HOPE: Harnessing olaparib, palbociclib, and endocrine therapy for BRCA1/2-associated HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer.
Authors: Shah Payal Deepak , Torres Alexandra , Aaron Megan , Narayan Vivek , Knollman Hayley Michelle , Bradbury Angela R. , DeMichele Angela , Robson Mark E. , Tung Nadine M. , Domchek Susan M. 
Published: June 2024

10616

Background: Thepoly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib yields superior progression-free survival, response rates and patient-reported outcomes compared with chemotherapy in patients with BRCA1- or BRCA2- ( BRCA1/2) associated metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Fulvestrant and palbociclib improve outcomes in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) MBC. HOPE (NCT03685331) is a phase I trial to evaluate combination olaparib (O), fulvestrant (F), and palbociclib (P) in patients with BRCA1/2-associated HR+, HER2 negative MBC. Methods: A 3+3 dose escalation was used to assess safety and preliminary efficacy of O, F and P. Eligible participants (pts) had HR+ MBC, a germline (g) or somatic (s) mutation in BRCA1/2, measurable/evaluable disease, any/no prior endocrine therapy, and 0-2 prior lines of chemotherapy for MBC. Prior PARPi and CDK4/6i were permitted but not in combination. Palbociclib was added after a 28-day safety run-in (Cycle 0) of O + F alone. Fulvestrant dose was 500mg IM on day 1 of each 28-day cycle. Dose level 0 (DL0, starting level) was F, O 300mg orally BID continuously, P 75mg orally daily on days 1-21; DL-1 was F, O 250mg orally BID, P 75mg orally daily on days 1-21. The primary endpoint was MTD (adverse events (AEs) based on CTCAE v5.0). Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) period included Cycles 0 and 1. A 30% DLT rate was acceptable; 6 pts had to be treated at a dose for it to be declared MTD. RECIST v1.1 was used to evaluate response. Results: Eight treated pts (s BRCA1:1 ;g BRCA2:6; s BRCA2:1 ) had median (M) age 47; M 0 (0-2) prior lines of endocrine therapy and 0 (0-1) prior chemotherapies for MBC. Three pts each had received O, F, and CDK4/6i as part of their standard of care treatment before study. At DL0, 2/2 pts had DLT with persistent grade(G) 3 neutropenia. Among 6 pts treated at DL-1, none experienced DLT, but 3 pts missed doses of study treatment due to cytopenias (G3 neutropenia, G3 leukopenia, G3 thrombocytopenia) during the DLT period. Following the DLT period, 1 pt reduced O to 200mg orally daily and 1 discontinued P based on provider discretion due to cytopenias (G3 neutropenia, G3 thrombocytopenia). Grade 3 AEs occurring in >1 pt related to study treatment were: neutrophil count decrease (G3/2, n=5/2); white blood cell decrease (G3/2/1, n=3/2/2); platelet count decrease (G3/2/1, n=2/0/1). Overall related AEs in >50% of pts were anemia (n=7), fatigue (n=6) and nausea (n=5). Best responses were CR/PR/SD/PD in 1/1/5/1 pts. Conclusions: MTDof O, F and P (DL-1) was reached and demonstrated antitumor activity. Although no AEs meeting protocol-specified DLT criteria were observed at MTD, hematologic toxicity at this dose complicated drug delivery and required close monitoring during and after the DLT period. Combinations utilizing PARP1 selective inhibitors, lower doses of therapy or sequential rather than combination therapy may improve feasibility. Clinical trial information: NCT03685331 .