scholarly journals Differences in PARP Inhibitors for the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer: Mechanisms of Action, Pharmacology, Safety, and Efficacy

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 4203
Author(s):  
Giorgio Valabrega ◽  
Giulia Scotto ◽  
Valentina Tuninetti ◽  
Arianna Pani ◽  
Francesco Scaglione
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Signal Transduction ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Chemical Structure ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Mechanisms Of Action ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Properties

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP) are proteins responsible for DNA damage detection and signal transduction. PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are able to interact with the binding site for PARP cofactor (NAD+) and trapping PARP on the DNA. In this way, they inhibit single-strand DNA damage repair. These drugs have been approved in recent years for the treatment of ovarian cancer. Although they share some similarities, from the point of view of the chemical structure and pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic properties, these drugs also have some substantial differences. These differences may underlie the different safety profiles and activity of PARPi.

scholarly journals PARP Inhibitors for Ovarian Cancer: Current Indications, Future Combinations, and Novel Assets in Development to Target DNA Damage Repair

2020 ◽  
pp. e116-e131
Author(s):  
Panagiotis A. Konstantinopoulos ◽  
Stephanie Lheureux ◽  
Kathleen N. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage Repair ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
Epithelial Cancers ◽  
Combination Strategies ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Target Dna

PARP inhibitors (PARPIs) have revolutionized the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer, first for BRCA-associated cancer, and, recently, for all epithelial cancers of serous or high-grade endometrioid subtypes in the front line. Although there is hope that PARPIs will help prevent recurrences when used following frontline maintenance, cancer will still recur in most women, and the need for active combination strategies as well as continued development of novel assets, either as monotherapy or in combination, will be urgently needed. This review article discusses the current indications for PARPIs in both frontline and recurrent settings, current research in combination approaches, and finally, ongoing research on novel methods to target DNA damage response in an effort to exploit the common susceptibility to DNA damage repair in epithelial ovarian cancer and improve outcomes for patients.

scholarly journals PARP Power: A Structural Perspective on PARP1, PARP2, and PARP3 in DNA Damage Repair and Nucleosome Remodelling

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 5112
Author(s):  
Lotte van Beek ◽  
Éilís McClay ◽  
Saleha Patel ◽  
Marianne Schimpl ◽  
Laura Spagnolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Covalent Modification ◽  
Activation Mechanism ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Complementary Role ◽  
Functional Understanding

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP) 1-3 are well-known multi-domain enzymes, catalysing the covalent modification of proteins, DNA, and themselves. They attach mono- or poly-ADP-ribose to targets using NAD+ as a substrate. Poly-ADP-ribosylation (PARylation) is central to the important functions of PARP enzymes in the DNA damage response and nucleosome remodelling. Activation of PARP happens through DNA binding via zinc fingers and/or the WGR domain. Modulation of their activity using PARP inhibitors occupying the NAD+ binding site has proven successful in cancer therapies. For decades, studies set out to elucidate their full-length molecular structure and activation mechanism. In the last five years, significant advances have progressed the structural and functional understanding of PARP1-3, such as understanding allosteric activation via inter-domain contacts, how PARP senses damaged DNA in the crowded nucleus, and the complementary role of histone PARylation factor 1 in modulating the active site of PARP. Here, we review these advances together with the versatility of PARP domains involved in DNA binding, the targets and shape of PARylation and the role of PARPs in nucleosome remodelling.

scholarly journals MTA1 promotes cell proliferation via DNA damage repair in epithelial ovarian cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 10269-10278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Q.Y. Yang ◽  
J.H. Li ◽  
Q.Y. Wang ◽  
Y. Wu ◽  
J.L. Qin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cell Proliferation ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage Repair ◽  
Damage Repair

scholarly journals A Review on DNA Repair Inhibition by PARP Inhibitors in Cancer Therapy

Folia Medica ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish P. Shah ◽  
Chhagan N. Patel ◽  
Dipen K. Sureja ◽  
Kirtan P. Sanghavi
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Repair Process ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Brca Mutations ◽  
Development Of Resistance ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Future Therapy

AbstractThe DNA repair process protects the cells from DNA damaging agent by multiple pathways. Majority of the cancer therapy cause DNA damage which leads to apoptosis. The cell has natural ability to repair this damage which ultimately leads to development of resistance of drugs. The key enzymes involved in DNA repair process are poly(ADP-ribose) (PAR) and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP). Tumor cells repair their defective gene via defective homologues recombination (HR) in the presence of enzyme PARP. PARP inhibitors inhibit the enzyme poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs) which lead to apoptosis of cancer cells. Current clinical data shows the role of PARP inhibitors is not restricted to BRCA mutations but also effective in HR dysfunctions related tumors. Therefore, investigation in this area could be very helpful for future therapy of cancer. This review gives detail information on the role of PARP in DNA damage repair, the role of PARP inhibitors and chemistry of currently available PARP inhibitors.

scholarly journals Regulation and pharmacological targeting of RAD51 in cancer

NAR Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
McKenzie K Grundy ◽  
Ronald J Buckanovich ◽  
Kara A Bernstein
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Biology ◽  
Cancer Resistance ◽  
Breast And Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Resistance To Therapy ◽  
Damage Repair

Abstract Regulation of homologous recombination (HR) is central for cancer prevention. However, too little HR can increase cancer incidence, whereas too much HR can drive cancer resistance to therapy. Importantly, therapeutics targeting HR deficiency have demonstrated a profound efficacy in the clinic improving patient outcomes, particularly for breast and ovarian cancer. RAD51 is central to DNA damage repair in the HR pathway. As such, understanding the function and regulation of RAD51 is essential for cancer biology. This review will focus on the role of RAD51 in cancer and beyond and how modulation of its function can be exploited as a cancer therapeutic.

Retrospective analysis of patients using olaparib (O) in pancreatic cancer (PC).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 389-389
Author(s):  
Erkut Hasan Borazanci ◽  
Carol Guarnieri ◽  
Susan Haag ◽  
Ronald Lee Korn ◽  
Courtney Edwards Snyder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Brca2 Mutation ◽  
Dna Damage Repair ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Repair Deficiency

389 Background: Molecular analysis has revealed four subtypes of PC giving clinicians further insight into treating this deadly disease. One subtype that was elucidated termed “unstable” is significant for the presence of DNA damage repair deficiency and can be targeted therapeutically. One such therapy, O, from the drug class poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, has already been FDA approved for individuals with BRCA mutated ovarian cancers. We performed a retrospective analysis on patients with PC treated at a single institution who have DNA damage repair deficiency mutations and have been treated with O. Methods: A chart review identified pancreatic cancer patients with DNA repair pathway mutations who were treated with O. The primary objective examined ORR in patients with PC with DNA repair mutations receiving O. Secondary objectives included tolerability, overall survival (OS), CA 19-9 change, and changes in quantitative textural analysis (QTA) on CT. Results: 11 individuals were identified, 5 carriers of a pathogenic germline (g) BRCA2 mutation, 1 carrier of a pathogenic g ATM mutation, 1 carrier of a pathogenic g BRCA1 mutation. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) included 1 g ATM mutation, 1 g PALB2 mutation, 1 somatic (s) C11orf30 mutation, and 1 s BRCA2 mutation. Median age at diagnosis was 59, with 4 M and 7 F. No patients met criteria for familial PC and 7 had a family history consistent for breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. All individuals had metastatic PC and had progressed on at least 1 line of systemic therapy. ORR was 18%. Median time of therapy on O was 5 months (mo) (Range 1.4 to 29.567 mo) with 5 of the individuals still undergoing treatment at the time of analysis. Mean OS was 12.35 mo, 9 of the 11 individuals still alive. QTA of baseline CTs from subjects with liver (8/11) and pancreatic tumors (7/11) revealed a strong association between lesion texture and OS (Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC): hepatic mets = 0.952, p = 0.0003) and time on O (PCC: panc lesions = 0.889, p = 0.006). Conclusions: In individuals with metastatic PC with mutations involved in DNA repair, O may provide clinical benefit. QTA of individual tumors may allow for additional information that predicts outcomes to PARP inhibitors in this population.

EGFR amplification predicted selective sensitivity to PARP inhibitors with high PARP-DNA trapping potential in human GBM.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2047-2047
Author(s):  
W. K. Alfred Yung ◽  
Shaofang Wu ◽  
Feng Gao ◽  
Siyuan Zheng ◽  
Jie Ding ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Glioma Stem Cells ◽  
Egfr Amplification ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Selective Sensitivity ◽  
Dna Trapping

2047 Background: Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) is an enzyme critical for regulating a variety of DNA damage repair mechanisms such as BER/SSBR, and PARP inhibitors have been shown to have single agent activity in breast and ovarian cancer patients with BRCA ½ mutations. However, PARP inhibitor such as veliparib has limited single agent activity in GBM and identifying markers predicting sensitivity is critical to select individuals or certain groups of patients for PARP inhibitor therapy. Methods: Potency and selectivity of PARP inhibitors were analyzed in a panel of glioma stem cells (GSCs) with varying genetic background. In vivo anti-tumor activity was evaluated in xenograft models. Results: In this study, we report that PARP inhibitor, talazoparib, showed strong single-agent cytotoxicity and remarkable selective activity in glioma stem cells (GSCs). This single agent activity was strongly correlated with EGFR amplification. GSCs with EGFR amplification (which occurs in about 45% of GBMs) showed higher oxidative base damage, DNA breaks, and genomic instability than non-amplified GSCs. To sustain the elevated basal oxidative stress, EGFR-amplified GSCs had increased basal expression of DNA repair proteins. As a result of blocked DNA damage repair by talazoparib treatment, DNA damage accumulated and lead to increased PARP-DNA complexes, which was then trapped by talazoparib and resulted in high toxicity. The PARP-DNA trapping function of PARPi is essential as olaparib and veliparib, two PARP inhibitors with weak DNA-PARP trapping potential did not show sensitivity in GSCs. In contrast, Pamiparib, another PARP inhibitor with similar PARP-DNA trapping ability to that of talazoparib, showed selective sensitivity in EGFR-amplified GSC. Conclusions: Our data showed that EGFR amplified GSCs with higher basal DNA damage exhibited therapeutic vulnerability to PARP inhibitors with high PARP-DNA trapping ability, and that EGFR amplification is a potential selection or predictive biomarker for PARP inhibitor therapy in GBM.

Genomic characterization of brain metastases (BM) in high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13580-e13580
Author(s):  
Renata Duchnowska ◽  
Anna Maria Supernat ◽  
Rafał Pęksa ◽  
Marta Łukasiewicz ◽  
Tomasz Stokowy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Somatic Mutations ◽  
Dna Damage Repair ◽  
Genetic Alterations ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Serous Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Primary Tumors ◽  
Tp53 Mutations ◽  
Damage Repair

e13580 Background: BM are a rare occurrence in ovarian cancer (OC) and their molecular characteristics is virtually unknown. DNA damage repair (DDR) deficiency is prevalent in OC, and co-mutated TP53 and any DDR denotes high tumor mutation burden (TMB). We genetically characterized a unique series of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) patients who developed BM to identify alterations of potential clinical relevance. Methods: Whole-exome sequencing (2x150bp, SureSelectXT Library Prep Kit, Illumina’s NovaSeq platform) was performed in matched BM, primary tumors (PT) and normal tissue. DNA was extracted from FFPE samples using QIAamp DNA FFPE Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Germany). All mutations were checked with Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) and Integrative Genomics Viewer (IGV). Results: Study group included 10 HGSOC patients (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics classification (FIGO) II-IV, mean age at diagnosis 48 years, range 35-59). Median time from primary HGSOC diagnosis to BM was 38 months (range, 18 to 149). TP53 somatic mutations were found in both primary tumor (PT) and BM in 8 patients. The other 2 cases harbored TP53 mutations not reported in COSMIC catalogue: p.S60L and intronic TP53 mutation preceding p.I322 (IGV). In 9 cases TP53 mutations coexisted with germline or somatic DNA damage repair deficiency. Four cases contained BRCA1 mutations (all germline), and none harbored germline BRCA2 mutation. Other mutated genes included MLH1 (2 somatic, 2 germline), ATR (4 germline, 1 somatic), AMT (1 somatic), RAD50 (1 somatic), ERCC4 (1 somatic), FANCD2 (1 somatic) and RPA1 (1 germline). Three mutation signatures defined in the COSMIC database were indentified in BM: 6, 20 and 30. In 6 cases these mutations were shared in PT, and in another 4 their presence in PT could not be determined due to technical reasons. Median survival from BM was 31 months (range, 5 to 184). Conclusions: Genomic analysis of BM provides an opportunity to identify potentially clinically informative alterations. Mutational profiles in PT are generally reflected in BM. Detected genetic alterations suggest their potential sensitivity to PARP inhibitors and immunotherapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document