Esparragosa Vazquez I, Sanson M, Chinot OL, Fontanilles M, Rivoirard R, Thomas-Maisonneuve L, Cartalat S, Tabouret E, Appay R, Bonneville-Levard A, Darlix A, Meyronet D, Barritault M, Gueyffier F, Remontet L, Maucort-Boulch D, Honnorat J, Dehais C, and Ducray F
Background: Based on preclinical studies showing that IDH-mutant (IDHm) gliomas could be vulnerable to PARP inhibition we launched a multicenter phase 2 study to test the efficacy of olaparib monotherapy in this population., Methods: Adults with recurrent IDHm high-grade gliomas (HGGs) after radiotherapy and at least one line of alkylating chemotherapy were enrolled. The primary endpoint was a 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS-6) according to response assessment in neuro-oncology criteria. Pre-defined threshold for study success was a PFS-6 of at least 50%., Results: Thirty-five patients with recurrent IDHm HGGs were enrolled, 77% at ≥ 2nd recurrence. Median time since diagnosis and radiotherapy were 7.5 years and 33 months, respectively. PFS-6 was 31.4% (95% CI [16.9; 49.3%]). Two patients (6%) had an objective response and 14 patients (40%) had a stable disease as their best response. Median PFS and median overall survival were 2.05 and 15.9 months, respectively. Oligodendrogliomas (1p/19q codeleted) had a higher PFS-6 (53.4% vs. 15.7%, P = .05) than astrocytomas while an initial diagnosis of grade 4 astrocytoma tended to be associated with a lower PFS-6 compared to grade 2/3 gliomas (0% vs 31.4%, P = .16). A grade 2 or 3 treatment-related adverse event was observed in 15 patients (43%) and 5 patients (14%), respectively. No patient definitively discontinued treatment due to side effects., Conclusions: Although it did not meet its primary endpoint, the present study shows that in this heavily pretreated population, olaparib monotherapy was well tolerated and resulted in some activity, supporting further PARP inhibitors evaluation in IDHm HGGs, especially in oligodendrogliomas., Competing Interests: I.E.: none. M.S.: none. O.C.: none. M.F.: research purposes from Servier company, benefits for interventions from Seagen and Novocure, and payment of congress fees from Gilead and Pfizer. R.R.: Advisory board (Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly), travel grants (Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer HealthCare SAS, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, MSD France, Novartis Pharma SAS, Pfizer, Roche). S.C.: MSD (travel grant). E.T.: Gliocure, Leo Pharma (advisory board), Leo Pharma (research grant), Novocure, Servier (symposium. A.B-L.: none. A. D.: Servier, Novocure (advisory board), Servier (travel grants). D.M.: none. M.B.: none. F.G.: none. L.R.: none. D.M-B.: none. J.H.: Novocure (travel grants, advisory board). C.D.: none. F.D.: Servier, Novocure (advisory board, symposium)., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.)