Efficacy of systemic therapies in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer harboring germline <i>ATM</i> versus <i>BRCA2</i> mutations

  • Alexandra O. Sokolova
    Division of Medical Oncology Oregon Health Science University Portland Oregon USA
  • Catherine H. Marshall
    Division on Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center Baltimore Maryland USA
  • Rebeca Lozano
    Prostate Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Division on Medical Oncology Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO) Madrid Spain
  • Roman Gulati
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • Elisa M. Ledet
    Systems Engineering and Operations Research Department George Mason University Fairfax Virginia USA
  • Navonil De Sarkar
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • Petros Grivas
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • Celestia S. Higano
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • Bruce Montgomery
    Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine University of Washington Seattle Washington USA
  • Peter S. Nelson
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • David Olmos
    Prostate Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Division on Medical Oncology Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO) Madrid Spain
  • Vadim Sokolov
    Systems Engineering and Operations Research Department George Mason University Fairfax Virginia USA
  • Michael T. Schweizer
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • Todd A. Yezefski
    Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine University of Washington Seattle Washington USA
  • Evan Y. Yu
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA
  • Channing J. Paller
    Division on Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center Baltimore Maryland USA
  • Oliver Sartor
    Division on Medical Oncology Tulane University School of Medicine New Orleans Louisiana USA
  • Elena Castro
    Prostate Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Division on Medical Oncology Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO) Madrid Spain
  • Emmanuel S. Antonarakis
    Division on Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center Baltimore Maryland USA
  • Heather H. Cheng
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Seattle Washington USA

抄録

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Among men with metastatic prostate cancer, about 10% have germline alterations in DNA damage response genes. Most studies have examined <jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic> alone or an aggregate of <jats:italic>BRCA1/2</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic>. Emerging data suggest that <jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> mutations may have distinct biology and warrant individual evaluation. The objective of this study is to determine whether response to prostate cancer systemic therapies differs between men with germline mutations in <jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> (g<jats:italic>ATM)</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic> (g<jats:italic>BRCA2)</jats:italic>.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>This is an international multicenter retrospective matched cohort study of men with prostate cancer harboring g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> or g<jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic>. PSA<jats:sub>50</jats:sub> response (≥50% decline in prostate‐specific antigen) was compared using Fisher's exact test.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results and Limitations</jats:title><jats:p>The study included 45 g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> and 45 g<jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic> patients, matched on stage and year of germline testing. Patients with g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> and g<jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic> had similar age, Gleason grade, and PSA at diagnosis. We did not observe differences in PSA<jats:sub>50</jats:sub> responses to abiraterone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer between the two groups; however, 0/7 with g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> and 12/14 with g<jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic> achieved PSA<jats:sub>50</jats:sub> response to PARPi (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> < .001). Median (95% confidence interval) overall survival from diagnosis to death was 10.9 years (9.5‐not reached) versus 9.9 years (7.1‐not reached, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = .07) for the g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> and g<jats:italic>BRCA2</jats:italic> cohorts, respectively. Limitations include the retrospective design and lack of mutation zygosity data.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Conventional therapies can be effective in g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> carriers and should be considered before PARPi, which shows limited efficacy in this group. Men with g<jats:italic>ATM</jats:italic> mutations warrant prioritization for novel treatment strategies.</jats:p></jats:sec>

収録刊行物

  • The Prostate

    The Prostate 81 (16), 1382-1389, 2021-09-13

    Wiley

被引用文献 (1)*注記

もっと見る

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ