Evaluation of Treatment With Talazoparib and Avelumab in Patients With Recurrent Mismatch Repair Proficient Endometrial Cancer
Authors: Konstantinopoulos Panagiotis A. , Gockley Allison A. , Xiong Niya , Krasner Carolyn , Horowitz Neil , Campos Susana , Wright Alexi A. , Liu Joyce F. , Shea Meghan , Yeku Oladapo , Castro Cesar , Polak Madeline , Lee Elizabeth K. , Sawyer Hannah , Bowes Brittany , Moroney John , Cheng Su-Chun , Tayob Nabihah , Bouberhan Sara , Spriggs David , Penson Richard T. , Fleming Gini F. , Nucci Marisa R. , Matulonis Ursula A. 
Published: July 2022

Importance

Although the activity of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib (the only US Food and Drug Administration–approved immunotherapy for mismatch repair proficient endometrial cancer [MMRP EC]) is compelling, there are no biomarkers of response and most patients do not tolerate, do not respond to, or develop resistance to this regimen, highlighting the need for additional, potentially biomarker-driven therapeutic approaches for patients with recurrent MMRP EC.

Objective

To assess the potential positive outcomes and safety of the combination of the polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase inhibitor talazoparib and the programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor avelumab in recurrent MMRP EC.

Design, Settings, and Participants

This investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm, 2-stage, phase 2 study nonrandomized controlled trial patients at 4 institutions in the US. Key eligibility criteria included measurable disease, unlimited prior therapies, and all endometrial cancer histologies.

Interventions

Talazoparib, 1 mg, orally, daily, and avelumab, 10 mg/kg, intravenously, every 2 weeks, were administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Statistical considerations were developed for 2 coprimary objectives of objective response rate and rate of progression-free survival at 6 months, with a 2-stage design that allowed for early discontinuation for futility. Prespecified exploratory objectives included the association of immunogenomic features (determined by targeted-panel next-generation sequencing and immunohistochemistry) with activity.

Results

Thirty-five female patients (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [8.41] years) received protocol therapy; 9 (25.7%) derived clinical benefit after meeting at least 1 of the 2 coprimary end points. Four patients (11.4%) exhibited confirmed objective response rates (4 partial responses), and 8 (22.9%) survived progression free at 6 months. The most common grade 3 and 4 treatment-related toxic effects were anemia (16 [46%]), thrombocytopenia (10 [29%]), and neutropenia (4 [11%]); no patient discontinued receipt of therapy because of toxic effects. Tumors with homologous recombination repair alterations were associated with clinical benefit from treatment with avelumab and talazoparib. Tumor mutational burden, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and PD-L1 status were not associated with clinical benefit.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this nonrandomized controlled trial suggest that treatment with avelumab and talazoparib demonstrated a favorable toxic effect profile and met the predetermined criteria to be considered worthy of further evaluation in MMRP EC. Immunogenomic profiling provided insights that may inform ongoing and future studies of polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase and PD-L1 inhibitor combinations in endometrial cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912572