Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) Inhibitor, in Combination with Pembrolizumab and Carboplatin as First-Line Treatment of Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous-Cell Carcinoma (RM-HNSCC): A Single-Arm, Phase 2 Trial

P. Oppelt,J. Ley,J. Liu,D. Adkins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.01.096

IF: 8.013

2024-04-01

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Abstract:Purpose/Objective(s) The homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) phenotype is common in HNSCC and is due to mutation and promoter hypermethylation of DNA repair genes and PTEN. In pre-clinical models of HNSCC, HRD sensitizes tumors to PARP inhibition and to additive antitumor activity of PARP inhibition in combination with platinum agents. PARP inhibitors also activate the STING pathway and upregulate PD-L1 expression, resulting in synergistic antitumor activity when given with PD-1 inhibitors. Olaparib is a highly selective PARP inhibitor that has been safely combined with pembrolizumab and carboplatin. The primary hypothesis of this single-arm phase 2 trial of patients with RM-HNSCC was that first-line treatment with olaparib, pembrolizumab, and carboplatin would result in a higher objective response rate (ORR) than historically reported with 5-fluorouracil (5-fluorouracil), pembrolizumab and a platinum agent. Materials/Methods Patients with untreated RM-HNSCC who had adequate performance status and organ function received up to six 21-day cycles of olaparib (200 mg bid orally days 1-10), pembrolizumab (200 mg IV day 1), and carboplatin (AUC 5 IV day 1). This was followed by up to twenty-nine 21-day cycles of olaparib (300 mg bid orally days 1-21) and pembrolizumab (200 mg day 1), or until discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint was objective response, assessed by an independent radiologist using iRECIST. A Simon optimal two-stage design tested the null hypothesis (H0:ORR≤36%) versus the alternative hypothesis (H1: ORR=62%) at a type I error rate of 10% and 90% power. In the first stage, up to 13 patients would be accrued. If ≥6 responses occurred, 16 additional patients would be accrued. H0 would be rejected if ≥14 responses were observed in these 29 patients. An interim analysis was performed after the first stage, to assess olaparib delivery during cycles 1 and 2 with the goal of 100% delivery in ≥ 80% of patients. Results Twenty-nine patients were enrolled, to date. Key characteristics included median age 65 years (range 38-83), tobacco history 54%, primary site (oropharynx 50%; oral cavity 36%; larynx 14%), HPV status (positive 46%; negative 54%) and PD-L1 CPS status (0: 4%; 1-19: 29%; ≥20: 64%; unknown: 3%). Twenty-eight patients were evaluable for response. Tumor response occurred in 14 patients, of which 13 were confirmed on subsequent imaging. Best tumor response included CR in 3 patients, PR in 11, SD in 10, and PD in 4. The ORR was 50.0% (95%CI 30.7-69.4%). Olaparib delivery during cycles 1 and 2 was 100% for all patients in the first-stage of the trial. No unexpected safety concerns occurred. Conclusion The primary hypothesis of the trial was met. Further studies of this combination are warranted.

oncology,radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging