Niraparib for advanced breast cancer with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: the EORTC 1307-BCG/BIG5-13/TESARO PR-30-50-10-C BRAVO study

Turner, N. C. et al. (2021) Niraparib for advanced breast cancer with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: the EORTC 1307-BCG/BIG5-13/TESARO PR-30-50-10-C BRAVO study. Clinical Cancer Research, 27(20), pp. 5482-5491. (doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-0310) (PMID:34301749) (PMCID:PMC8530899)

[img] Text
247220.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.



Purpose: To investigate the activity of niraparib in patients with germline-mutated BRCA1/2 (gBRCAm) advanced breast cancer (aBC). Patients and methods: BRAVO was a randomized, open-label phase 3 trial. Eligible patients had gBRCAm and HER2-negative aBC previously treated with {less than or equal to}2 prior lines of chemotherapy for aBC or had relapsed within 12 months of adjuvant chemotherapy, and were randomised 2:1 between niraparib and physician's choice chemotherapy (PC) (monotherapy with eribulin, capecitabine, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine). Patients with hormone-receptor positive tumours had to have received {greater than or equal to}1 line of endocrine therapy and progressed during this treatment in the metastatic setting or relapsed within one year of neo/adjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was centrally-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), PFS by local assessment, objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: After the pre-planned interim analysis, recruitment was halted based on futility, noting a high degree of discordance between local and central PFS assessment in the PC arm that resulted in informative censoring. At the final analysis (median follow-up: 19.9 months), median centrally-assessed PFS was 4.1 months in the niraparib arm (n=141) versus 3.1 months in the PC arm (n=74; hazard ratio [HR] 0.96; 95% CI: 0.65-1.44; P=0.86). HRs for OS and local-PFS were 0.95 (95% CI 0.63-1.42) and 0.65 (0.46-0.93), respectively. ORR was 35% (95% CI 26-45) with niraparib and 31% (19-46) in the PC arm. Conclusion: Informative censoring in the control arm prevented accurate assessment of the trial hypothesis, although there was clear evidence of niraparib's activity in this patient population.

Item Type:Articles
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:MacPherson, Professor Iain
Authors: Turner, N. C., Balmaña, J., Poncet, C., Goulioti, T., Tryfonidis, K., Honkoop, A. H., Zoppoli, G., Razis, E., Johannsson, O. T., Colleoni, M., Tutt, A. N. J., AUDEH, W., Ignatiadis, M., Mailliez, A., Trédan, O., Musolino, A., Vuylsteke, P., Juan Fita, M. J., Macpherson, I. R.J., Kaufman, B., Manso, L., Goldstein, L. J., Ellard, S. L., Láng, I., Jen, K. Y., Adam, V., Litière, S., Erban, J., and Cameron, D. A.
College/School:College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Cancer Sciences
Journal Name:Clinical Cancer Research
Publisher:American Association for Cancer Research
ISSN (Online):1557-3265
Published Online:22 July 2021
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2021 The Authors
First Published:First published in Clinical Cancer Research 27(20): 5482-5491
Publisher Policy:Reproduced under a Creative Commons License

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record