ABSTRACT
The development of DNA damage response (DDR)-directed therapies is a major area of clinical investigation, yet to date Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors remain the only approved therapy in this space. Major challenges to DDR-targeted therapies in the post-PARPi era are the context dependency of DDR alterations and the presence of pre-existing resistance in this heavily pre-treated population. To that end, we used a contemporary platform to analyze pre-treatment circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) samples from 173 patients enrolled onto two Phase 1/2 trials harboring pathogenic variants (PVs) in DDR genes. Baseline ctDNA analysis revealed a wealth of insights, including circulating tumor fraction estimation, impact of clonal hematopoiesis, PV allelic status, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) signatures and presence of pre-existing resistance. HRD reversions were detected in 44% of evaluable patients and included large genomic rearrangements leading to deletion of whole or partial exons. We also discovered reversion of ATM in two patients previously treated with platinum chemotherapy, which has not previously been described. This study showcases the genomic complexity of DDR-altered tumors, revealed through baseline ctDNA profiling, an understanding of which is crucial for the future clinical development of novel DDR-directed therapies and combinations.
Competing Interest Statement
Please refer to the manuscript text for full competing interests statement.
Clinical Trial
Yes TRESR; NCT04497116 ATTACC; NCT04972110
Funding Statement
This work was funded by Repare Therapeutics, Inc., and Guardant Health Inc.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences International Ethical Guidelines, applicable International Conference on Harmonization, Good Clinical Practice Guidelines, and applicable laws and regulations. All patients provided written informed consent to adhere to the clinical protocol and provided serial blood samples and tumor tissues. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board or Ethics Committee at each participating institution: University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Institutional Review Boards of MD Anderson Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work. Dana Farber Cancer Institute Institutional Review Boards of Dana Farber Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work. Advarra IRB, Inc. of Sarah Cannon Research Institute TN gave ethical approval for this work. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Institutional Review Board/Privacy Board of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work. Duke University Health Systems Institutional Review Boards of Duke Cancer Institute gave ethical approval for this work. Rhode Island Hospital IRB of Rhode Island Hospital gave ethical approval for this work. Northwestern University IRB Panels A, B, C, D and Q of Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University gave ethical approval for this work. University Health Network Research Ethics Board of Princess Margaret Cancer Centre gave ethical approval for this work. Health Research Authority, North East Tyne and Wear South Research Ethics Committee of The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Manchester gave ethical approval for this work. Health Research Authority, North East Tyne and Wear South Research Ethics Committee of Freeman Hospital Newcastle/Sir Bobby Robson Cancer Trials Research Centre gave ethical approval for this work. Health Research Authority, North East Tyne and Wear South Research Ethics Committee of Sarah Cannon Research Institute London gave ethical approval for this work. Scientific Ethics Committees for the Capital Region (Denmark) translated name of Rigshospitalet, University Hospital of Copenhagen gave ethical approval for this work. Columbia University Medical Center Institutional Review Board of Columbia Herbert Irving Comprhensive CA Ctr (CUHC) gave ethical approval for this work. Johns Hopkins Institutional Review Board of Johns Hopkins University (JHU) gave ethical approval for this work. Advarra IRB, Inc. of Yale Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work. Advarra IRB, Inc. of Huntsman Cancer Institute and Hospital gave ethical approval for this work. Advarra IRB, Inc. of University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work. Advarra IRB, Inc. of Thomas Jefferson University gave ethical approval for this work Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board of Mayo Clinic Rochester gave ethical approval for this work. Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board of Mayo Clinic Arizona gave ethical approval for this work. Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board of Mayo Clinic Florida gave ethical approval for this work. UCSF Human Research Protection Program & IRB of University of California, San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work. US Oncology Inc., IRB of Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers, LLP gave ethical approval for this work. US Oncology Inc., IRB of Oncology Associates of Oregon, P.C gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
