Predictive role of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) for irinotecan in combination with venadaparib, a novel PARP1/2 inhibitor, as third- or fourth-line treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer.
Authors: Oh Do-Youn , Ryu Min-Hee , Lee Keun-Wook , Rha Sun Young , Kim Seung Tae , Iqbal Syma , Yoon Jeesun , Kim Hyung-Don , Kim Jin Won , Kim Ji-Won , Lee Won Sik , Hong Min Ju , Lee Myongjae , Roh Eun-Jihn , HA KYOUNG SOO 
Published: January 2024

380 Background: Tumors with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), including BRCA and ATM mutations, have shown to predict response to poly (adenosine diphosphate [ADP]–ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. The associations between treatment efficacy of PARP inhibitor-based regimen and mutations in BRCA (BRCAm) or ATM gene (ATMm) are not well known in previously treated advanced gastric cancer (GC). Combining PARP inhibitor and irinotecan is known to synergize cytotoxicity. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the association of HRD and efficacy of irinotecan and venadaparib combined, in patients with metastatic GC who had failed at least 2 lines of therapy. Methods: MTT assays were performed in vitro to verify and characterize synergism between venadaparib and SN-38. Data were analyzed using the GraphPad Prism (version 9.5.1) and CompuSyn (version 1.0) software. Patients with at least two prior palliative treatments were enrolled in a multi-national phase Ib trial (NCT04725994). Tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST 1.1. Exploratory genomic analysis was included to assess the correlation between efficacy and HRD. Genomic analysis was conducted using ctDNA (GuardantOMNI Gene Panel version 1.0, Redwood City, CA) on Day 1 pre-dose. Results: In MTT assays, the combination of SN-38 and venadaparib exerted synergistic effect with combination indices (CI) ranging from 0.013 to 0.991 in SNU-638 (BRCA2m), SNU-668 (BRCA1m), AGS (low ATM) and SNU-484 (HR proficient) cells. We observe the synergistic effect between SN-38 and venadaparib remained consistent even at low concentrations of venadaparib (SN-38 IC50; without venadaparib → with 10 nM of venadaparib; SNU-638(1.72→0.28), SNU-668(10.7→1.5), AGS (0.62→0.049), SNU-484(2.25->0.38)). In the dose-finding part of the clinical study, 26 patients were enrolled, 13 had received two prior treatments and 13 had received three prior treatments. At data cut-off, median duration of follow-up (range) was 4.4 (1.3 – 23.7) months. Of the 26 patients enrolled, 5 (1 BRCA2m and 4 ATMm) had HRD (19.2%) and were treated with varying doses of irinotecan and venadaparib. In the five patients with HRD, an objective response rate (ORR) was 60% and median progression-free survival (mPFS) (95% CI) was not reached (1.2–21.5). Of the 26 patients enrolled, 11 received varying doses of venadaparib plus 100 mg/m2 of irinotecan, with an ORR of 36.4% and mPFS (95% CI) of 5.6 (3.5–not reached) months. Conclusions: Venadaparib in combination with irinotecan showed synergistic effect in vitro assays and promising clinical efficacy in the systemic treatment of refractory GC, particularly in patients with HRD. The dose expansion phase of the study is ongoing to investigate the optimal biological dose and patient selection strategies, in a randomized design. Clinical trial information: NCT04725994 .