Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ
Alan Haruo Bryce , Josep M. Piulats , M. Neil Reaume , Peter James Ostler , Raymond S. McDermott , Joel Roger Gingerich , Elias Pintus , Srikala S. Sridhar , Wassim Abida , Gedske Daugaard , Axel Heidenreich , Laurence E. M. Krieger , Brieuc Sautois , Andrea Loehr , Darrin Despain , Jowell Go , Simon Paul Watkins , Simon Chowdhury , Charles J. Ryan , Karim Fizazi
Background: TRITON3 (NCT02975934) is a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 study of rucaparib vs physician’s choice (docetaxel [DTX], abiraterone [ABI] or enzalutamide [ENZ]) in patients (pts) with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC with BRCA1/2 (BRCA) or ATM alterations. It was previously reported that rucaparib significantly improved the primary endpoint of radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) vs physician’s choice in pts with BRCA or ATM alterations. We report here the interim overall survival (OS) and also report on efficacy of rucaparib compared individually with either DTX or ABI/ENZ. Methods: Pts had disease progression after 1 prior second-generation androgen pathway inhibitor therapy in any setting and were randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg BID or physician’s choice of DTX, ABI or ENZ. An ordered step-down multiple comparisons procedure was used to control the overall error rate. OS was a key secondary endpoint with rPFS as the primary endpoint tested first in the BRCA subgroup, then the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Subgroup analyses based on physician’s choice were exploratory. Results: As of August 25, 2022, 302 pts with BRCA and 103 pts with ATM alterations were randomized. OS maturity was 54% in the BRCA subgroup and 59% in the ITT population. rPFS and OS are shown. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) in the rucaparib, DTX and ABI/ENZ groups was asthenia/fatigue (61.1%, 67.6% and 57.6%, respectively). The most frequent grade ≥3 TEAE in the rucaparib, DTX and ABI/ENZ groups was anemia (23.7%), neutropenia (14.1%), and hypertension (10.2%), respectively. Conclusions: Rucaparib significantly improved rPFS vs either DTX or ABI/ENZ; safety was consistent with prior reports. Interim OS results suggest a trend towards improvement for rucaparib vs DTX or ABI/ENZ in pts with mCRPC and BRCA alterations. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934.
BRCA subgroup | ITT population | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rucaparib (n=201) | Physician’s choice (n=101) | DTX (n=60) | ABI/ENZ (n=41) | Rucaparib (n=270) | Physician’s choice (n=135) | DTX (n=75) | ABI/ENZ (n=60) | |
Median rPFS, mos (95% CI); P valuea vs rucaparib | 11.2 (9.2–13.8) | 6.4 (5.4–8.3); <0.0001 | 8.3 (6.1–9.9); 0.0009 | 4.5 (3.3–5.8); <0.0001 | 10.2 (8.3–11.2) | 6.4 (5.6–8.2); 0.0003 | 8.3 (6.1–10.1); 0.0066 | 4.5 (3.7–5.8); <0.0001 |
HR (95% CI) vs rucaparib | – | 0.50 (0.36–0.69) | 0.53 (0.37–0.77) | 0.38 (0.25–0.58) | – | 0.61 (0.47–0.80) | 0.64 (0.46–0.88) | 0.47 (0.34–0.66) |
Median OS, mos (95% CI); P valuea vs rucaparib | 24.3 (19.9–25.7) | 20.8 (16.3–23.1); 0.2080 | 18.9 (15.0–23.1); 0.1640 | 22.1 (15.9–28.3); 0.4023 | 23.6 (19.7–25.0) | 20.9 (17.5–24.4); 0.6702 | 19.1 (15.3–23.1); 0.2013 | 22.1 (17.2–29.0); 0.9045 |
HR (95% CI) vs rucaparib | – | 0.81 (0.58–1.12) | 0.75 (0.51–1.11) | 0.81 (0.52–1.27) | – | 0.94 (0.72–1.23) | 0.80 (0.58–1.11) | 1.01 (0.70–1.46) |
aLog rank test. HR, hazard ratio.
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Alexandra Sokolova
First Author: Elena Castro
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Karim Fizazi
2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Neeraj Agarwal