from AstraZeneca and Laekna. Dr. Alan H. Bryce reports receiving institutional funding from Astra Zeneca, Gilead, and Janssen; payment or honoraria from Elsevier, Fallon Medica, Horizon CME, MJH Life Sciences, PRIME Education, and Research to Practice; travel support from Prostate Cancer Foundation; holding a patent on Therapeutic Targeting of Cancer Patients with NRG1 Rearrangements (15/735,289); and receiving data safety monitoring board or advisory board fees, paid to Mayo Clinic, from Bayer and Janssen, and from Carden Jennings, Foundation Medicine, Merck, Myovant, and Novartis AG. Dr. Jeremy Shapiro has no disclosures or conflicts. Dr. Richard M. Bambury reports receiving travel support from Bayer, Ipsen, and Pfizer; data safety monitoring or advisory board fees from BMS, Janssen, and Pfizer; and other financial or nonfinancial interests from ONCOassist (Portable Medical Technology). Dr. Jingsong Zhang has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Dendreon, Myovant Sciences, and Pfizer; and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Dendreon, and Sanofi. Dr. Daniel Castellano has consulting and advisory roles for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, Roche, and Sanofi; received research funding from Janssen; and received travel support from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, and Pfizer. Dr. Albert Font has consulting and advisory roles for Astellas, Eusa, Janssen, and Sanofi; and has received research funding from AstraZeneca. Dr. Ray McDermott has served in a consulting or advisory role for Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; has received support for travel and/or accommodation from Celgene, Janssen, and Pfizer; and has received research funding related to clinical trials from Clovis Oncology, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Merck. Dr. Brieuc Sautois reports receiving consulting fees from Clovis Oncology, Astellas Pharma, BMS Belgium, and Janssen, and payment or honoraria from Janssen and MSD. Dr. Josep M. Piulats reports receiving grant support for investigator-sponsored trial from Beigene, Mirati, MSD, and Pfizer, and for preclinical proposal from Janssen; consulting fees from MSD and Novartis; payments for medical writing from Immunocore, MSD, and Pfizer; travel support from AstraZeneca; advisory board fees from Immunocore and Lilly; and other services from Clovis, BeiGene, BMS, Jansen, and Lilly. Dr. Elias Pintus reports receiving consulting fees from Janssen and Merck Sharp & Dohme, financial support from Bayer, and nonfinancial support from Amgen. Dr. Charles J. Ryan has received research support from Clovis Oncology and has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca and Bayer. Professor Axel S. Merseburger has served as a principal investigator or subinvestigator for clinical studies by Clovis Oncology, Astellas, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Ipsen, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva, and Wyeth; served as a speaker for Astellas, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Hexal, Ipsen, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi Aventis, and Teva; served on an advisory board for Clovis Oncology, Astellas, Bayer, Ipsen, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Teva; and received research grants from Wyeth. Professor Gedske Daugaard reports receiving consulting fees from Astellas, Bayer, Enterome, Janssen, MSD, and Pfizer, and data safety monitoring or advisory board fees from Astellas, Bayer, MSD, and Pfizer. Professor Karim Fizazi has received personal fees from Clovis Oncology, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, CureVac, ESSA, Janssen, Orion Pharma, Roche-Genentech, and Sanofi. Dr. Andrea Loehr, Darrin Despain, Dr. Andrew D. Simmons, Melanie Dowson, Jowell Go, and Dr. Simon P. Watkins report being employed by and owning stock in Clovis Oncology. Dr. Simon Chowdhury reports receiving consulting fees for serving on advisory boards and speakers’ bureaus from Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, Athenex, Bayer, Beigene, Janssen Oncology, and Novartis; honoraria from Beigene, Huma, Janssen, Remedy Bio, and Telix; owning stock in Curve. Life and Huma Remedy Bio; and receiving research funding from Clovis Oncology. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by these authors: Dr. John M. Burke, Professor Vinod Ganju, Dr. Anne-Claire Hardy-Bessard, Dr. Dominique Spaeth, Dr. Eric Voog, and Professor Axel Heidenreich.

Figures

FIG. 1
FIG. 1
PATIENT FLOW DIAGRAM. DDR = DNA damage repair; IRR = independent radiology review. a A total of 187 patients were enrolled based on eligible alterations detected from central screening of tissue and/or plasma samples; 90 patients were enrolled based on the results from local genomic testing. The study closed on July 27, 2021; 23 patients continued to receive rucaparib outside of the study after study closure (BRCA [n = 19], CHEK2 [n = 1], and other DDR gene [n = 3]).
FIG. 2
FIG. 2
FOREST PLOTS OF ORR AND PSA50 RESPONSE RATE BY SUBGROUP. The vertical dotted line corresponds to the ORR or PSA50 response in the BRCA-mutated group. CI = confidence interval; IRR = independent radiology review; ORR = objective response rate; PSA50 = prostate-specific antigen ≥50% decrease from baseline.
FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.
Best change from baseline in (A) sum of target lesion(s) in the IRR-evaluable population and (B) PSA in the overall efficacy population. In Figure 3A, the upper dotted line indicates the threshold for progressive disease, a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions; the lower dotted line indicates the threshold for partial response, a 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter of the target lesions. In Figure 3B), the upper dotted line indicates the threshold for PSA progression, a 25% increase from baseline (accompanied by an absolute increase of ≥2 ng/ml above the nadir); the lower dotted line indicates the threshold for PSA response, a 50% decrease from baseline. Bars were capped at 100% for visual clarity. PSA increases for the 15 leftmost patients were 689%, 373%, 319%, 231%, 220%, 183%, 146%, 142%, 133%, 132%, 126%, 125%, 109%, 106%, and 101%. In both panels, patients with 0% change from baseline are shown as 0.5% for visual clarity. IRR = independent radiology review; PSA50 = prostate-specific antigen ≥50% decrease from baseline.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Kaplan-Meier curves for (A) IRR-assessed rPFS and (B) OS. CI = confidence interval; IRR = independent radiology review; NR = not reached; OS = overall survival; rPFS = radiographic progression-free survival.

Comment in

References

    1. Teyssonneau D, Margot H, Cabart M, et al. Prostate cancer and PARP inhibitors: progress and challenges. J Hematol Oncol 2021;14:51. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abida W, Patnaik A, Campbell D, et al. Rucaparib in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer harboring a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene alteration. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:3763–72. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Merseburger AS, Waldron N, Ribal MJ, et al. Genomic testing in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a pragmatic guide for clinicians. Eur Urol 2021;79:519–29. - PubMed
    1. Rubraca® (rucaparib) tablets [prescribing information]. Boulder, CO: Clovis Oncology, Inc.; 2022.
    1. Abida W, Campbell D, Patnaik A, et al. Non-BRCA DNA damage repair gene alterations and response to the PARP inhibitor rucaparib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: analysis from the phase II TRITON2 study. Clin Cancer Res 2020;26:2487–96. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data