Biotech Strategy Blog

Commentary on Science, Innovation & New Products with a focus on Oncology, Hematology & Cancer Immunotherapy

Posts tagged ‘niraparib’

Recently, PARP inhibitors have been back in the news for several reasons, including the publication of the olaparib (AstraZenca/Merck) advanced mCRPC data in the New England Journal of Medicine from the phase 3 PROfound trial and the announcement regarding achievement of the key secondary endpoint of overall survival. As Dr José Baselga quite rightly noted, this is very good news indeed because:

“Overall survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer has remained extremely challenging to achieve.”

We’ve rather more trial misses in this disease setting than successes from various therapies over the last few years including ipilimumab, PROSTVAC, alisertib, and atezolizumab, to name a few off the top of my head.

Related to mCRPC, let’s also not forget the upcoming PDUFA date later this month for Clovis’s rucaparib in the very same indication.

Not to be outdone on the PARP front, just a few days GSK received FDA approval for niraparib as first-line monotherapy maintenance therapy for women with platinum-responsive advanced ovarian cancer – regardless of biomarker status – based on the phase 3 PRIMA study presented at ESMO last year and simultaneously published in the NEJM. Recall that the majority of women (51%) had homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) and this subset saw the greatest benefit.

Flying high in the DDR space?

We have now seen clinical benefit in the PARP inhibitors in four tumour types driven by DNA damage repair (DDR) deficiencies, namely ovarian, breast, pancreatic, and prostate cancers.

How do we go about extending the concept of DDR in terms of the biology of other tumour types?

A number of related pathway targets have been investigated, including ATM/ATR, Chk1, Wee–1 and others, with mixed success.

It’s not the nature of oncology R&D to stand still, however; what if we could turn things on their head and think creatively about the problems still to be addressed?

One particular new company to the PARP space is doing just that… so what are they doing and what’s different about their approach?

To learn more from our oncology analysis and get a heads up on new insights and commentary subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Who’s King of the PARP castle?

After yesterday’s review and expert commentary on the phase 3 PROfound trial presented in the Presidential Session at ESMO 2019, we’re continuing our look at PARP inhibitors in advanced prostate cancer.

Perhaps surprisingly, there were a lot of insights to be found in the posters that were presented and discussed at the meeting for other PARPs in clinical development.

How do these stack up against olaparib? We’re not fans of cross-trial comparisons as they always come with a mandatory health warning, but if you want to consider the emerging landscape, it is important to be aware of the different patient populations, lines of therapy, and details of the trial designs.

For additional perspective at ESMO19, we spoke to a European prostate cancer expert who kindly talked about his clinical practice and also offered insights into a PARP clinical trial he and colleagues presented in Barcelona.

Who will be King of the PARP castle in advanced prostate cancer?

To learn more from our latest oncology conference insights and get a heads up on our latest post ESMO Coverage and reflections, including a specialist thought leader interview, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

We’ve been writing about PARP inhibitors since 2006!  Who knew this target would have multiple legs over a dozen years on?

Barcelona

In this post we’re taking a look at some of the noteworthy presentations at ESMO19 around targeting DNA damage repair (DDR) and how they act through synthetic lethality and/or the generation of immune response to kill cancer cells in GU cancers.

It’s a fascinating area where we are seeing convergence between immunotherapy and genomic instability, one of the hallmarks of cancer.

The abstracts for ESMO19 are not yet available, so in this post we’re only providing context and setting the scene for some of the presentations we are looking forward to, as well as raising some key questions that we hope will be answered in Barcelona.

To learn more from our latest oncology conference insights and get a heads up on our latest ESMO Preview, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

It’s the dog days of summer and yet there’s a lot happening on the DDR front from multiple angles.

After a short break from science, this makes now a really good time to reflect and take stock in order to explore some of the key issues facing the field, especially in terms of future combination approaches.

Research that’s appearing now may influence future trial designs – always a nagging worry in Pharmaland that the standard of care can change before you even get your own phase 3 readout! No one likes to be pipped to the post, after all.

With the early WEE–1 news this week and a raft of new PARP readouts, there is much to discuss and also plenty of nuance and subtlety to consider carefully because what looks obvious at first blush may not actually be the case based on prior evidence that many will have forgotten about.

So grab a cup of iced coffee and shades and settle down under your sunbrellas for a pleasant and easy to read review of the various trials, settings, combinations and DDR pathway considerations…

To learn more and get a heads up on our latest oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

DNA Damage Repair (DDR) has come a long way over the last decade or so from preclinical development through clinical trials, including some notable failures along the way. What began initially with PARP inhibitors, has now expanded into other related targets in the pathway, including ATM/ATR, WEE–1, Chk1/2, DNA-PK, and even Fanconi anemia genes such as FANCA/BC/D1, BRIP1 and PALB2, which are considered an indication of BRCAness where there is also chromosomal instability and homologous recombination.

Top 10 DDR targets and molecules at AACR19

At AACR last week, there was plenty to learn about in the ever-expanding DDR niche in terms of new data from a relatively new target such as DNA-PK to updated clinical data on WEE–1 and Chk1 inhibition to early data on PARP in a new tumour type to add to the growing list of ovarian, breast, and prostate cancers that are impacted by DDR therapies.

Included in this post are 10 key targets or molecules in the DDR niche that are of potential interest to readers – we explain why we included them and why the data matters.

Here we take a look at the highlights that we came across in this mini review, which should be useful preparation ahead of yet more clinical data likely being presented at ASCO and ESMO later this year.

To learn more and get a heads up on our latest oncology insights and coverage, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

The annual ASCO-SITC meeting (#ImmunoOnc19) was held in San Francisco this year and has come a long way from the inaugural event we attended in Orlando.

Finding the signals amongst the noise

In the original 2017 event, I vividly recall as stirring presentation from Dr Limo Chen on targeting CD38 in solid tumours, last year we wrote an update on GU cancers including the STING pathway.

What’s in store from San Francisco and how do we go about finding key signals from the noise?

Over the next two posts I’m going to focus on new findings in various approaches that either look interesting and worth watching, or where there are lessons that can be learned for future developments.

This time around, some of the highlights surprised even me…

To learn more from our latest conference coverage and oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

At one point not too distant in the past, all the big news seemed to flow out of advanced prostate cancer with abiraterone and enzalutamide vying for attention, followed by occasional news on ARN–509, ODM–201, galeterone (remember that one from Tokai with all the AR-V7 kerfuffle?), radium Ra–223 dichloride, cabazitaxel, denosumab, ipilumumab, PROSTVAC, brachyury, and a few others. Predictably, not all were successful, and the count is still out on some.

San Francisco

In our latest conference coverage, we take a look at what we can learn from riding the prostate cancer train at ASCO GU ahead of the presentations in San Francisco tomorrow.

We will be updating this review as more data become available with the presentations, so do grab a cup of joe and settle down for some interesting reading ahead of time… this should get you all up to speed on the journey there!

To learn more from our latest conference and oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Dr Moore at ESMO18

At the recent European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO18) Congress in Munich, arguably the data of the meeting – if the audience reaction is anything to go by – were the results from the phase 3 SOLO1 trial that were presented by Dr Kathleen Moore (right).

The results were simultaneously published in The New England Journal of Medicine in an article entitled: “Maintenance Olaparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer” (Link).

As Moore and colleagues note in the abstract:

“After a median follow-up of 41 months, the risk of disease progression or death was 70% lower with olaparib than with placebo (Kaplan–Meier estimate of the rate of freedom from disease progression and from death at 3 years, 60% vs. 27%; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.41; P < 0.001).”

Dr Moore is an Associate Professor of gynecologic oncology and the Jim and Christy Everest Endowed Chair in Cancer Research at the University of Oklahoma Stephenson Cancer Center.  She kindly spoke to BSB after her presentation in the Presidential Symposium.

In addition to Dr Moore’s personal commentary on what these results mean for women with ovarian cancer, we also have some additional insights on what this data may mean for other players in the PARP space such as Tesaro and Clovis.

To learn more from our latest assessment and get a heads up on our oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Picking a PARPi – what can the biology tell us?

One of the really interesting questions I recently received from a BSB subscriber related to PARP inhibitors – they asked whether the therapies are all the same and can be considered interchangeable as a class?

Around the same time, another reader wrote in asking if there was any new information on what’s happening with PARPi combinations in breast or ovarian cancers?

This got me thinking as there has actually been some useful preclinical and clinical studies reported on both fronts that at least begin to open our eyes to new information based on research that has been reported in several places.

Thus I thought it would be useful to summarise the data and take a look at what we learned in the process.

Fair warning – some of the findings turned out to be a little bit more surprising than you might normally expect to see…

To learn more from our latest thought leader interview and get a heads up on our oncology insights, subscribers can log-in or you can click to gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Madrid city center

Greetings from Vienna, Austria!  Fresh off a red eye… we’re en route to one European cancer conference in Germany, while writing about another one in Madrid.

This latest preview looks at some of the key IO studies that are either intriguing or have potentially interesting results that BSB readers have written in asking us about.

There are some targeted therapies thrown in too for good measure too, as there are some IO-targeted combos to look at, as well as IO-IO approaches.

What I want to accomplish in this latest preview is point out some elements of what we call ‘interestingness’ where people should be watch or wary of either jumping to conclusions or making comparisons across trials and arriving at assumptions that may not turn out to be valid. My best advice here is to always be sceptical and assume there’s no concordance and that way you won’t be caught unawares.  It’s easier said than done, though.

Indeed there were so many questions about ESMO that we needed two preview posts to cover many of the questions we received.

Part 2 should roll out tomorrow, wifi on the road permitting – stay tuned for more on ESMO17.

Subscribers can log-in to read our latest insights or you can gain access to BSB Premium Content.

This content is restricted to subscribers

Free Email Updates
Subscribe to new post alerts, offers, and additional content!
We respect your privacy and do not sell emails. Unsubscribe at any time.
error: Content is protected !!