Search

PURPOSE Guidelines recommend somatic and germline testing for men with advanced prostate cancer (PCa). Barriers to widespread implementation result in underutilization of germline testing. Somatic testing alone risks missing pathogenic germline variants (PGVs). We sought to determine whether the addition of germline testing to tumor-only sequencing improves detection of PGVs in men with advanced PCa. Secondarily, we sought to define the added value of combining somatic and germline testing to optimize detection of clinically actionable alterations. PATIENTS AND METHODS We analyzed results of independent germline testing and tumor-only sequencing from 100 men with advanced PCa from a prospective clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03328091 ). The primary outcome was the proportion of PGVs not reported with tumor-only sequencing. The secondary outcome was the association of locus-specific loss of heterozygosity for PGVs in homologous recombination genes with clinical-genomic features. RESULTS In the 100 men who underwent germline testing and tumor-only sequencing, 24 PGVs were identified, 17 of which were clinically actionable, in 23 patients. Tumor-only sequencing failed to report four (17%) of the PGVs. One additional PGV (4.2%) had variant allele frequency on tumor-sequencing below the threshold for follow-up germline testing. When integrating tumor-only sequencing with germling testing results, 33% of patients harbored clinically actionable alterations. Rates of locus-specific loss of heterozygosity were higher for BRCA2 PGVs in castration-resistant PCa than PGVs in other homologous recombination genes in hormone-sensitive PCa ( P = .029). CONCLUSION Tumor-only sequencing failed to report more than 20% of PGVs in men with advanced PCa. These findings strongly support guideline recommendations for universal germline and somatic testing in this population. Combining tumor and germline sequencing doubled the chance of detecting a clinically actionable alteration.

Feature-region combination AUCs and benchmarking Sheet 1: Log2 fold-change, p-value, and q-value between ARPC and NEPC lines for central mean coverage in all queried (338) TFs (two tailed Mann-Whitney U test, Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted). Sheet 2: 100-fold cross-validation AUCs for all region and feature combinations subset by the ‘AR10’ overlapping features (see Methods). Sheet 3: 100-fold cross-validation AUCs for all region and feature combinations subset by the ‘Phenotype 47-defining’ overlapping features. Sheet 4: 100-fold cross-validation AUCs for all region and feature combinations (global). Sheet 5: Predictions scores, tumor fraction, depth of coverage, and subtype for benchmarking admixtures. Sheet 6: AUCs for unsupervised prediction of admixture subtypes grouped by tumor fraction and depth. Sheet 7: NEPC:ARPC ratio, tumor fraction, and ARPC and NEPC fraction predictions for mixed phenotype admixtures using Keraon (see Methods).

Supplementary Figures S1-S18 and Supplementary Table legends.

Purpose:To identify the safety of niraparib, a PARP inhibitor, in combination with Radium-223 for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in men without known BRCA mutations.Patients and Methods:Men with progressive mCPRC following ≥1 line of androgen receptor (AR)-targeted therapy and bone metastases but no documented BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 alterations or bulky visceral disease were included. Niraparib dose was escalated in combination with standard dosing of Radium-223 using a time-to-event continual reassessment method. The highest dose level with a DLT probability Results:Thirty patients were treated with niraparib and radium-223: 13 patients received 100 mg, 12 received 200 mg, and 5 patients received 300 mg of niraparib. There were six DLT events: two (13%) for neutropenia, two (13%) for thrombocytopenia, whereas fatigue and nausea each occurred once (3%). Anemia (2/13%) and neutropenia (2/13%) were the most common grade 3 adverse events. For patients with prior chemotherapy exposure, the MTD was 100 mg, whereas the MTD for chemotherapy naïve patients was 200 mg. Whole blood gene expression of PAX5 and CD19 was higher in responders and ARG-1, IL2R, and FLT3 expression was higher in nonresponders.Conclusions:Combining niraparib with Radium-223 in patients with mCRPC was safe; however, further studies incorporating biomarkers will better elucidate the role of combinations of PARP inhibitors with DNA damaging and other agents.

PSA waterfall plot

GO terms for NEK6 upregulated genes Day 5 after castration (filtered for >10 GeneHits).

Verification of detection power calculation. Comparison between the predicted detection power of 18 replicates and the actual fraction of those replicates that were called MRD+. 18 independent samples from a 1:100k dilution were probed with a 488 SNV panel (see methods). Replicates had their duplex consensus reads downsampled in increments of 10% and detection power was recalculated. Reported are the median and range of predicted detection powers for all replicates at each downsampling.

siRNA and sgRNA sequences

Early stage breast cancer cohort. (A) Overview of subtype distribution of cohort as well as the timing of blood draws relative to surgery and treatment. (B) REMARK diagram of the early stage breast cancer cohort. (C) Distribution of the number of mutations tracked for each patient.

Purpose:Existing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methods lack the sensitivity needed for detecting minimal residual disease (MRD) following therapy. We developed a test for tracking hundreds of patient-specific mutations to detect MRD with a 1,000-fold lower error rate than conventional sequencing.Experimental Design:We compared the sensitivity of our approach to digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) in a dilution series, then retrospectively identified two cohorts of patients who had undergone prospective plasma sampling and clinical data collection: 16 patients with ER+/HER2− metastatic breast cancer (MBC) sampled within 6 months following metastatic diagnosis and 142 patients with stage 0 to III breast cancer who received curative-intent treatment with most sampled at surgery and 1 year postoperative. We performed whole-exome sequencing of tumors and designed individualized MRD tests, which we applied to serial cfDNA samples.Results:Our approach was 100-fold more sensitive than ddPCR when tracking 488 mutations, but most patients had fewer identifiable tumor mutations to track in cfDNA (median = 57; range = 2–346). Clinical sensitivity was 81% (n = 13/16) in newly diagnosed MBC, 23% (n = 7/30) at postoperative and 19% (n = 6/32) at 1 year in early-stage disease, and highest in patients with the most tumor mutations available to track. MRD detection at 1 year was strongly associated with distant recurrence [HR = 20.8; 95% confidence interval, 7.3–58.9]. Median lead time from first positive sample to recurrence was 18.9 months (range = 3.4–39.2 months).Conclusions:Tracking large numbers of individualized tumor mutations in cfDNA can improve MRD detection, but its sensitivity is driven by the number of tumor mutations available to track.

Overview schematic of MRD assay. MRD assay workflow from characterizing a primary tumor to determining if a blood draw contains evidence of residual disease.

Supplementary Figure from A Phase I Study Investigating AZD8186, a Potent and Selective Inhibitor of PI3Kβ/δ, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Validation of tumor fraction confidence interval and effects of biological variability on tumor fraction inference. (A) Confidence intervals inferred from simulated data were aggregated into coverage probability for each condition and compared against theoretical coverage probability of 95% (see Methods). (B) Biological variability of clonal evolution loss was simulated by removing tumor evidence from a fraction of the fingerprint panel. Tumor fraction was calculated for simulated and original samples for comparison.

Patients who experienced local recurrence only after treatment for early stage breast cancer. cfDNA time points for all patients who experienced local recurrence only. End points represent time of last follow up or death.

Supplementary materials

Purpose:To characterize safety and tolerability of the selective PI3Kβ inhibitor AZD8186, identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and assess preliminary efficacy in combination with abiraterone acetate or vistusertib.Patients and Methods:This phase I open-label study included patients with advanced solid tumors, particularly prostate cancer, triple-negative breast cancer, and squamous non–small cell lung cancer. The study comprised four arms: (i) AZD8186 monotherapy dose finding; (ii) monotherapy dose expansion; (iii) AZD8186/abiraterone acetate (with prednisone); and (iv) AZD8186/vistusertib. The primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and identification of the RP2D of AZD8186 monotherapy and in combination. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and tumor and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses.Results:In total, 161 patients were enrolled. AZD8186 was well tolerated across all study arms, the most common adverse events being gastrointestinal symptoms. In the monotherapy dose-finding arm, four patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (mainly rash). AZD8186 doses of 60-mg twice daily [BID; 5 days on, 2 days off (5:2)] and 120-mg BID (continuous and 5:2 dosing) were taken into subsequent arms. The PKs of AZD8186 were dose proportional, without interactions with abiraterone acetate or vistusertib, and target inhibition was observed in plasma and tumor tissue. Monotherapy and combination therapy showed preliminary evidence of limited antitumor activity by imaging and, in prostate cancer, PSA reduction.Conclusions:AZD8186 monotherapy had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, and combination with abiraterone acetate/prednisone or vistusertib was also tolerated. There was preliminary evidence of antitumor activity, meriting further exploration of AZD8186 in subsequent studies in PI3Kβ pathway–dependent cancers.

Purpose:Androgen receptor (AR) inhibition can upregulate c-MET expression, which may be a resistance mechanism driving progression of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We conducted a phase I trial investigating the safety and pharmacokinetics of a potent c-MET inhibitor, crizotinib, with the AR antagonist, enzalutamide, in CRPC.Patients and Methods:Employing a 3+3 dose-escalation design, we tested three dose levels of crizotinib (250 mg daily, 200 mg twice a day, and 250 mg twice a day) with standard-dose enzalutamide (160 mg daily). The primary endpoint was rate of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Tolerability and pharmacokinetics profile were secondary endpoints.Results:Twenty-four patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation (n = 16) and dose-expansion (n = 8) phases. Two DLTs occurred in dose escalation (grade 3 alanine aminotransferase elevation). The MTD of crizotinib was 250 mg twice a day. Most frequent treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (50%), transaminitis (38%), nausea (33%), and vomiting, constipation, and diarrhea (21% each). Grade ≥3 events (25%) included transaminitis (n = 2), fatigue (n = 1), hypertension (n = 1), pulmonary embolism (n = 1), and a cardiac event encompassing QTc prolongation/ventricular arrhythmia/cardiac arrest. Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months (95% confidence interval, 2.8–21.2). Pharmacokinetics analysis at the MTD (n = 12) revealed a mean Cmaxss of 104 ± 45 ng/mL and AUCτss of 1,000 ± 476 ng•h/mL, representing a 74% decrease in crizotinib systemic exposure relative to historical data (Cmaxss, 315 ng/mL and AUCτss, 3,817 ng•h/mL).Conclusions:Concurrent administration of enzalutamide and crizotinib resulted in a clinically significant 74% decrease in systemic crizotinib exposure. Further investigation of this combination in CRPC is not planned. Our results highlight the importance of evaluating pharmacokinetics interactions when evaluating novel combination strategies in CRPC.

Supplementary Methods

Supplementary Tables

In prostate cancer, the development of castration resistance is pivotal in progression to aggressive disease. However, understanding of the pathways involved remains incomplete. In this study, we performed a high-throughput genetic screen to identify kinases that enable tumor formation by androgen-dependent prostate epithelial (LHSR-AR) cells under androgen-deprived conditions. In addition to the identification of known mediators of castration resistance, which served to validate the screen, we identified a mitotic-related serine/threonine kinase, NEK6, as a mediator of androgen-independent tumor growth. NEK6 was overexpressed in a subset of human prostate cancers. Silencing NEK6 in castration-resistant cancer cells was sufficient to restore sensitivity to castration in a mouse xenograft model system. Tumors in which castration resistance was conferred by NEK6 were predominantly squamous in histology with no evidence of AR signaling. Gene expression profiling suggested that NEK6 overexpression stimulated cytoskeletal, differentiation, and immune signaling pathways and maintained gene expression patterns normally decreased by castration. Phosphoproteome profiling revealed the transcription factor FOXJ2 as a novel NEK6 substrate, with FOXJ2 phosphorylation associated with increased expression of newly identified NEK6 transcriptional targets. Overall, our studies establish NEK6 signaling as a central mechanism mediating castration-resistant prostate cancer. Cancer Res; 77(3); 753–65. ©2016 AACR.

Application of MRD testing to healthy donor cfDNA samples. Patient specific panels designed for 14 different patients were pooled together and applied to cfDNA collected from four different healthy donors. Reported are the number of sites where ctDNA was detected. We required at least two sites to call a sample MRD+.

Description of additional methods and procedures used in the study.

Supplementary Data from A Phase I Study Investigating AZD8186, a Potent and Selective Inhibitor of PI3Kβ/δ, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) testing for single mutation in dilution series. (A) The observed VAFs of HapMap serial dilutions measured by using a ddPCR assay for a single mutation (with three replicates) vs. the expected VAFs; (B) The representative ddPCR raw data and fluorescence intensity thresholds for determining positive or negative droplets.

Legend for Supplemental Figures S1-S6.

Alterations in DNA damage response (DDR) genes are common in advanced prostate tumors and are associated with unique genomic and clinical features. ATM is a DDR kinase that has a central role in coordinating DNA repair and cell-cycle response following DNA damage, and ATM alterations are present in approximately 5% of advanced prostate tumors. Recently, inhibitors of PARP have demonstrated activity in advanced prostate tumors harboring DDR gene alterations, particularly in tumors with BRCA1/2 alterations. However, the role of alterations in DDR genes beyond BRCA1/2 in mediating PARP inhibitor sensitivity is poorly understood. To define the role of ATM loss in prostate tumor DDR function and sensitivity to DDR-directed agents, we created a series of ATM-deficient preclinical prostate cancer models and tested the impact of ATM loss on DNA repair function and therapeutic sensitivities. ATM loss altered DDR signaling, but did not directly impact homologous recombination function. Furthermore, ATM loss did not significantly impact sensitivity to PARP inhibition but robustly sensitized to inhibitors of the related DDR kinase ATR. These results have important implications for planned and ongoing prostate cancer clinical trials and suggest that patients with tumor ATM alterations may be more likely to benefit from ATR inhibitor than PARP inhibitor therapy.Significance:ATM loss occurs in a subset of prostate tumors. This study shows that deleting ATM in prostate cancer models does not significantly increase sensitivity to PARP inhibition but does sensitize to ATR inhibition.See related commentary by Setton and Powell, p. 2085

Immunofluorescence and IR survival data; additional methods

Technical performance of the MRD Assay. All samples from early stage breast cancer cohort. Includes plasma cfDNA and buffy coat gDNA samples. Samples from the same patient and probed with the same panel are represented independently. (A) On target fraction calculated from Picard CollectHsMetrics and using pct_selected_bases. (B) Coefficient of variation of duplex fragment depth across fingerprint sites. (C) Fold 80 base penalty score for duplex fragment depth across fingerprint sites. (D, E) Error rate comparison between conventional sequencing (requiring Q20 base quality and removing duplicate fragments) and our duplex sequencing with added filters (see methods). (F) Fraction of total duplexes after downsampling raw reads. We considered a sample to be saturated if it still contained at least 95% of its duplexes after downsampling to 80% of its raw reads.

Purpose: To identify the safety of niraparib, a PARP inhibitor, in combination with Radium-223 for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in men without known BRCA mutations. Patients and Methods: Men with progressive mCPRC following ≥1 line of androgen receptor (AR)-targeted therapy and bone metastases but no documented BRCA-1 or BRCA-2 alterations or bulky visceral disease were included. Niraparib dose was escalated in combination with standard dosing of Radium-223 using a time-to-event continual reassessment method. The highest dose level with a DLT probability Results: Thirty patients were treated with niraparib and radium-223: 13 patients received 100 mg, 12 received 200 mg, and 5 patients received 300 mg of niraparib. There were six DLT events: two (13%) for neutropenia, two (13%) for thrombocytopenia, whereas fatigue and nausea each occurred once (3%). Anemia (2/13%) and neutropenia (2/13%) were the most common grade 3 adverse events. For patients with prior chemotherapy exposure, the MTD was 100 mg, whereas the MTD for chemotherapy naïve patients was 200 mg. Whole blood gene expression of PAX5 and CD19 was higher in responders and ARG-1, IL2R, and FLT3 expression was higher in nonresponders. Conclusions: Combining niraparib with Radium-223 in patients with mCRPC was safe; however, further studies incorporating biomarkers will better elucidate the role of combinations of PARP inhibitors with DNA damaging and other agents.

BACKGROUND: Primary and metastatic prostate cancers have low mutation rates and recurrent alterations in a small set of genes, enabling targeted sequencing of prostate cancer-associated genes as an efficient approach to characterizing patient samples (compared to whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing). For example, targeted sequencing provides a flexible, rapid, and cost-effective method for genomic assessment of patient-derived cell lines to evaluate fidelity to initial patient tumor samples. METHODS: We developed a prostate cancer-specific targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel to detect alterations in 62 prostate cancer-associated genes as well as recurring gene fusions with ETS family members, representing the majority of common alterations in prostate cancer. We tested this panel on primary prostate cancer tissues and blood biopsies from patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We generated patient-derived cell lines from primary prostate cancers using conditional reprogramming methods and applied targeted sequencing to evaluate the fidelity of these cell lines to the original patient tumors. RESULTS: The prostate cancer-specific panel identified biologically and clinically relevant alterations, including point mutations in driver oncogenes and ETS family fusion genes, in tumor tissues from 29 radical prostatectomy samples. The targeted panel also identified genomic alterations in cell-free DNA and circulating tumor cells from patients with metastatic prostate cancer, and in standard prostate cancer cell lines. We used the targeted panel to sequence our set of patient-derived cell lines; however, no prostate cancer-specific mutations were identified in the tumor-derived cell lines, suggesting preferential outgrowth of normal prostate epithelial cells. CONCLUSIONS: We evaluated a prostate cancer-specific targeted NGS panel to detect common and clinically relevant alterations (including ETS family gene fusions) in prostate cancer. The panel detected driver mutations in a diverse set of clinical samples of prostate cancer, including fresh-frozen tumors, cell-free DNA, circulating tumor cells, and cell lines. Targeted sequencing of patient-derived cell lines highlights the challenge of deriving cell lines from primary prostate cancers and the importance of genomic characterization to credential candidate cell lines. Our study supports that a prostate cancer-specific targeted sequencing panel provides an efficient, clinically feasible approach to identify genetic alterations across a spectrum of prostate cancer samples and cell lines.

Advanced prostate cancers comprise distinct phenotypes, but tumor classification remains clinically challenging. Here, we harnessed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to study tumor phenotypes by ascertaining nucleosome positioning patterns associated with transcription regulation. We sequenced plasma ctDNA whole genomes from patient-derived xenografts representing a spectrum of androgen receptor active (ARPC) and neuroendocrine (NEPC) prostate cancers. Nucleosome patterns associated with transcriptional activity were reflected in ctDNA at regions of genes, promoters, histone modifications, transcription factor binding, and accessible chromatin. We identified the activity of key phenotype-defining transcriptional regulators from ctDNA, including AR, ASCL1, HOXB13, HNF4G, and GATA2. To distinguish NEPC and ARPC in patient plasma samples, we developed prediction models that achieved accuracies of 97% for dominant phenotypes and 87% for mixed clinical phenotypes. Although phenotype classification is typically assessed by IHC or transcriptome profiling from tumor biopsies, we demonstrate that ctDNA provides comparable results with diagnostic advantages for precision oncology. Significance: This study provides insights into the dynamics of nucleosome positioning and gene regulation associated with cancer phenotypes that can be ascertained from ctDNA. New methods for classification in phenotype mixtures extend the utility of ctDNA beyond assessments of somatic DNA alterations with important implications for molecular classification and precision oncology. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 517

PURPOSE: This multicenter randomized phase 2 trial investigates the impact of intense androgen deprivation on radical prostatectomy (RP) pathologic response and radiographic and tissue biomarkers in localized prostate cancer (NCT02903368). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a Gleason score ≥4+3=7, PSA >20 ng/mL or T3 disease and lymph nodes

Prostate cancers are considered to be immunologically ‘cold’ tumors given the very few patients who respond to checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy. Recently, enrichment of interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) predicted a favorable response to CPI across various disease sites. The enhancer of zeste homolog-2 (EZH2) is overexpressed in prostate cancer and known to negatively regulate ISGs. In the present study, we demonstrate that EZH2 inhibition in prostate cancer models activates a double-stranded RNA–STING–ISG stress response upregulating genes involved in antigen presentation, Th1 chemokine signaling and interferon response, including programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-L1) that is dependent on STING activation. EZH2 inhibition substantially increased intratumoral trafficking of activated CD8(+) T cells and increased M1 tumor-associated macrophages, overall reversing resistance to PD-1 CPI. Our study identifies EZH2 as a potent inhibitor of antitumor immunity and responsiveness to CPI. These data suggest EZH2 inhibition as a therapeutic direction to enhance prostate cancer response to PD-1 CPI.

Background In this multicenter, single-arm, multicohort, phase 2 trial, the efficacy of nivolumab and ipilimumab was evaluated in patients with advanced rare genitourinary cancers, including bladder and upper tract carcinoma of variant histology (BUTCVH), adrenal tumors, platinum-refractory germ cell tumors, penile carcinoma, and prostate cancer of variant histology (NCT03333616). Methods Patients with rare genitourinary malignancies and no prior immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure were enrolled. Patients received nivolumab at 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab at 1 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, and this was followed by 480 mg of nivolumab intravenously every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). Results Fifty-five patients were enrolled at 6 institutions between April 2018 and July 2019 in 3 cohorts: BUTCVH (n = 19), adrenal tumors (n = 18), and other tumors (n = 18). The median follow-up was 9.9 months (range, 1 to 21 months). Twenty-eight patients (51%) received 4 doses of nivolumab and ipilimumab; 25 patients received nivolumab maintenance for a median of 4 cycles (range, 1-18 cycles). The ORR for the entire study was 16% (80% confidence interval, 10%-25%); the ORR in the BUTCVH cohort, including 2 complete responses, was 37%, and it was 6% in the other 2 cohorts. Twenty-two patients (40%) developed treatment-related grade 3 or higher toxicities; 24% (n = 13) required high-dose steroids (≥40 mg of prednisone or the equivalent). Grade 5 events occurred in 3 patients; 1 death was treatment related. Conclusions Nivolumab and ipilimumab resulted in objective responses in a subset of patients with rare genitourinary malignancies, especially those with BUTCVH. An additional cohort exploring their activity in genitourinary tumors with neuroendocrine differentiation is ongoing. Lay summary Patients with rare cancers are often excluded from studies and have limited treatment options. Fifty-five patients with rare tumors of the genitourinary system were enrolled from multiple sites and were treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab, a regimen used for kidney cancer. The regimen showed activity in some patients, particularly those with bladder or upper tract cancers of unusual or variant histology; 37% of those patients responded to therapy. Additional studies are ongoing to better determine who benefits the most from this combination.

Alterations in DNA damage response (DDR) genes are common in advanced prostate tumors and are associated with unique genomic and clinical features. ATM is a DDR kinase that has a central role in coordinating DNA repair and cell-cycle response following DNA damage, and ATM alterations are present in approximately 5% of advanced prostate tumors. Recently, inhibitors of PARP have demonstrated activity in advanced prostate tumors harboring DDR gene alterations, particularly in tumors with BRCA1/2 alterations. However, the role of alterations in DDR genes beyond BRCA1/2 in mediating PARP inhibitor sensitivity is poorly understood. To define the role of ATM loss in prostate tumor DDR function and sensitivity to DDR-directed agents, we created a series of ATM-deficient preclinical prostate cancer models and tested the impact of ATM loss on DNA repair function and therapeutic sensitivities. ATM loss altered DDR signaling, but did not directly impact homologous recombination function. Furthermore, ATM loss did not significantly impact sensitivity to PARP inhibition but robustly sensitized to inhibitors of the related DDR kinase ATR. These results have important implications for planned and ongoing prostate cancer clinical trials and suggest that patients with tumor ATM alterations may be more likely to benefit from ATR inhibitor than PARP inhibitor therapy. Significance: ATM loss occurs in a subset of prostate tumors. This study shows that deleting ATM in prostate cancer models does not significantly increase sensitivity to PARP inhibition but does sensitize to ATR inhibition. See related commentary by Setton and Powell, p. 2085

The successful development of effective cancer immunotherapy, in particular immune checkpoint inhibitors, has changed the treatment paradigm of many tumor types. In light of the limited efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors demonstrated in recent clinical trials in refractory prostate cancer, this review highlights important recent and ongoing studies that are shaping the pursuit of effective immunotherapy for prostate cancer.We review two overarching themes with respect to recent studies of prostate cancer immunotherapy: evolving therapeutic strategies and novel biological findings, including the landscape of predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response.Novel and combinatorial immunotherapy strategies are being implemented across the clinical spectrum of prostate cancer. Greater understanding of complex tumor-immune interactions and the determinants of therapy response in prostate cancer is an area of intense investigation, and will inform both translational and clinical immuno-oncology research in the field.

Background In metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), predictive biomarkers that correlate with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are lacking. Here, we interrogated genomic and clinical features associated with response to ICIs in mUC. Methods Sixty two mUC patients treated with ICI who had targeted tumour sequencing were studied. We examined associations between candidate biomarkers and clinical benefit (CB, any objective reduction in tumour size) versus no clinical benefit (NCB, no change or objective increase in tumour size). Both univariable and multivariable analyses for associations were conducted. A comparator cohort of 39 mUC patients treated with taxanes was analysed by using the same methodology. Results Nine clinical and seven genomic factors correlated with clinical outcomes in univariable analysis in the ICI cohort. Among the 16 factors, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥5 (OR = 0.12, 95% CI, 0.01–1.15), visceral metastasis (OR = 0.05, 95% CI, 0.01–0.43) and single-nucleotide variant (SNV) count Conclusions This three-factor model includes genomic (SNV count >9) and clinical (NLR

PARP inhibitors were recently approved for treatment of molecularly-defined subsets of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Although the PARP inhibitor olaparib was approved for use in patients with a mutation in one of fourteen genes, the mutation frequency of the genes varies widely in mCRPC and the impact of the less commonly altered genes on PARP inhibitor sensitivity is uncertain. We used functional approaches to directly test the impact of PALB2 and BARD1 loss on homologous recombination (HR) function and PARP inhibitor sensitivity in prostate cancer cell lines. PALB2 or BARD1 loss led to decreased HR function as measured by loss of radiation-induced Rad51 foci formation as well as decreased HR capacity in a cell-based reporter assay. PALB2 or BARD1 loss also significantly increased sensitivity to the PARP inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib across a panel of prostate cancer cell lines. These data support PALB2 and BARD1 loss as markers of clinically relevant PARP inhibitor sensitivity and highlight the potential to use functional approaches to complement and extend findings from clinical trials of targeted agents.