Poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are currently used in the treatment of several cancers carrying mutations in the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, with many more potential applications under study and in clinical trials. Here, we discuss the potential for extending PARP inhibitor therapies to tumours with deficiencies in the DNA damage-activated protein kinase, Ataxia-Telangiectasia Mutated (ATM). We highlight our recent findings that PARP inhibition alone is cytostatic but not cytotoxic in ATM-deficient cancer cells and that the combination of a PARP inhibitor with an ATR (ATM, Rad3-related) inhibitor is required to induce cell death.

BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of lung adenocarcinoma have been reported to lack ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) protein expression. We asked whether ATM-deficient lung cancer cell lines are sensitive to poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and determined the mechanism of action of olaparib in ATM-deficient A549 cells. METHODS: We analysed drug sensitivity data for olaparib and talazoparib in lung adenocarcinoma cell lines from the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) project. We deleted ATM from A549 lung adenocarcinoma cells using CRISPR/Cas9 and determined the effects of olaparib and the ATM/Rad3-related (ATR) inhibitor VE-821 on cell viability. RESULTS: IC 50 values for both olaparib and talazoparib positively correlated with ATM mRNA levels and gene amplification status in lung adenocarcinoma cell lines. ATM mutation was associated with a significant decrease in the IC 50 for olaparib while a similar trend was observed for talazoparib. A549 cells with deletion of ATM were sensitive to ionising radiation and olaparib. Olaparib induced phosphorylation of DNA damage markers and reversible G2 arrest in ATM-deficient cells, while the combination of olaparib and VE-821 induced cell death.

No abstract

ImportanceImmune-related adverse events (irAEs) due to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) have been shown to be positively associated with survival. Among patients with metastatic melanoma, evidence supporting this association has been conflicting, while ipilimumab-nivolumab combination ICB has been examined only in small clinical cohorts.ObjectiveTo examine the association between irAEs and survival among patients with metastatic melanoma, in particular for those receiving combination ICB.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA retrospective cohort of 492 consecutive patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ICB at 2 tertiary and 4 regional cancer centers in Alberta, Canada, from August 1, 2013, to May 31, 2020, was observed. Patients were aged 18 years or older with metastatic melanoma agnostic to primary site, who received 1 or more doses of an anti–programmed cell death protein 1 agent as single or combination ICB. Clinically significant irAEs requiring systemic corticosteroids and/or treatment delay were captured. To minimize immortal time bias, only patients surviving 12 weeks after ICB initiation were included in survival analyses. Statistical analysis was conducted on December 10, 2021.ExposuresDevelopment of irAEs requiring systemic corticosteroids and/or treatment delay.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was overall survival (OS), with the association of irAE development with OS assessed via Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. The association of hospitalization for irAEs and ICB resumption after irAE with OS was examined.ResultsAmong 492 patients, the median age of those with irAEs was 61.8 years (IQR, 52.9-72.1 years), and the median age of those without irAEs was 65.5 years (IQR, 56.5-76.9 years), while sex distribution was comparable (137 of 198 men [69.2%] with irAEs vs 183 of 294 men [62.2%] without irAEs). There was an association between irAEs and OS both in the overall cohort (with irAEs: median OS, 56.3 months [95% CI, 38.2 months to not evaluable] vs without irAEs: median OS, 18.5 months [95% CI, 14.4-23.2 months]; P < .001) and in the 124 patients (25.2%) receiving combination ICB (with irAEs: median OS, 56.2 months [95% CI, 52.2 months to not evaluable] vs without irAEs: median OS, 19.0 months [95% CI, 6.6 months to not evaluable]; P < .001). Hospitalization for irAE did not alter this positive association with OS compared with outpatient treatment (median OS, not evaluable [95% CI, 31.5 months to not evaluable] vs median OS, 52.2 months [95% CI, 35.2 months to not evaluable]; P = .53), while resumption of ICB was associated with longer OS than not resuming ICB (median, 56.3 months [95% CI, 40.8 months to not evaluable] vs 31.5 months [95% CI, 21.0 months to not evaluable]; P = .009). A favorable independent association of irAEs with OS was confirmed in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio for death, 0.382 [95% CI, 0.254-0.576]; P < .001).Conclusions and RelevanceThis study suggests an association between irAEs and OS for patients with metastatic melanoma, including those treated with combination ICB and those with severe irAEs requiring hospitalization. The potential benefit associated with ICB resumption after irAEs warrants further investigation.